Leesylvania State Park Living Shoreline Project Monitoring Protocol

Leesylvania State Park is located along the Potomac River in Prince William County, Virginia (Figure 1). It is one of the most highly used state parks in Virginia with attendance topping 600,000 (Anne, 2017). The project shoreline occurs on the southeast-facing Potomac River shore north of the marina (Figure 2). This section of coast is very low and is exposed to long fetches across and down river. Prior to the project, the shoreline had a scarped bank, exposed tree roots, and falling trees which was unsafe for park visitors (Figure 3). In 2011, the Shoreline Studies Program at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) performed a site assessment and developed the plan for a Living Shoreline demonstration project. The project consisted of four gapped rock sills with sand fill and marsh grass plantings (Figure 4). Project partners, Virginia State Parks, VIMS, Prince William County, and the Northern Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC) cooperated to obtain grant funding for construction

Oyster Bag Sill Construction and Monitoring at Two Sites in Chesapeake Bay

The use of oyster shell bags as a means of shore protection along fetchlimited shorelines in Chesapeake Bay is growing. This method is an innovative use of a byproduct of the seafood industry and can provide habitat creation, water quality improvement, and shore protection. The landowner can install the bags themselves, and with the new living shoreline general permit in Virginia, these projects are easier than ever to afford and install. However, oyster shells are a limited resource that are needed for largescale oyster reef restoration with the Chesapeake Bay watershed, so determining the effectiveness of this shore protection strategy is important to allocating resources for habitat restoration

Shoreline Management Plan with Habitat Enhancement for Town of Saxis, Virginia

The goal of the present study is to identify the best course of action to manage shoreline erosion in Saxis and to provide a detailed Shoreline Management Plan with Habitat Enhancement which can be presented to potential State and Federal funding agencies. While the Plan itself will not resolve the erosion conditions in Saxis, it will allow the Town to market its need and the method of resolution of this need, to agencies and leaders with the resources to implement the Plan’s suggested actions. The shoreline management plan will provide the necessary level of shoreline stabilization while minimizing adverse impacts to estuarine habitat and providing maximum habitat enhancement opportunities. The habitats needed to fulfill the life history requirements of target species desirable for Saxis Island were emphasized in the Plan. The Plan also will present opportunities to enhance local fisheries and provide increased opportunities in eco-tourism

Interpreting Helioseismic Structure Inversion Results of Solar Active Regions

Helioseismic techniques such as ring-diagram analysis have often been used to determine the subsurface structural differences between solar active and quiet regions. Results obtained by inverting the frequency differences between the regions are usually interpreted as the sound-speed differences between them. These in turn are used as a measure of temperature and magnetic-field strength differences between the two regions. In this paper we first show that the "sound-speed" difference obtained from inversions is actually a combination of sound-speed difference and a magnetic component. Hence, the inversion result is not directly related to the thermal structure. Next, using solar models that include magnetic fields, we develop a formulation to use the inversion results to infer the differences in the magnetic and thermal structures between active and quiet regions. We then apply our technique to existing structure inversion results for different pairs of active and quiet regions. We find that the effect of magnetic fields is strongest in a shallow region above 0.985R_sun and that the strengths of magnetic-field effects at the surface and in the deeper (r < 0.98R_sun) layers are inversely related, i.e., the stronger the surface magnetic field the smaller the magnetic effects in the deeper layers, and vice versa. We also find that the magnetic effects in the deeper layers are the strongest in the quiet regions, consistent with the fact that these are basically regions with weakest magnetic fields at the surface. Because the quiet regions were selected to precede or follow their companion active regions, the results could have implications about the evolution of magnetic fields under active regions.Comment: Accepted for publication in Solar Physic

Lancaster County Dune Inventory

Lancaster County, Virginia is located at the confluence of the Rappahannock River and Chesapeake Bay (Figure 1). Most of the dunes are located along the Rappahannock River with the remainder along Chesapeake Bay. There are a total of 45 dune sites identified along the Lancaster County shoreline (Figure 2). It is the intent of this publication to provide the user with information on the status of dunes in Lancaster County. This information comes from research performed in 1999 and 2000 which was presented in a report entitled “Chesapeake Bay Dune Systems: Evolution and Status (Hardaway et al., 2001). Although somewhat dated, the information provides a short historical perspective of the state of each site at the time of the site visit. Since much of the data was collected several years ago and the beach and dune systems may have changed, this report is intended only as a resource for coastal zone managers and homeowners; it is not intended for use in determining legal jurisdictional limits

Northampton County Dune Inventory

Northampton County is located on the Eastern Shore of Virginia (Figure 1). Only dune sites on Chesapeake Bay were analyzed. A total of 30 dune sites were identified along Northampton’s shoreline (Figure 2). It is the intent of this publication to provide the user with information on the status of dunes in Northampton County. This information comes from research performed in 1999 and 2000 which was presented in a report entitled “Chesapeake Bay Dune Systems: Evolution and Status (Hardaway et al., 2001). Although somewhat dated, the information provides a short historical perspective of the state of each site at the time of the site visit. Since much of the data was collected several years ago and the beach and dune systems may have changed, this report is intended only as a resource for coastal zone managers and homeowners; it is not intended for use in determining legal jurisdictional limits