Vandalism Damage to Upham Beach Geotextile T-Groins: Photographic Evidence

I must confess that I was surprised to see an article by David DeCamp about the Upham Beach Geotextile T-Groins in the April 18th edition of the St. Petersburg Times.   

It didn't necessarily surprise me that the Upham Beach Stabilization Project would be in the news, because St. Pete Beach property owners are enthusiastically supportive of the project and the local surfing community (led by the Suncoast Chapter of the Surfrider Foundation) has mounted strong and active resistance to the project, and the resulting controversy has received a lot of press coverage over the past few years. 

What surprised me is that Mr. DeCamp's story raises questions as to whether the Upham Beach geotubes have been damaged by vandalism, and whether the geotubes have been successful in preventing erosion of the sand on Upham Beach.  While reasonable minds can differ about whether County, State and/or Federal funds should be used for projects like this, I believe the reports and findings of the County's engineers, combined with common sense and simple observation clearly establish that:  

1. the Upham Beach geotubes were very successful at preventing the erosion of Upham Beach's sand before they were damaged,
2. the erosion of Upham Beach dramatically increased when the geotubes were damaged and were no longer able to perform as designed, and 
3. while there is no conclusive evidence of WHO caused the damage to the Upham geotubes, available photographic evidence clearly establishes that the geotubes suffered damage that could only have been caused by human hands, which leads to the reasonable (if not inexorable) conclusion that this damage, in combination with the natural force of stormsurge, contributed to the collapse and failure of the northern Upham geotubes.    
 

There are a lot of statements/claims in the DeCamp story that need to be checked or clarified, but in this post I'm going to focus on the issue of vandalism damage:  whether the Upham geotubes were vandalized and the extent to which such damage has impaired the erosion-prevention performance of the Upham geotubes.

In his story, DeCamp writes:

"Morroni and other advocates blame vandals in 2008 for damage to the T-groins, though there is no conclusive evidence for that, said Andy Squires, the county's deputy director of environmental management.  Critics at the Surfrider Foundation suggest the damage was caused by storms and wear and tear."

The vandalism damage to the Upham T-Groins was well documented with photographic evidence during presentations made to the St. Pete Beach City Commission in 2008, at a time when Dr. Nicole Elko was Pinellas County's Coastal Coordinator in charge of the project.  A simple Google search of "Upham Geotube" yields Channel 10 news coverage documenting vandalism to the Upham geotubes with Dr. Nicole Elko confirming and describing the vandalism damage to the Upham Geotubes as well as explaining how the damage played a role in the collapse of the tubes.  The same Google search reveals St. Petersburg Times news coverage in 2005 documenting vandalism damage to the Upham Geotubes.


Mr. Squires has only recently undertaken Dr. Elko's former duties and probably had not seen the photographic evidence, hence his quote.  While his comment is true to the extent that there is no conclusive evidence of WHO may have damaged the geotubes, the photographic record shows linear, rectangular holes and slash-like perforations in the tough, durable geotextile material that clearly were not caused by "storms" or "wear and tear" as alleged by the Surfrider Foundation, and the only reasonable conclusion is that the geotubes were damaged by intentional, determined human action, i.e., vandalism.

The following are some of the photographs that were presented in 2008 to evidence the vandalism damage to the Upham T-Groins: 

Here is a photo of  a rectangular hole that was cut in the seaward end of the stem of T1, the northernmost geotube:

 Here is a photograph of lacerations that were observed in the seaward end of the stem of T1.  Geotextile fabric is exceptionally tough material, and these gashes could not have been caused by natural causes or "wear and tear".

Now for some photographs that illustrate the devastating effect that this man-made damage has on the Upham geotubes.  Posted below are a series of photographs that show how quickly a vandalized geotube collapses when subjected to the force and strain of storm-surge.  These photographs show how the damaged geotube pictured above suffered complete collapse in less than 24 hours when it was subjected to the forces of Storm/Hurricane Ike in 2008:

The story told by these photographs is vividly clear:  the holes and slashes that were cut in the end of the geotube compromised the ability of the geotubes to maintain their structural integrity when they were impacted by the force of the waves and stormsurge of hurricane Ike.

OK, so this post is already getting a bit long, so I'll follow up later with a discussion of the effectiveness of the geotube design as an erosion control measure and some of the other points raised in the DeCamp story.  For now, I'll simply say that it is wrong to suggest that the Upham Geotubes have failed to function as designed as an erosion control measure:  I believe these photographs show that there is clear evidence that their structural integrity has been intentionally compromised by human action in a manner fundamentally inconsistent and incompatible with their engineering design, and this evidence is more than sufficient to rebut any claims or suggestions that the Upham geotubes were compromised merely by wear and tear.