coastal observing systems: key future oastal dynamics i · 53rd annual convention baton rouge,...

78353rd Annual Convention � Baton Rouge, Louisiana

COASTAL OBSERVING SYSTEMS: KEY TO THEFUTURE OF COASTAL DYNAMICS INVESTIGATIONS

Gregory W. Stone1, 2, Xiongping Zhang1, Jian Li1 and Alex Sheremet1, 2

1Coastal Studies Institute, Louisiana State University2Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences, Louisiana State University

ABSTRACT

Several new local, regional and national initiatives involving distributed coastal ocean

observing systems are being implemented around the U.S. The primary goal of these efforts is

to raise, to a new plateau, the understanding of, and the ability to predict, critical processes that

operate in the coastal seas and estuaries of the southeast. Improved models of these physical,

chemical and biologic phenomena will permit more accurate prediction of coastal hazards,

threats to human health, and short and long term changes in coastal ecosystems. These predic-

tions will guide coastal stewardship, enable planning for extreme events, facilitate safe and

efficient maritime operations, and support coastal military security and homeland security. Here

we present a new observing system, WAVCIS, developed off the Louisiana coast and present

unique data sets measured during two tropical cyclones, TS Isidore and H Lili, both of which

made landfall along coastal Louisiana in 2002. Implementation and maintenance of these coastal

observatories is providing unique opportunities for scientists working on the coast to investigate

new phenomena pertaining to high energy events and resultant hydrodynamic and geological

response.

INTRODUCTIONSeveral local, regional and national initiatives involving distributed coastal ocean observing

systems have been implemented throughout the U.S. in order to sustain/develop meteorologicaland oceanographic arrays offshore. While these observing systems have a myriad of applicationsincluding forecasting, emergency preparedness during hazardous conditions and offshore acci-dents, and homeland security to mention a few, they are poised to take coastal dynamics studies toa new level in that most systems will report in real time. In this paper we present a system beingdeveloped and implemented off the Louisiana coast—WAVCIS (Wave-Current-Surge InformationSystem, www.wavcis.lsu.edu) to address a number of cutting edge scientific questions, primarilypertaining to storms (winter and tropical cyclones) along the coast. Examples of data measured bythis system is presented for two tropical cyclones, Tropical Storm Isidore and Hurricane Lili, both ofwhich made landfall seven days apart along the Louisiana coast in 2002. These data sets are ex-tremely unique and were available in real time as these storms developed in strength, entered the

GCAGS/GCSSEPM Transactions � Volume 53 � 2003784

Gulf of Mexico and made landfall along coastal Louisiana. Prior to presenting these data, an over-view of existing observing systems is provided followed by some technical specifications of theWAVCIS program.

OVERVIEW OF EXISTING OBSERVATION SYSTEMS

Measurement techniques affect planning a measurement program. Depending on the purpose,two general groups can be set forth: the first requires information on typical ocean hydrodynamicconditions that are representative of a monthly, seasonal, or annual time-scale. This applicationincludes selection of vessels, and planning of time periods for offshore operations. Most oceanobservation systems around coastal Louisiana can be categorized in this group. The second grouprequires information that is representative of the most severe hydrodynamic conditions that occurover time periods of many years. These applications primarily deal with the design of coastal andoffshore structures . This type of observing system usually requires deployment of the instrument ata fixed location with the objective of collecting a long term time series. The following discussionswill briefly overview the second type of observation system.

Along the coast of the United States, over one hundred observation stations have been estab-lished, many of these in the recent past. The largest national network is operated by NOAA’s(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) data buoy center (NDBC). The network hasapproximately 70 buoys and 60 CMAN stations. These moored buoys and onshore/nearshoreplatforms (CMAN stations) are used for oceanographic and meteorological observations. TwoCMAN stations exist along the Louisiana coast; BURL1 which is located in Southwest Pass at themouth of the Mississippi River and GDIL1, located on the east end of Grand Isle (Figure 1). Bothstations measure basic meteorological information including wind, atmospheric pressure, tide, airand water temperature, and visibility. There are no buoys within the inner continental shelf offLouisiana. The recently built NDBC 42041 is located 205 km south of Timbalier Island in a waterdepth of 1500 meters. The other buoy, NDBC 42001, is located 330 km south of Southwest Pass atthe 3000 m isobath.

Another national observation network is NWLON (National Water Level Observation Net-work). This program is a network of tide gauge and water level stations managed by NOAA’sNational Ocean Service (NOS), Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO-OPS). Other national networks include PORTS (Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System) with 18stations, NERR (National Estuarine Research Reserve) with 22 stations, operated and maintained byNOAA’s NOS for very specific regions and purposes around the nation. The Coastal and Hydrau-lics Laboratory at USACOE (United States Army Corps of Engineers) maintains a network forcollecting, processing, analyzing, and reporting wave data at approximately 29 stations around theUS coast. None of these programs have sensors along the Louisiana coast.

Some other systems around the US coast have been developed in recent years: e.g. West FloridaCoastal Ocean Monitoring and Prediction System (COMPS) in Florida, the Coastal Data Informa-tion Program operated by the Ocean Engineering Research Group (OERG) of the Center for CoastalStudies (CCS), Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO), and the New Jersey Coastal MonitoringNetwork (NJ CMN) .

Along the Texas coast, TABS (Texas Automated Buoy System) has been developed as a real timecurrent observation system by Texas A&M University. The Texas Coastal Ocean ObservationNetwork (TCOON) has being developed and run by the Conrad Blucher Institute for Surveyingand Science at Texas A&M-Corpus Christi for observing water level and temperature.

Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium (LUMCON) Environmental Monitoring operated byLUMCON, consists of three stations. One is at the LUMCON Marine Center in Cocodrie, southwestof New Orleans, another is in Terrebonne Bay, and the third is in Lake Pontchartrain. At present,there is no wave and current information available from these stations.

It is important to recognize that these U.S. observing systems and monitoring programs servethe needs of many, both academic and applied. It is equally important that these observing ele-

Stone et al.


ments are not evenly distributed along the coast, nor are they integrated to constitute a completesystem and for this reason are not as cost effective nor as useful as they could be . More attentionhas been paid in recent years to the idea that Louisiana needs an observing system which can beintegrated with other systems. Some national partnership programs have been proposed, e.g.SCOOP (SURA Coastal Ocean Observing Program) by SURA (Southern Universities ResearchAssociation), COTS (Coastal Observation Technology System) by NOAA, and GOOS (Global OceanObserving System). The WAVCIS program is actively involved in these groups and plays an impor-tant role. The importance of GIS coupled with observation systems has now been noted . Recently,with the development of wireless communication and computer processing speed, real-time datatransfer from offshore has become an important factor in ocean observing.

Figure 1. Location of WAVCIS stations and NDBC buoys and CMAN stations.

Stone et al.


THE WAVCIS PROGRAM

WAVCIS is a scientifically designed, regional online ocean observing system along the Louisianacoast. This system automatically measures offshore sea state and processes oceanographic andmeteorological information which is subsequently made available on the World Wide Web. Thesystem is optimized by researchers at Coastal Studies Institute, Louisiana State University wherepersonnel have expertise in oceanographic and meteorological processes as well as informationtechnology. Implementation of GIS in WAVCIS is one of the critical features of this program.

The program began in 1998 through seed funding provided by the Louisiana Board of Regentsand was initially tested in Mississippi Sound by funding from the National Park Service. WAVCIShas played a significant role in coastal planning and for the research community since its deploy-ment.

WAVCIS utilizes the latest technology from satellite communications, state-of-the-art instrumen-tation, advanced data process theory, and GIS technology. This program has been developed notonly as a cost-effective tool to observe the ocean routinely, but it also employs effective methods toextract information from the data that are collected and integrated from multiple sources. Data anddata products can be distributed to all users through the Internet on a real time basis.

Figure 2 shows the conceptual framework of WAVCIS. The meteorological and oceanographicdata gathered offshore are being transmitted by wireless communication to a base station in theWAVCIS data processing laboratory at Louisiana State University.

Instruments are either mounted on the platform or on the seafloor measuring data around theclock. Table 1 summaries the parameters WAVCIS provides real-time online from either directlymeasured by the instruments or derived from the measured parameters.

Thirteen stations have been proposed to be deployed along the Louisiana and Mississippi coast.Several thousand oil/gas platforms exist along the Louisiana continental shelf allowing idealinfrastructure for WAVCIS stations. One operational station, CSI 5, was built on a platform asshown in Figure 3. The robust structure and high elevation ensures normal operation during severestorms offshore.

Four major north-south arrays cover the entire area on the shallow inner continental shelf(Figure 1). The west proposed array south of Cameron, consists of two stations, CSI 1 and CSI 2,located at water depths of approximately 10 and 20 meters respectively. These stations will bedesigned to measure sea state for the area with less suspended sediment discharged from theAtchafalaya and Mississippi rivers. Two stations in the second array will be located south of Vermil-ion Bay which is characterized by a wide shallow muddy seabed. These two stations are CSI 3 andCSI 4. The third array, which is the primary array in the WAVCIS program, is located south ofTerrebonne Bay. It consists of 6 stations. The stations in this array extend from the interior marshcoast, CSI 12, to the shallow bay area, CSI 11, and extend from a shallow offshore area to near thecontinental slope, CSI 5, CSI 6, CSI 7 and CSI 8. This north northwest to south southeast array wasdesigned after considering the orientation of historical hurricane tracks. In conjunction with the

Table 1. List of parameters measured by WAVCIS.

Category Parameters

Meteorological Wind speed, wind gust, wind direction, visibility, humidity,air temperature, air pressure

Oceanographic Significant wave height, maximum wave height, mean wave period,dominant wave period, wave direction, directional and non-directionalwave spectrum, current speed, current velocity, current profile, sea surfacetemperature, water level, turbidity, salinity.

Stone et al.


NDBC buoys 42001 and 42041 in deep water, this array can measure storm wave evolution fromdeep water to the coast. There are two stations, CSI 9 and CSI 10, in the forth array which arelocated in depths between 10 and 50 meters south of Grand Isle. One operational station is locatedin Mississippi Sound for measuring hydrodynamic and meteorological phenomena east of theMississippi River.

As of October 2003, five WAVCIS stations were operational. They are CSI 3, CSI 5, CSI 6, CSI 11,and CSI 13. Table 2 lists the geographical locations and water depth for these 5 operational stations.CSI 11 and CSI 13, are located in Terrebonne Bay, Louisiana and Mississippi Sound, Mississippirespectively. CSI 3, CSI 5, CSI 6 are located offshore. CSI 3, 18 km south of Marsh Island, and CSI 5,2.5 km south of Timbalier Island, are located in water depths of approximately 5 meters and 7meters respectively. CSI 6 is located 20 km south of Timbalier Island at a depth of approximately 20meters. In conjunction with NDBC buoy 42041 and NDBC buoy 42001, the array constituted by CSI11, CSI 5, CSI 6 can provide a metocean data profile from the middle of the Gulf of Mexico in deepwater, across the inner shelf to the interior bay. As discussed later, this array is essential in provid-ing critical surge and wave information during major storms in the Gulf.

Figure 2. Instrumented platform concept used in the WAVCIS program.

Stone et al.


USE OF WAVCIS TO UNDERSTAND TROPICAL CYCLONE DYNAMICSData from WAVCIS have been captured during several tropical cyclones in 2002 and 2003 and

part of the impetus for developing the program is linked to the high incidence of storms that impactthe northern Gulf. Historical records suggest that the southeast of the U.S. experiences among thegreatest number of tropical cyclone landfalls around the globe with the Gulf of Mexico experiencinga large number of them (Figure 4). In a recent study that focused on the frequency of tropicalsystems impacting the Louisiana coast, evidence was presented showing that along with Key West,Florida, south-central Louisiana ranked the highest over a one hundred year period (1900-2000) infrequency of strikes of major storms (category 3 and above) for an area extending from Texas toNorth Carolina (Muller and Stone, 2001). Several recent scientific studies have underscored the

Figure 3. CSI 5 offshore platform south of Terrebonne Bay.

Table 2. Location of WAVCIS stations.

Station AverageName Latitude Longitude Depth (m) Location

CSI 3 -923.68 296.47 4.9 18 km south of Marsh island, LACSI 5 -9032 293.2 6.7 2.5 km south of Timbalier Island, LACSI 6 -9029 2852 20.3 20 km south of Timbalier Island, LACSI 11 -9035 2910 3.4 Terrebonne Bay, LSCSI 13 -8901 3016 6.5 Mississippi Sound, MS

Stone et al.


significance of tropical and extratropical storms in driving coastal erosion along the Louisiana coast(Stone and Finkl, 1995; Stone et. al., 1993; 1995; 1997; 1999; 2003; Muller and Stone, 2001). Winterstorms in addition to tropical cyclones have frequently impacted the coast and more often than not,resulted in severe overwashing and breaching of the barrier and mainland systems. This is largelydue to the fact that the beach and dune system elevation is exceptionally low, typically less than ~3m above sea level. Thus, the cumulative impact of these events over time is a gradual but signifi-cant decline in the physical stability of this coast. The combination of storms, sea level rise, subsid-ence and a reduction in sediment supply to the coast has resulted in rapid deterioration of thebarrier islands in Louisiana.

Figure 4. Upper: An example of the frequency of landfalls of hurricanes in the Atlantic basin over a onehundred year period during the 20th century. Lower: Example of the spatial distribution of hurricanetrajectories and landfalls for the same time period in the Gulf of Mexico (data obtained from the NationalHurricane Center).

Stone et al.


The islands are particularly vulnerable to breaching during storms and post-storm recovery isgenerally not accomplished, or slow between storm events. Reviews of the importance of hurri-canes and tropical storms on coastal Louisiana can be found in Penland et al., (1989); Stone et al.,(1993; 1996; 1997; 1999; 2003). Recent work also shows that with the gradual demise of barrierislands along south-central Louisiana, wave energy conditions in the bays are increasing with time(Stone and McBride, 1998). This phenomenon is apparent during fair-weather wave conditions andduring storms when lower frequency waves propagate through wider inlets and breaches along thebarrier system.

Figure 5. Satellite images of cyclones Isidore (upper) and Lili (lower) in the GOM.

Stone et al.


Figure 6. Storm tracks for cyclones Isidore and Lili.

Figure 7. Image showing Isidore and Lili storm tracks and location of WAVCIS array.

Stone et al.


TROPICAL CYCLONES ISIDORE AND LILI

The 2002 Hurricane Season proved to be one of the most active seasons for the State of Louisi-ana in more than 100 years. Four storms – Bertha, Hanna, Isidore and Lili – made landfall along theLouisiana coast, the greatest number of storms to strike the Louisiana coast in a single season inrecorded history. Bertha was the first landfalling tropical cyclone to strike the coast since Danny in1997. Isidore and Lili (Figure 5), however, had the most significant impact on the coast. Uponcrossing Cuba and entering the Gulf of Mexico on 20 Sep 2002, Isidore became the Gulf’s firsthurricane of the 2002 Atlantic Hurricane Season. The cyclone tracked westward towards theYucatan Peninsula, and meandered over that landmass for two days (Figure 6). Although morethan 800 km south of the U.S. central Gulf Coast, the tropical cyclone already was having an impacton coastal Louisiana. The cyclone was interacting with a ridge of high pressure over the continental

Figure 8. (A) Spectral evolution during Isidore and Lili at CSI 5. (B) Spectral evolution for same storms atCSI 11 in Terrebonne Bay.

Stone et al.


U.S. and generating a Gulf-wide pressure-gradient, and the resulting northeasterly and easterlywinds began increasing water levels along the southeast Louisiana coast.

Isidore began its long-anticipated northward advance on 24 Sep. Satellite imagery suggests thata steady intrusion of “dry” air on the southwestern and southern flanks of the system was at leastpartly responsible for the lack of significant strengthening. The National Hurricane Center esti-

Figure 9. (A) Time series of Hs (m) at 5 locations from the central GOM to Terrebonne Bay along the path ofTS Isidore (left). (B) Time series of Hs (m) from the central GOM to CSI 3 along the path of H Lili.

Stone et al.


mates indicate peak sustained winds ranged from 25-28 ms-1 (50-55 kts) as Isidore crossed the GOM.Data indicate that the center of the storm passed directly over NDBC Buoy 42041 (27.50ºN, 90.50ºW)at approximately 0000 UTC on 26 Sep. Peak sustained winds recorded at Buoy 42041 exceeded 17ms-1 (33 kt), but briefly dropped to less than 1 ms-1 while the center of the system was over the buoy.Tropical-storm force winds began arriving along the Louisiana coast at approximately 0000 UTC on26 Sep. Wind gusts exceeded 26 ms-1 (> 50 kt) near Grand Isle, with sustained winds in excess of 17ms-1 (> 33 kt) extending along the storm’s path as the system made landfall.

Figure 10. Time series of spectra shows the spectral evolution of Isidore and Lili. Sept. 18-Oct. 3, 2002measured at CSI 3.

Figure 11. Swell and sea generated by the same storm in opposing directions.

Stone et al.


Lili originated from a tropical wave that moved over the tropical Atlantic Ocean from the westcoast of Africa on 16 Sep. On the 21st, the system was upgraded to a tropical depression. For theremainder of the month, Lili underwent phases of strengthening and weakening but on 1 Oct. thecenter of the hurricane moved over the western mainland of Cuba, with wind speeds as high as 47ms-1 (90 kt) gradually accelerating its forward speed to approximately 8 ms-1 (15 knots). Lili turnednorthward and made landfall along the western Louisiana coast on the 3 Oct., with an estimated 42ms-1 (80 kt) maximum wind speed. However, between Cuba and Louisiana, Lili intensified to 65 ms-1

(125 kt) earlier that day over the north-central Gulf of Mexico and then rapidly weakened during the 13hours until landfall. Lili was absorbed by an extratropical low on 4 Oct. while moving northeast-ward near the Tennessee/Arkansas border. Lili was the first hurricane to make landfall in theUnited States since Irene hit Florida in 1999.

Figure 12. Wave/wind direction vectors point 90 degrees counter-clockwise to the path between the eye andthe measurement.

Figure 13. Time series of significant wave height, water level and mean current velocity for hurricane Lili.

Stone et al.


HYDRODYNAMIC RESPONSE

Four stations comprising a portion of the WAVCIS array were ideally located to capture uniquehydrodynamic (and meteorological) data during both storms. As shown in Figure 6, Isidore gener-ally paralleled the north-south array (CSI 11, 5 and 6) offshore to NDBC 42041. CSI 3 was located inthe eye wall of Hurricane Lili near landfall. Plots of time evolution of wave spectra at CSI 5 (Figure8A) bear the distinct signature of Isidore (longer duration - 5 days, less energetic associated wavefield) and Lili (2 days, strong event). The two peaks, at approximately 0.8 Hz, separated in time bysome 3 days, correspond to the two phases in Isidore’s evolution, separated by the decrease inintensity during the time the storm spent over the Yucatan Peninsula. Lili entered the Gulf ap-proximately 6 days later with a rapid forward speed, intensifying quickly. As a result, its wavesystem was more energetic but had a shorter duration.

The bimodal spectral distribution at Terrebonne Bay (CSI 11, Figure 8B) is likely due to swellpropagating into the bay through Cat Island Pass (located between CSI 11 and 5) and strong localgeneration of high frequency waves (0.25-0.3 Hz) by wind. Dissipation in the long wave band(frequency less than 0.2 Hz) was likely due to strong refractional scattering through Cat Island Passand bottom friction. At this location, locally generated short waves (frequency > 0.2 Hz) dominatethe spectrum. The difference in strength between the two systems is illustrated also by the strongerseas associated with Hurricane Lili. TS Isidore followed a general south-north path which took itover 5 observation stations from the central GOM (42001) north to Terrebonne Bay, over a distanceof >400 km. A time series of significant wave height during Isidore’s passage is presented in Figure9A. At the peak of the storm, deep water stations recorded waves with significant heights in excessof 6 m. Very energetic wave conditions (5 m significant wave height) were observed closer to thecoast (CSI 6, near 20 m isobath). Figure 6B shows a similar plot for H. Lili as measured at CSI 3. Thevery steep ramping and decay of wave height at CSI 3, agrees with previous observations duringwinter storms where strong attenuation of both swell and sea have been observed along the westLouisiana shelf which is characterized by cohesive sediment on the shelf (Sheremet and Stone 2003).

SPECTRAL EVOLUTIONThe evolution of each storm emphasizing the bimodal characteristics is presented in Figure 10

and is based on ADCP measurements taken at CSI 3. Hurricane Lili generated long waves (12-18s)which moved out radially as they dispersed with swell waves arriving first along the westernLouisiana coast. Because the wavelength was long, the swell refracted normal to the shelf bathym-etry and by the time it reached CSI 3 it was predominantly south or shore normal. This refractioncan be seen in the wave direction of the swell and as shown in Figure 11, the higher frequency endof the swell formed a tail that tends toward the southeast. Also evident in Figure 11 are the highfrequency sea waves propagating from the northeast. The storm rotated counter clockwise and asthe leading edge of the hurricane approached the coast, a wave spectrum some 90 degrees to theradius of the storm developed. As the eye of the hurricane approached CSI 3, wind speed increasedand sea state increased for the offshore waves. The opposing direction for the wind-sea and swellleaves a conspicuous gap in the wave height spectrum, at frequencies just above the swell. Offshorewind, opposing onshore swell waves, attenuated higher frequency swell (0.1-0.2 Hz) as the offshorespectrum built in the opposite direction (0.2-0.5 Hz). Figure 9 demonstrates the changing directionof the wind-sea. As the eye of the storm approached CSI 3, the radius of curvature decreased andthe wind speed increased. Wind-sea rotated from northeast to southeast as the eye wall passed overand then to southwest as it moved toward landfall. As the eye wall passed both sea and swellspectra merged. Isidore showed the same rotation of wind-sea direction, but in the opposite direc-tion since the eye passed more than 100 km to the east of CSI 3.

Stone et al.


Figure 14. Water level during both storms measured on the inner shelf (CSI3 and 5) and in Terrebonne Bay(CSI 11).

Stone et al.


CURRENT AND SURGE EVOLUTION

Time series of significant wave height, water level and mean current velocity are presented inFigure 13. All three are seen to be out of phase. Wave energy (top, green) increased first because thespectrum included both local wind-sea and swell that was generated earlier in the storm. Theadvancing storm created storm surge (middle, blue) where the pressure of the storm forced waterout before it. The storm surge presented in Figure 10 (bottom, red) is shown with onshore currentmagnitudes on the order of >1 m/sec (3-4 knots). These currents peaked just a few hours before themaximum water level was reached (middle, light blue).

Water elevations measured on the shelf (CSI 3 and 5) and in Terrebonne Bay (CSI 11) are pre-sented in Figure 14. During Isidore, surge levels approximated 0.5 m on the inner shelf and adja-cent bay at the CSI 5 and 11 location. Setdown of approximately 0.5 m occurred at CSI 5 in westernLouisiana where coastal waters responded to offshore winds as the system made landfall to theeast. Lili generated surge levels of ~1.5 m at CSI 3, approximately double that measured at CSI 5 tothe east. North of CSI 5 in Terrebonne Bay, however, surge levels of ~1.2 m were measured. Ongo-ing work in which various surge models are being skill assessed suggests that some numericalmodels are over estimating surge along this portion of coast by between 3-6 fold.

CONCLUSIONSA powerful and robust ocean observing system, WAVCIS, has been developed for the Louisiana

coast and has captured highly unique data sets during several tropical cyclones in the Gulf ofMexico. The system has provided new insight on the dynamics of these and less severe winterstorms and has also provided a workbench for new experiments being performed along the muddycoast of western Louisiana (see Sheremet and Stone, in press; 2003; Sheremet et al., this volume;Bentley et al., this volume). An expanded array farther west to Texas and east to Florida will for-mulate the infrastructure support for a new initiative, to be funded by the U.S. Navy/Office ofNaval Research, on heterogeneity of inner shelf sediments and effects on hydrodynamics. Newareas of research will involve skill assessment of numerical models using in situ observations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe authors acknowledge the following current sponsors of the WAVCIS program: Louisi-

ana Department of Natural Resources, Contract #169704190; Federal Emergency ManagementAgency, Contract #2529-01-01; National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration #NA160C2938;Louisiana Applied Oil Spill Research and Development Program, #169704196. ChevronTexaco isacknowledged for infrastructure and logistical support.

REFERENCESBobbitt, A.M., Dziak, R.P., Stafford, K.M., and Fox, C.G., 1997. GIS Analysis of remotely sensed and field observa-

tion oceanographic data. Marine Geodesy, 20(2-3): 153–163.Earle, M.D, McGehee, D., and Tubman, M., 1995. Field wave gaging program, wave data analysis standard. US

Army Corps of Engineers.Glenn, S.M. and Schofield, M.E., 2002. The New Jersey shelf observation system. Rutgers University. http://

marine.rutgers.edu/mrs.Guinasso, N.L., Lee, L.L., Joseph, Y., Walpert, J.N., Reid, R.O., Brooks, D.A., Bender, L.C., Hetland, R.D., Howard,

M., and Martin, R.D., 2001. Observing and forcasting coastal currents: Texas Automated Buoy System (TABS).Penland, S., Suter, J.R., Sallenger, A.H., Williams, S.J., McBride, R.A. Westphal, K.E., Reimer, P.D. and Jaffe, B.E.,

1989. Morphodynamic Signature of the 1985 Hurricane Impacts on the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Proc.Sisixth Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management (ASCE July 11-14, 1989, Charleston, South Carolina),4220-4233.

Muller, R.A. and Stone, G.W., 2001. A Climatology of Tropical Storms and Hurricane Strikes to Enhance Vulner-ability Predicition for the Southeast U.S. Coast. Journal of Coastal Research, 17, 4, 949-956.

Stone et al.


McBride, R. A., Penland, Shea, Hiland, M. W., Williams, S. J., Westphal, K. A. Jaffe, B. E., and Sallenger, A. H., Jr.,1992, Analysis of barrier shoreline changes in Louisiana from 1853 to 1989, in Williams, S. J., Penland, Shea,and Sallenger, A. H., Jr., eds., Louisiana barrier island erosion study-atlas of barrier shoreline changes inLouisiana form 1853 to 1989: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series I-2150-A, p. 36-97.

Nowlin, W.D., Jr., and Malone, T.C., 1999. Toward a U.S. plan for an intergrated, sustained ocean observingsystem. NORLC. http://www.core.ssc.erc.msstate.edu/NOPPobsplan.html

Ocean U.S., 2002. Building consensus: Toward an integrated and sustained ocean observing system. AirlineHouse, Warrenton, Virginia.

Sheremet, A. and Stone, G.W., 2003. Wave Dissipation due to Heterogeneous Sediments on the Inner LouisianaShelf. Proc. Coastal Sediments’03 (this volume).

Stone, G.W., 2001. A new wave-current online information system of oil spill contingency planning (WAVCIS).Proceedings of the 24th Arctic and Marine Oil spill program (AMOP) Technical Seminar. EnvironmentCanada, 401-425.

Stone, G.W. and Finkl, C.W. (eds.), 1995. Impacts of Hurricane Andrew on the Coastal Zones of Florida andLouisiana: 22-26 August, 1992. Coastal Education and Research Foundation, Fort Lauderdale, Fl., 364 pp.

Stone, G. W., Grymes, J., Steyer, K., Underwood, S., Robbins, K., and Muller, R. A., 1993. A Chronologic Overviewof Climatological and Hydrological Aspects Associated with Hurricane Andrew and its MorphologicalEffects Along the Louisiana Coast, U.S.A. Shore and Beach. 61, 2, 2-12.

Stone, G. W., Xu, J.P. and Zhang, X.P, 1995. Estimation of the Wave Field During Hurricane Andrew and Morpho-logical Impacts along the Louisiana Coast, in Impacts of Hurricane Andrew on the Coastal Zones of Floridaand Louisiana: August 22-26, 1992. G. W. Stone and C. W. Finkl (eds.). Journal Coastal Research Special Issue,21, 234-253.

Stone, G.W., Grymes, J.M., Armbruster, C.A. and Huh, O.K., 1996 Overview and Impacts of Hurricane Opal onthe Florida Coast.” EOS, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 77, 551-553.

Stone, G.W., Grymes, J.M., Dingler, J.W. and Pepper, D.A., 1997. Overview and Significance of Hurricanes on theLouisiana Coast, USA. Journal of Coastal Research, 13, 3, 656-669.

Stone, G.W. and McBride, R.A., 1998. Louisiana barrier Islands and their Importance in Wetland Protection:Forecasting Shoreline Change and Subsequent Response of Wave Climate. Journal of Coastal Research, 14, 3,900-916.

Stone, G.W., Wang, P., Pepper, D.A., Grymes, J.M., Roberts, H.H., Zhang, X.P., Hsu, S.A. and Huh, O.K., 1999.Researchers Begin to Unravel the Significance of Hurricanes on the Northern Gulf of Mexico Coast. EOS,Transactions of the American Geophysical Union,80, 27, 301-305.

Stone, G.W., Sheremet, A., Zhang, X., Walker, N.D., Grymes, J.M., Huh, O.K., Hsu, S.A., Blanchard, B., Bentley,S.J., 2003. A Decade of Tropical Cyclones in one Hurricane Season; Impacts of Isidore and Lili on the Louisi-ana Coast. (in prep.)

Stone et al.

coastal observing systems: key future oastal dynamics i · 53rd annual convention baton rouge,...

Documents