Lyell Collection

Geological Society, London, Special Publications

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hinton, C. L.
Right arrow Articles by Nicholls, R. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 2007; v. 274; p. 93-101;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.SP.2007.274.01.10
© 2007 Geological Society of London

Shoreface morphodynamics along the Holland Coast

C. L. Hinton1 & R. J. Nicholls2

1 ABP Marine and Environmental Research Ltd, Pathfinder House, Maritime Way, Southampton, SO14 3AE, UK (email: chinton{at}abpmer.co.uk)
2 School of Civil Engineering and the Environment and CCPEM, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK

The morphodynamic behaviour of the shoreface of the Holland coast has been investigated over the medium- and large-scales (years to decades). This is a wave-dominated, uniform coastline backed by dunes and uninterrupted by tidal inlets. The work takes a data-orientated approach using the ‘long’ profiles in a data set extending over 32 years and covering 81 km of coast. These profiles are spaced every 1 km alongshore and extend to a maximum offshore distance of 3 km (approximately 16 m water depth).

Previous work based upon cross-shore profiles suggests that there is a seaward limit to significant depth change, or activity, on the upper shoreface over the small- and medium-scales (termed ‘depth of closure’). Examination of the data set shows that the middle and lower shoreface is also morphologically active in many instances, with the activity increasing with timescale. Many profiles exhibit closure on the upper shoreface, and then reopen on the middle/lower shoreface, exhibiting morphological activity. This deeper shoreface morphodynamics appears to be related to onshore supply of sand to the active zone. Hence, the analysis shows that the upper, middle and lower shoreface are coupled, as widely assumed, and has widespread significance for understanding long-term coastal evolution.