The Army Corps of Engineers has released a much-anticipated study regarding the benefits of beach nourishment. The study, entitled The Distribution of Shore Protection Benefits, examines the distribution of economic and environmental benefits from beach nourishment, and evaluates how those benefits should figure into the cost sharing formula between the federal government and non-federal sponsors.

The conclusions of the study reinforce several key positions that supporters of beach restoration projects have long endorsed. First, the study concluded that only 35% of the benefits of beach nourishment occur locally, while "65% accrue to people who reside elsewhere." This supports the coastal communities' longstanding belief that the majority of benefits from beach restoration projects are not local benefits, but national benefits. The study also finds that, while beach restoration is likely to increase tourism and therefore increase local tax revenue, an increase in revenue to the local government is "unlikely to be large enough to fund an increased non-Federal cost-share from the current 35% to 50% or 65% of the project re-nourishment costs." The study holds that to be true "even if the State participates by paying as much as 75% of the non-Federal cost-share." The study also concludes that when recreational benefits are not included, that is "when there is no improvement to the quality of the beach experience", the result is "zero" increase in regional benefits. In other words, when the storm damage reduction is the sole focus of a project, the local community does not benefit from any additional tourism revenue.

The Office of Management and Budget requested that Corps complete the study, after its own internal review determined that it did not have enough information to make informed decisions about the economic value and distribution of benefits from beach restoration projects.

The study also looked at the environmental impacts of beach restoration projects. Once again, the results showed that beach restoration has minimal, temporary environmental impact and is actually beneficial to the environment: "Periodic beach re-nourishment often has beneficial environmental effects. Many Corps beach nourishment projects have produced environmental benefits, such as providing new nesting area for sea turtles, spawning grounds for horseshoe crabs, and habitat for piping plover, least terns and sea-beach amaranth." Furthermore, it concluded that beach nourishment projects "have no significant impact in the long-run" as "(t)he plant and animal species existing in littoral areas are adapted to survive in the dynamic environment" of sand erosion and accretion. The Corps protocols also require the use of "engineering and monitoring practices to avoid detrimental impacts."

We are hopeful that this study will put to rest the claims that beach restoration is mainly a local benefit and that it is harmful to the environment. This study proves that the majority of the benefits are national, not local, and that beach restoration is not harmful to the environment, but actually helpful. We hope that Congress and OMB will take these findings into account as they formulate the Water Resources Development Act of 2002 and funding for future beach restoration projects.

This article taken from the Marlow & Company Public Affairs Wesite:  www.marloweco.com