California harbor dredging: History and trends

Shore & Beach Pub Date : 2021-08-19 DOI:10.34237/1008932
Kiki Patsch, G. Griggs
{"title":"California harbor dredging: History and trends","authors":"Kiki Patsch, G. Griggs","doi":"10.34237/1008932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"California is a major shipping point for exports and imports across the Pacific Basin, has large commercial and recreational fisheries, and an abundance of marine recreational boaters. Each of these industries or activities requires either a port or harbor. California has 26 individual coastal ports and harbors, ranging from the huge sprawling container ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to small fishing ports like Noyo Harbor and Bodega Bay. Almost all of California’s ports and harbors were constructed without any knowledge or consideration of littoral drift directions and rates and potential future dredging issues. Rather, they were built where a need existed, where there was a history of boat anchorage, or where there was a natural feature (e.g. bay, estuary, or lagoon) that could be the basis of an improved port or harbor. California’s littoral drift rates and directions are now well known and understood, however, and have led to the need to perform annual dredging at many of these harbors as a result of their locations (e.g. Santa Cruz, Oceanside, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Channel Islands harbors) while other harbors require little or no annual dredging (e.g. Half Moon Bay, Moss Landing, Monterey, Redondo-King and Alamitos Bay). California’s coastal harbors can be divided into three general groups based on their long-term annual dredging volumes, which range from three harbors that have never been dredged to the Channel Islands Harbor where nearly a million cubic yards is removed on average annually. There are coastal harbors where dredging rates have remained nearly constant over time, those where rates have gradually increased, and others where rates have decreased in recent years. While the causal factors for these changes are evident in a few cases, for most there are likely a combination of reasons including changes in sand supply by updrift rivers and streams related to dam construction as well as rainfall intensity and duration; lag times between when pulses of sand added to the shoreline from large discharge events actually reach downdrift harbors; variations in wave climate over time; shoreline topography and nearshore bathymetry that determine how much sand can be trapped upcoast of littoral barriers, such as jetties and breakwaters, before it enters a harbor; and timing of dredging. While there is virtually nothing that can be done to any of these harbors to significantly reduce annual dredging rates and costs, short of modifying either breakwater or jetty length and/or configuration to increase the volume of sand trapped upcoast, thereby altering dredging timing, they are clearly major economic engines, but come with associated costs.","PeriodicalId":153020,"journal":{"name":"Shore & Beach","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shore & Beach","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34237/1008932","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

California is a major shipping point for exports and imports across the Pacific Basin, has large commercial and recreational fisheries, and an abundance of marine recreational boaters. Each of these industries or activities requires either a port or harbor. California has 26 individual coastal ports and harbors, ranging from the huge sprawling container ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to small fishing ports like Noyo Harbor and Bodega Bay. Almost all of California’s ports and harbors were constructed without any knowledge or consideration of littoral drift directions and rates and potential future dredging issues. Rather, they were built where a need existed, where there was a history of boat anchorage, or where there was a natural feature (e.g. bay, estuary, or lagoon) that could be the basis of an improved port or harbor. California’s littoral drift rates and directions are now well known and understood, however, and have led to the need to perform annual dredging at many of these harbors as a result of their locations (e.g. Santa Cruz, Oceanside, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Channel Islands harbors) while other harbors require little or no annual dredging (e.g. Half Moon Bay, Moss Landing, Monterey, Redondo-King and Alamitos Bay). California’s coastal harbors can be divided into three general groups based on their long-term annual dredging volumes, which range from three harbors that have never been dredged to the Channel Islands Harbor where nearly a million cubic yards is removed on average annually. There are coastal harbors where dredging rates have remained nearly constant over time, those where rates have gradually increased, and others where rates have decreased in recent years. While the causal factors for these changes are evident in a few cases, for most there are likely a combination of reasons including changes in sand supply by updrift rivers and streams related to dam construction as well as rainfall intensity and duration; lag times between when pulses of sand added to the shoreline from large discharge events actually reach downdrift harbors; variations in wave climate over time; shoreline topography and nearshore bathymetry that determine how much sand can be trapped upcoast of littoral barriers, such as jetties and breakwaters, before it enters a harbor; and timing of dredging. While there is virtually nothing that can be done to any of these harbors to significantly reduce annual dredging rates and costs, short of modifying either breakwater or jetty length and/or configuration to increase the volume of sand trapped upcoast, thereby altering dredging timing, they are clearly major economic engines, but come with associated costs.
加州港口疏浚:历史和趋势
加州是整个太平洋盆地进出口的主要航运点,拥有大型商业和休闲渔业,以及丰富的海洋休闲船民。这些产业或活动中的每一个都需要一个港口或港湾。加州有26个独立的沿海港口,从洛杉矶和长滩的大型集装箱港口到诺约港和博德加湾等小型渔港。加州几乎所有的港口和港口都是在不了解或不考虑沿海漂流方向和速率以及未来潜在的疏浚问题的情况下建造的。相反,它们是在有需要的地方建造的,在有船只停泊的历史的地方,或者在有自然特征(如海湾、河口或泻湖)的地方,这些自然特征可以作为改善港口或港口的基础。然而,加利福尼亚的沿海漂移速率和方向现在已经众所周知,并且由于这些港口的位置(例如圣克鲁斯,Oceanside,圣巴巴拉,文图拉和海峡群岛港口),导致需要在许多这些港口每年进行疏浚,而其他港口很少或不需要每年进行疏浚(例如半月湾,莫斯兰丁,蒙特雷,雷东多金和阿拉米托斯湾)。加州的沿海港口可以根据其长期的年度疏浚量分为三类,从从未疏浚的三个港口到平均每年疏浚近一百万立方码的海峡群岛港口。有些沿海港口的疏浚率随着时间的推移几乎保持不变,有些港口的疏浚率逐渐增加,有些港口的疏浚率近年来有所下降。虽然这些变化的原因在少数情况下是明显的,但对于大多数情况来说,可能是多种原因的结合,包括与大坝建设有关的上游河流和溪流的沙供应变化以及降雨强度和持续时间;从大型排放事件中添加到海岸线的沙脉冲实际到达下游港口之间的滞后时间;波浪气候随时间的变化;海岸线地形学和近岸测深学,可以确定有多少沙子在进入港口之前可以被困在沿海屏障(如防波堤和防波堤)的上游;疏浚的时机。虽然对于这些港口来说,除了改变防波堤或防波堤的长度和/或配置来增加海岸上的沙量,从而改变疏浚时间之外,实际上没有什么可以显著降低每年的疏浚率和成本,但它们显然是主要的经济引擎,但也伴随着相关的成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信