**Session No. 30**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**Course Title: Coastal Hazards Management**

**Session Title: Managing Development in the Coastal Zone, Federal
Policy III: Internal Revenue Code; United States Army Corps of
Engineers; National Seashores; National Forests; Bureau of Land
Management; Department of Defense.**

**Author: Professor David J. Brower, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill**

**Time: 50 minutes**

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Objectives:**

30.1 Review the approaches used by federal policy to manage the coastal
zone.

> 30.2 Consider the Internal Revenue Code as an incentive for increased
> development in the coastal zone and in particular in hazardous areas
> of the coastal zone.
>
> 30.3 Understand the role of the United States Army Corps of Engineers
> in the management of the coastal zone.
>
> 30.4 Understand the effects of ownership of land by the federal
> government on the management of the coastal zone.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Scope:**

The purpose of this session is to explore and understand the effect of
federal policy on efforts to mitigate the impact of natural hazards in
the coastal zone. First we will review the approaches used by the
federal policies discussed in Session Number 29; we will then move on to
explore several other federal programs.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Readings:**

*Instructor and Student Readings:*

Beatley, Timothy, et al. 2002. *An Introduction to Coastal Zone
Management*. Washington, DC: Island Press, pp 63; 71 -- 74; 91 -- 94;
98; 112; 117 -- 119; 122; 130; 275.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**PowerPoint slides:**

\[**PowerPoint 30.1** Images of Wetlands that show ability to absorb
flood waters\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.2** Breakwaters\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.3** Jetties\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.4** Bulkhead\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.5** Sandbags\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.6** Beach Nourishment\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.7** Beach Nourishment\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.8** Map of National Park Properties in the Coastal
Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.9** Map of Department of Defense Properties in the
Coastal Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.10** Map of National Forests in the Coastal Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.11** Map of US Army Corps of Engineers- Beach
Nourishment\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.16** Map of US Forest Service\]

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**General Requirements:**

Material for Objectives 30.1, 30.2, 30.3 is to presented as lecture
supported by PowerPoint slides. As with Sessions 28 and 29, the
instructor has the option of presenting the material in Objective 30.4
as lecture, or may assign students or teams of students to make class
presentations. Instructions for student presentations appear in Handout
28.1 which can be found in Appendix A to Session No. 28.

Another, and perhaps better, way to deal with this session would be to
ask all of the students to research all of the programs (this would not
be hard to do on the internet and would be good experience for the
students) and come to class prepared to discuss the programs using the
format outlined in Handout 28.1.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Objective 30.1** Review the approaches used by the Coastal Zone
Management Act and by the Coastal Barrier Resources Act to affect
development in the coastal zone.

**Requirements:**

The content should be presented as a lecture.

**Remarks:**

# Coastal Zone Management Act

-   The Coastal Zone Management Act provides uses **incentives** to
    encourage states to formulate and administer Coastal Management
    Programs. These incentives take the form of:

    -   **grants** made by the national government through the National
        Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to coastal states
        for Coastal Management Program formulation and administration
        and

    -   through the **consistency provisions** of the CZMA that provides
        a measure of control over federal activity in the coastal zone.

# Coastal Barrier Resources Act

-   The Coastal Barrier Resources Act **removes incentives** (federally
    funded infrastructure) that would encourage **development** in the
    Coastal Barrier Resources System.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Objective 30.2** Consider the Internal Revenue Code as an incentive
for increased development in the coastal zone and in particular in the
hazardous areas of the coastal zone.

**Requirements:**

The content should be presented as a lecture. Class discussion is to be
encouraged.

**Remarks:**

# The Internal Revenue Code as a De Facto Management Tool

-   The first program to be discussed is one not usually thought of as a
    management tool . However, a little thought and analysis will reveal
    that the Internal Revenue code is in fact a very powerful (de facto)
    management tool. The results may be unanticipated or at least not
    obviously intentional but are very real.

1.  [Name of the program]{.underline}: federal income tax

2.  [Authorized by]{.underline}: Internal Revenue Code

3.  [Administered by]{.underline}: Internal Revenue Service, a branch of
    the United States Treasury Department

4.  [What does the program do]{.underline}: the basic function of the
    IRC is to raise the revenue needed to operate the government

5.  [How does the program affect development in the coastal
    zone]{.underline}: the Internal Revenue Code includes provisions
    that provide tax credits, deductions and other forms of subsidies,
    such as:

-   **mortgage interest** and **property taxes** on second homes may be
    treated as **deductions** from taxable income;

-   **damage** to a property caused by a natural hazard may be treated
    as a **casualty loss deduction**;

-   expenses incurred in operating a second home as a **rental
    property** may be treated as **business expenses**;

-   **accelerated depreciation** allowances on **rental property** are
    allowed.

6.  [In your judgment is the program effective?]{.underline}: many argue
    that these and similar provisions of the Internal Revenue Code
    provide powerful incentives for coastal development.

7.  [Does the program affect the vulnerability of the coast to natural
    hazards]{.underline}: in as much as the Internal Revenue Code makes
    it more advantageous to own property in the coastal zone and softens
    the financial burden of property damaged by a natural hazard, it
    would seem reasonable to conclude that the Internal Revenue Code
    increases the vulnerability of the coastal zone to natural hazards.

8.  [Could the program be used as a tool to decrease the vulnerability
    of property in the coastal zone?]{.underline}: the IRC could serve
    to remove the incentives it provides to develop in coastal areas,
    much as the CBRA does. The instructor may wish to raise the issue of
    the *political feasibility* of such a suggestion.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Objective 30.3** Understand the role of the United State Army Corps of
Engineers (USACOE) in the management of development in the coastal zone.

**Requirements:**

Present the content as a lecture supported by PowerPoint slides. Class
discussion is to be encouraged.

The following PowerPoint slides will be used during this Objective:

\[**PowerPoint 30.1** Images of Wetlands that show ability to absorb
flood waters\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.2** Breakwaters\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.3** Jetties\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.4** Bulkhead\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.5** Sandbags\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.6** Beach Nourishment\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.7** Beach Nourishment\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.8** Map of National Park Properties in the Coastal
Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.9** Map of Department of Defense Properties in the
Coastal Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.10** Map of National Forests in the Coastal Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.11** Map of US Army Corps of Engineers- Beach
Nourishment\]

**Remarks:**

-   The United States Army Corps of Engineers plays two very important
    but different **roles** in the management of development of the
    coastal zone:

    -   The first is that of a **regulator of certain activities** in
        the coastal zone;

    -   The second as a **builder of very large projects** in the
        coastal zone.

Examples of each of these will be discussed in turn.

**The USCOE as regulator:**

1.  [Name of the program]{.underline}: the \"dredge and fill\" program.

2.  [Authorized by]{.underline}: Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

3.  [Administered by:]{.underline} the USACOE

4.  [What does the program do?]{.underline}: Section 404 of the Clean
    Water Act conserves water quality by regulating the discharge of
    dredge and fill materials into \"waters of the United States.\"

5.  [How does the program affect development in the coastal
    zone?]{.underline}: As a practical matter, in the process of
    protecting water quality Section 404 limits development activity in
    wetlands. Permits issued by the COE are required for the discharge
    of dredge or fill material, and wetlands that are impacted must be
    restored, or new wetlands must be constructed elsewhere as a form of
    mitigation.

6.  [In your judgment is the program effective?]{.underline}: Some
    critics argue that the 404 Program has several inherent limitations
    on its effectiveness, such as: 404 pertains only to discharges, the
    COE too readily issues permits, the definition of "wetland" can be
    problematic, and wetland mitigation and restoration requirements are
    not stringently enforced. In addition, some claim that the
    effectiveness of 404 requirements have been hindered by an
    administration that is more eager to promote development than
    preserving wetlands in their natural state. Despite these
    criticisms, most would agree that Section 404, overall, has managed
    to conserve a substantial portion of the nation's wetlands.

7.  [Does the program affect the vulnerability of the coast to natural
    hazards]{.underline} ? Clearly Section 404 has served to decrease
    the vulnerability of coastal areas to natural hazards. Although
    water quality is the stated objective of Section 404, by protecting
    their natural function, wetlands can absorb floodwaters, lessening
    the impact on the built environment.

> **\[PowerPoint 30.1 Images of wetlands that show ability to absorb
> flood waters\]**

8.  [Could the program be used as a tool to decrease the vulnerability
    of property in the coastal zone?]{.underline}: If the 404 program
    were strengthened in some key ways, it could more effectively reduce
    coastal risks and take into account future sea level rise.

**The USACOE as the builder of large coastal projects**

-   **Hard Erosion Control Structures**

    -   A half century ago, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers **shoreline
        protection** program focused primarily on the use of \"hard\"
        erosion control structures.

    -   Hard structures that are typical of USACOE works along the coast
        include:

        -   Groins

        -   Seawalls

        -   Bulkheads

        -   Breakwaters

    -   These structures were **designed to stiffen or harden the face
        of the coastline** to better withstand the high energy of the
        ocean.

> \[**PowerPoint 30.2** Breakwaters\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.3** Jetties\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.4** Bulkhead\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.5** Sandbags\]

-   Hard structures have been used to **increase the rigidity** of the
    barrier island.

    -   However, this sort of structure can **interrupt the natural
        long-shore flow of sand** which replenishes the beaches.

    -   This interruption of sand flow may actually **exacerbate the
        shore erosion** which the structures were built to correct.

        -   *For example*, the **Galveston seawall** built following the
            devastating hurricane in 1906 has in fact protected
            Galveston from natural erosion, but **there are no beaches**
            in front of the seawall.

        -   *For example*, the jetty system built just south of **Ocean
            City, Maryland** to keep an inlet open has indeed kept the
            inlet open, but has prevented sand from replenishing the
            **down-current** **beaches** causing them to **visibly
            retreat**.

    -   Seawalls and revetments may also exacerbate erosion by
        reflecting wave energy and **steepening offshore profiles**.

-   **Beach Nourishment**

    -   The USACOE erosion control response has since **evolved** from
        the construction of hard structures, and the Corps has turned to
        a **softer response: beach nourishment.**

\[**PowerPoint 30.6** Beach Nourishment\]

-   Beach nourishment involves the **addition of sand** in designed
    contours to extend the beach seaward.

-   This additional sand **provides a measure of protection** to natural
    and developed areas that lie on the landward side of the beach.

-   The nourished beaches also serve as **recreational areas**.

> \[**PowerPoint 30.7** Beach Nourishment\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.8** Map of National Park Properties in the Coastal
Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.9** Map of Department of Defense Properties in the
Coastal Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.10** Map of National Forests in the Coastal Zone\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.11** Map of US Army Corps of Engineers- Beach
Nourishment\]

-   Beach nourishment has **strong supporters** as well as equally
    **strong critics**.

    -   The **supporters** see beach nourishment as **solid
        engineering** and **economically sound** solution to the very
        real problem of eroding beaches.

    -   **Critics** see beach nourishment as **very temporary** and
        **costly** sand structures doomed to fail.

-   **Studies** of beach nourishment projects **support both views**:

    -   Some beach nourishment projects have lived up to their advance
        billing and have served to **protect landward structures**,
        create a **wide recreational beach**, and have provided an
        **economic boost** to ocean front communities through protection
        of the real property tax base and tourism revenues.

    -   Other beach nourishment projects have **disappeared in the first
        storm**, millions of dollars washed out to sea.

**In summary:**

1.  [Name of the program]{.underline}: Beach Nourishment and Shoreline
    Protection

2.  [Authorized by]{.underline}: each project is authorized separately
    by Congress. Usually it is a two-step process in which Congress
    appropriates a relatively small amount to design the project and
    then in a separate decision, often years later, Congress
    appropriates funds to actually build the project.

3.  [Administered by]{.underline}: the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
    (Although the projects themselves are almost always designed and
    built by contractors hired by the USCOE.)

4.  [What does the program do?]{.underline}: The original function of
    shoreline protection projects was to protect on-shore development
    from the \"invading\" ocean. This continues to be the major
    function, but now projects are designed to work more as a part of
    the natural system rather than as an effort to \"manage\" the
    natural system.

5.  [How does the program affect development in the coastal
    zone?:]{.underline} By placing structures and/or large amounts of
    sand on the beach, landward development is perceived to be safer

6.  [In your judgment is the program effective?:]{.underline} There are
    approximately 90 shoreline projects conducted by the US Army Corps
    of Engineers located along 230+ miles of ocean and Great Lakes
    coastline. Some of these projects have served their purpose well;
    others have been unstable or have exacerbated the problems they were
    intended to solve.

7.  [Does the program affect the vulnerability of the coast to natural
    hazards]{.underline} ? Proponents say that the COE's shoreline
    projects have provided protection to landward development. Critics
    say that at best, these projects work only in the short term; at
    worst they simply exacerbate vulnerability by making the barrier
    system look less vulnerable than it really is, thus encouraging
    development in hazardous coastal areas.

8.  [Could the program be used as a tool to decrease the vulnerability
    of property in the coastal zone?]{.underline}: Proponents argue that
    the projects do decrease vulnerability by deflecting wave energy (in
    the case of hard structures) and by providing the extra protection
    of a wider beach (in the case of nourishment). Critics argue that if
    the projects do in fact reduce vulnerability it is only for the sort
    term, and that these projects simply delay having to face the real
    problem of coastal erosion.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**For Discussion:**

The arguments both pro and con regarding shoreline programs conducted by
the US Army Corps of Engineers could lead to a very interesting class
discussion.

One of the main issues revolves around the fact that the coastlines of
the Nation are already largely developed. These ocean and lakefront
structures are of extreme value both to property owners as investments
and income-generators, as well as to state and local governments as a
source of significant tax revenues.

When these properties are threatened by erosion, a great deal of
political pressure is exerted on federal, state, and local governments
to \"fix\" the problem. The question then is merely which erosion
control technique is the best.

On the other hand, some argue that these properties are owned by \"fat
cats\" who made bad decisions. Sound investment practice should include
a serious weighing of all the risks, including the risk that the
investment property may fall into the ocean. Why should the government
spend millions of dollars in taxpayers' money to \"bail them out\"?

*Discuss*.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Objective 30.4** Understand the effects of ownership of land by the
federal government on the management of the coastal zone.

**Requirements:**

The content should be presented as a lecture supported by PowerPoint
slides. Class discussion is to be encouraged.

The following slides will be used during this objective:

\[**PowerPoint 30.12** Map of Olympic National Park\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.13** Map of Cap Code National Seashore\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.14** Map of North Carolina's National Seashores\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.15** Map of Military Bases across the U.S.\]

\[**PowerPoint 30.16** Map of US Forest Service\]

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Remarks:**

# The Federal Government as Land Owner

-   The concept of **land ownership** as a **development management
    tool** was introduced earlier in the course, and will be discussed
    more fully later.

    -   The purpose of this Objective is simply to make the students
        aware of the fact that the federal government **owns a great
        deal of real estate**, and as the owner of that land the
        government is **entitled** and has the **responsibility to
        manage** it.

-   The bulk of the land in federal ownership is located in the western
    (non-coastal) states.

-   However, some **very significant coastal areas** are owned and
    managed by various federal agencies.

    -   Among these are the National Seashores and other lands managed
        by the **National Park Service**.

> \[**PowerPoint 30.12** Map of Olympic National Park\]
>
> \[**PowerPoint 30.13** Map of Cap Code National Seashore\]
>
> \[**PowerPoint 30.14** Map of North Carolina's National Seashores\]

-   In all of the federally owned coastal areas, the agency "owner"
    carries out management **objectives** that **do not include
    mitigating the impact** of natural hazards.

-   Yet, in many instances, **careful land management** can achieve
    **multiple objectives**.

    -   *For example*, development plans for the National Seashores
        (managed by the US Park Service) can include the objective of
        beach conservation for recreational purposes by restricting
        beach development, which simultaneously fulfills the objective
        of preventing structures from being built in high-hazard areas.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The **Department of Defense** is also a major owner of land in the
    coastal zone.

> \[**PowerPoint 30.15** Map of Military Bases across the U.S.\]

-   The **U.S. Forest Service**, in the Department of Agriculture
    manages the National Forests. A few National Forests are located in
    the coastal zone.

> \[**PowerPoint 30.16** Map of US Forest Service\]

# Surplus Federal Lands

-   Of importance to coastal and/or emergency managers is the notion
    that the **federal government** from time to time **disposes of
    \"surplus\" lands**.

-   These lands are conveyed to **other units of government** or to
    **private owners**.

    -   *For example*, the federal government recently **disposed** of a
        number of **lighthouses** that had become technologically
        obsolete.

-   Congress **anticipated these transfers of ownership** in the Coastal
    Barrier Resources Act **(CBRA**). \"Otherwise Protected Areas\" are
    included in the CBRA System so that if CBRA land is transferred, it
    is still subject to the restrictions against development subsidies
    that are contained in the Act.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_