State of Maine's Beaches in 2011

Laudholm Beach, Wells

Four beach profiles (LH01-03, LH05, Figure 62) were available for analysis of beach recovery. At LH01, the front profile stake was lost during the 2007 storm, and profiling was resumed at the back stake in June 2007. The profiles extend along a portion of the beach nearest the Little River, from northeast to southwest for profiles LH01-LH03; profile LH05 is located slightly farther to the southwest.

Winter Profile Changes

LH01 = C (75)

Figure 63

Profile LH01, located nearest the Little River, received a B- in the last assessment. Based on the winter profiles available, the profile has remained stable in its first 30 meters from the pin, with a well defined dune crest (Figure 63). Seaward of the 30 m mark, the profile has shown variability since the immediate post-2007 profile shape in terms of the depth of sand at the trough, and the elevation of sand into the low tide area. In 2008 and 2009, the profile gained elevation at the 50 m mark, and seaward of the 100 m mark. By 2010, the profile appears to have eroded slightly at its dune, and deepened at the 50 m mark by around about 1 meter in elevations - this was actually the most erosive profile of the four years. In 2011, the profile recovered slightly, with elevation gains in the offshore above the 2010 shape, but sections remained below the 2007 winter shape, and never reached the high 2008 and 2009 elevations in the offshore. The dune portion of the profile appears relatively stable, but it has undergone generally erosive changes in the past few years along the beach berm and low tide areas. The 2011 profile appears to be an "average" shape for the range of profiles from 2007 to 2011.

LH02 = D (65)

Figure 64

LH02, located to the south of LH01, received a B on the last assessment. In 2008 (Figure 64), the majority of the profile demonstrated very good recovery. In 2009, the profile eroded slightly along its length, though it did maintain elevations above the 2007 post-storm shape. In 2010, consistent with LH01, the profile underwent large amounts of erosion, and eroded to its deepest point, especially along its berm, out to about 70 m for the starting point. Some recovery occurred in 2011, especially between 40 and 75 m from the starting point. However, the upper portion of the profile, nearest the dune, clearly eroded in a landward direction over the time period. The profile is exhibiting steepening in its nearshore portion, back down to or below the 2007 shape. It is showing steady erosion and landward migration that is worse than an average.

LH03 = D (65)

Figure 65

Profile LH03, located roughly in the middle of Laudholm Beach, received a B in the last assessment. In 2008 and 2009 (Figure 65), the profile showed signs of recovery, with elevation gains along the length of the profile. In 2010, this trend continued but the dune eroded landward. However, in 2011, the profile clearly steepened, eroded landward, and the elevation decreased, although the dune edge appears to have migrated slightly seaward - this is most likely due to cobble piling near the dune. The profile is, similar to the others, showing that the berm and lower portions of the profile are undergoing significant erosion. The profile actually appears to have eroded to below the historic erosional surface (the exposed peat) in 2011, at the 70 m mark.

LH05 = C (75)

Figure 66

LH05 is positioned much closer to Drakes Island Beach. The immediate, post-storm profile was extremely steep, and had a noted low dune crest. By April 2008 (Figure 66), the upper portion of the profile (out to about 40 m), had recovered very well, gained elevation, and built seaward; this could be due to cobble migration. The 2009 profile showed some dune and beach erosion along the upper portion of the profile, and did not change much in the offshore. By 2010, some slight dune erosion was noted, but a small berm built at about 20 m offshore, again most likely due to cobbles. In 2011, the profile looked roughly the same, but had migrated slightly landward in response to erosion. We suspect that some of the profile stability exhibited seaward of 50 m may actually be due to the fact that the profile may be eroded down to the marsh surface. We remain cautious about the shape of this profile, given the trend at LH03 and LH02.

Winter Beach Grade = C- (70)

The winter beach profiles at Laudholm Beach are indicating a slow, landward migration and steepening, indicating ongoing erosion. The general trend through 2009 showed good recovery, but since then, the profiles have been undergoing landward migration, steepening, and erosion, especially closer to the Little River.

Summer Profile Changes

LH01 = C (75)

Figure 67

The summer 2007 (Figure 67) profile showed a large berm at the 40 m mark. In 2008, the berm disappeared, and the profile deepened and migrated landward slightly. By summer 2009, the upper portion of the profile continued to erode, but the lower portion recovered and filled in. In 2010, the profile appears to have gained some elevation at the dune crest, but eroded at the berm and nearshore. It does show a good amount of sediment in the low tide area of the profile, which is a good sign - this sand may return. Although the dune crest appears to have been relatively stable, the nearshore portion of the profile - notably the berm - appears to have been lost over the past few summers. Comparison with 2011 shapes will help determine if the berm returns.

LH02 = D (65)

Figure 68

In general, over the past four years, profile LH02 (Figure 68) exhibited a relatively stable summer dune crest, with some landward movement of the dune out to about 20 m. However, berm loss is evident over the years, with continual, steady, erosion from 2007 to 2010, located between 20 and 50 m from the starting point. Seaward of this, the profile exhibited variability. This profile is clearly showing evidence of consistent berm erosion over the past few years, most likely down to its erosion surface.

LH03 = C- (72)

Figure 69

Consistent with the other Laudholm profiles, in the summer, LH03 (Figure 69) has shown the continual loss of the berm, positioned near the 25-30 m mark. The nodal point for the profile appears to be at the 40 m mark, where the low tide area showed more variability. The 2008 profile had the most sand stored in the low tide area, while the 2007 and 2010 profiles had the lowest amount. This summer profile is also showing berm loss over the years, but its changes do not seem as bad as LH02; also, some sediment is apparent in the offshore.

LH05 = D (65)

Figure 70

LH05 (Figure 70) appears to also have responded over the past few years by moving landward and eroding. The entire profile, including the dune crest and berm, have moved slightly landward; however, the 2009 profile does appear to be slightly steeper than the 2010 summer shape, indicating that the profile did recover slightly in 2010. The dune crest and lower portion of the profile, out to about 80 m, however, is below the 2009 and 2008 profile elevations. It appears that LH05 has eroded down to its historic erosional surface (peat) in the low tide area of the profile. We remain very cautious as to how this profile will respond this summer.

Summer Beach Grade = D+ (69)

The summer profiles at Laudholm Beach appear to be maintaining their dune crests relatively well; this is likely due to cobble being pushed up to the toe of the dune. However, each profile is showing signs of consistent berm retreat, signifying erosion, over the time period from 2007-2010.

Summary

Laudholm Beach appears to be undergoing significant erosion, especially at the middle and lower portions of its profiles. In fact, it appears that many of the profiles have been eroded down below their sand and cobble layers, to (and in some cases below) the peat surface in the surf zone. Dune and upper beach stability may be influenced by the migration of cobbles up the profile, to near the toe of the dune. In addition, it appears that southerly migration of the Little River inlet channel is negatively influencing profile shapes through ebb-tidal shoal instability.

Overall grade = C- (70)

Contents Introduction Beach Responses Discussion Conclusions References Appendix

Last updated on July 14, 2011