By Sharon Omahen

University of Georgia

Jekyll and Tybee Island beach-goers are willing to pay more to
park at the beach if it means the beaches will be wider and
sandier at high tide.

“Erosion is a major concern involved in managing coastal lands,”
said Warren Kriesel, an agricultural economist with the
University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental
Sciences.

To find out whether Georgia beach-goers would be willing to help
pay to control shoreline erosion, Kriesel and his colleagues
surveyed tourists on Georgia’s Jekyll and Tybee Islands. They
used funds from a Georgia Sea Grant.

No beach at high tide

“In developed areas, 55 percent of Georgia’s shoreline has been
armored with concrete seawalls or large boulders in an effort to
control erosion,” Kriesel said. “Armoring degrades a beach’s
recreation and natural habitat, because it disrupts the flow of
sand.”

Preventing property losses with seawalls on developed coastlines
often results in the beach disappearing at high tide.

Kriesel said officials charged with managing the state’s public
beaches typically use two strategies: artificially renourish the
beach by bringing in sand, or let nature take its course.

“Poor-quality beaches can drive tourists away,” he said. “Wide,
sandy beaches are vital to tourism in coastal communities. And
the tourism industry is an important part of these local
economies.”

Georgia islands focus of study

Jekyll Island, 8 miles from Brunswick, Ga., is about 5,000 acres
of state-owned land. It’s managed by the Jekyll Island Authority.
State law prohibits more than 35 percent of the island being
developed.

Tybee Island is 18 miles south of Savannah, Ga. and is visited
more than Jekyll. Most of Tybee’s property is privately owned and
developed in single-family residences and condominiums.

“Jekyll’s erosion has historically been controlled by seawalls,
which were built following an extensive hurricane in 1964,”
Kriesel said.

“Tybee’s erosion was first managed with a seawall,” he said.
“Then beach nourishments programs were done in conjunction with
the dredging of the Savannah River waterway. Every 10 years or
so, there’s a nourishment program.”

Beach-goers on each island were surveyed during spring, summer
and fall. On each island, the people surveyed were shown a map of
the island’s current conditions and a map of the island with
improvements resulting from erosion-control tactics.

Pick one: As is, or better

They were asked if they preferred the status quo with the
existing parking fee or the improved beach conditions with a
higher parking fee. “We also asked whether the increased parking
fee would affect the number of times they visit the beach,”
Kriesel said.

More than 1,000 usable surveys were collected on each island.

The UGA study revealed that 71 percent of the beach-goers
surveyed on both islands would be willing to pay higher parking
fees to generate funds for shoreline erosion control.

The UGA researchers estimated the cost of erosion control based
on the 1990 nourishment project on Sea Island, Ga., 8 miles north
of Jekyll Island.

“The nourishment on Sea Island initially cost $7.5 million for 2
miles, with annual maintenance costs of $125,000,” he said. “We
assume these projects last about 10 years before the eroded sand
is replenished by another project. We also adjusted our cost
estimation for inflation.”

Kriesel estimated the cost of a beach nourishment program for the
2.9 miles of Jekyll Island to be about $27.4 million. The cost of
beach nourishment on Tybee Island’s 2 miles of eroded shore would
be about $18.9 million, he said.

The respondents placed high value, too, on better quality
beaches.

“This value is significantly larger than the estimated cost of
achieving improved beach quality,” Kriesel said. “The
benefit/cost ratio is at least 4:3. We hope local governments
will use these results to plan preservation of Georgia’s coastal
environment. Investing in better beaches is an economically
attractive use of resources on the Georgia coast.”