Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T14:35:36.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022

Jonathan A. Warrick Open the ORCID record for Jonathan A. Warrick [Opens in a new window] ,
Amy E. East  and
Helen Dow
Jonathan A. Warrick*
Affiliation:
U.S. Geological Survey, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Amy E. East
Affiliation:
U.S. Geological Survey, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Helen Dow
Affiliation:
U.S. Geological Survey, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
*
Corresponding author: Jonathan A. Warrick, E-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ongoing sea-level rise has brought renewed focus on terrestrial sediment supply to the coast because of its strong influence on whether and how long beaches, marshes and other coastal landforms may persist into the future. Here, we summarise findings of sediment discharge from several coastal rivers, revealing that infrequent, large-magnitude events have disproportionate influence on the morphodynamics of coastal landforms and littoral cells. These event-dominated effects are most pronounced for small, steep mountainous rivers that supply beach and wetland sediment along the world’s active tectonic margins, although infrequent events are important drivers of sediment discharge for rivers worldwide. Additionally, extreme events (recurrence intervals of decades to centuries) that follow wildfires, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, extreme precipitation or – most notably – combinations of these factors can redefine coastal sediment budgets and morphology. Some of these extreme events (e.g., wildfires plus rainfall) are increasing in magnitude and frequency under modern climate warming, with the likely result of increasing sediment flux to affected coastlines. Climate change is also altering watershed processes in both high latitudes and high altitudes, resulting in increased sediment supply to downstream catchments. We conclude that sediment inputs to coastal systems are highly variable with time, and that the variability and trends in sediment input are as important to characterise as long-term averages.

Topics structure

Topic(s)

Geomorphology

Subtopic(s)

Extreme events and their impactsOpen coast morphodynamics

Keywords

coastal sedimentsea-level riseaccretionerosioncoastal changeepisodic eventscoastal morphodynamicsclimate change
Type
Review
Information
Cambridge Prisms: Coastal Futures , Volume 1 , 2023 , e2
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is a work of the US Government and is not subject to copyright protection within the United States. Published by Cambridge University Press.
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© USGS department of the interior, 2022.

Impact statement

The future of the world’s coasts will be influenced by ongoing sea-level rise and forthcoming storms, which will combine to increase the likelihood for coastal flooding and erosion. However, many coastal settings receive natural supplies of sediment from adjacent rivers and landscapes, and these sediments can physically build up coastal landforms and reduce the potential for erosion and flooding. It is very important to better understand sediment delivery to the coast, as this is one of the key factors in assessing coastal climate change impacts. The delivery of new sediment to the coast commonly has long intervals with very little sediment discharged punctuated by brief events with tremendous sediment discharge. These sediment input events are generally caused by disturbances in the landscape, which can include wildfires, earthquakes, heavy rainfall, volcanic eruptions and human impacts. Over decades to centuries, infrequent, high-magnitude sediment input events can be responsible for most of the sediment that exists along the coast. Climate change has the potential to increase sediment discharge to some coastal settings because of its imminent effects on wildfire, heavy rainfall and the extent of frozen areas within high altitudes and in polar regions. Because of this, there is an increased need to understand the amount of sediment input to coastal regions both now and in the future. Teams of scientists will be needed to monitor and predict future sediment inputs with an eye on better understanding how the coast will respond to climate change.

Introduction

Coastal landforms and the human communities and natural resources located on these features are increasingly vulnerable to flooding and erosion because of ongoing and accelerating eustatic sea-level rise (FitzGerald et al., Reference FitzGerald, Fenster, Argow and Buynevich2008; Syvitski et al., Reference Syvitski, Kettner, Overeem, Hutton, Hannon and Brakenridge2009; Vitousek et al., Reference Vitousek, Barnard, Fletcher, Frazer, Erikson and Storlazzi2017; Schuerch et al., Reference Schuerch, Spencer, Temmerman, Kirwan, Wolff and Lincke2018). Coastal landforms evolve over time in response to a combination of oceanic, geologic, biologic and fluvial processes, and the relative importance of these processes can vary considerably along the world’s coasts and over time (Inman and Nordstrom, Reference Inman and Nordstrom1971; Wright and Short, Reference Wright and Short1984; Komar, Reference Komar1998; Friedrichs and Perry, Reference Friedrichs and Perry2001; Murray et al., Reference Murray, Knaapen, Tal and Kirwan2008; Winterwerp et al., Reference Winterwerp, Erftemeijer, Suryadiputra, van Eijk and Zhang2013; Splinter et al., Reference Splinter, Turner, Reinhardt and Ruessink2017; Wright et al., Reference Wright, Syvitski, Nichols, Zinnert, Wright and Nichols2019). Primary factors in the evolution of many coastal landforms are the volume of sediment available to these systems and the physical processes that move sediment over time (Syvitski, Reference Syvitski2005; Frihy et al., Reference Frihy, Shereet and El Banna2008; Anthony et al., Reference Anthony, Marriner and Morhange2014; Nienhuis et al., Reference Nienhuis, Ashton, Nardin, Fagherazzi and Giosan2016; Yang et al., Reference Yang, Yang, Xu, Wu, Shi and Zhu2017; Tessler et al., Reference Tessler, Vörösmarty, Overeem and Syvitski2018; Besset et al., Reference Besset, Anthony and Bouchette2019; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Stevens, Miller, Harrison, Ritchie and Gelfenbaum2019).

Coastal landforms can be characterised by the amounts and types of sediment available to them, and there are two endmembers with respect to terrestrial sediment supply: (1) coastal landforms that receive no direct terrestrial sediment, such as many atolls and barrier islands (Heron et al., Reference Heron, Moslow, Berelson, Herbert, Steele, Susman, Greenwood and Davis1984; FitzGerald et al., Reference FitzGerald, Fenster, Argow and Buynevich2008; Duvat, Reference Duvat2019), and (2) landforms that are derived almost entirely from inputs of terrestrial sediment, such as deltas of the world’s rivers and littoral cells along many of the world’s active continental margins (Inman and Nordstrom, Reference Inman and Nordstrom1971; Hicks and Inman, Reference Hicks and Inman1987; Ashton and Giosan, Reference Ashton and Giosan2011; Nienhuis et al., Reference Nienhuis, Ashton, Roos, Hulscher and Giosan2013; Giosan et al., Reference Giosan, Syvitski, Constantinescu and Day2014; Anthony, Reference Anthony2015). For coastal systems that are derived from terrestrial sediment, changes in the volume or grain size of sediment delivered to the coast can result in pronounced changes in the morphology or morphodynamical trajectory (Cooper, Reference Cooper2001; Nienhuis et al., Reference Nienhuis, Ashton, Roos, Hulscher and Giosan2013, Reference Nienhuis, Ashton, Edmonds, Hoitink, Kettner and Rowland2020; Anthony et al., Reference Anthony, Marriner and Morhange2014; Giosan et al., Reference Giosan, Syvitski, Constantinescu and Day2014; Bendixen et al., Reference Bendixen, Iversen, Bjørk, Elberling, Westergaard-Nielsen, Overeem, Barnhart, Khan, Box, Abermann, Langley and Kroon2017; Luo et al., Reference Luo, Yang, Wang, Zhang and Li2017; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Stevens, Miller, Harrison, Ritchie and Gelfenbaum2019; Hoitink et al., Reference Hoitink, Nittrouer, Passalacqua, Shaw, Langendoen and Huismans2020; Yang et al., Reference Yang, Luo, Temmerman, Kirwan, Bouma and Xu2020; Syvitski et al., Reference Syvitski, Ángel, Saito, Overeem, Vörösmarty and Wang2022). Thus, to evaluate and predict coastal changes for systems influenced by terrestrial sediment, it is essential to understand several characteristics of the sediment supply, including the processes that deliver sediment to the coast, the timing, volume and characteristics, including grain size distributions, of these sediment contributions and the littoral processes that disperse sediment from the river mouth (Hicks and Inman, Reference Hicks and Inman1987; Orton and Reading, Reference Orton and Reading1993; Kao and Milliman, Reference Kao and Milliman2008; Romans et al., Reference Romans, Normark, McGann, Covault and Graham2009; Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013; Nienhuis et al., Reference Nienhuis, Ashton, Roos, Hulscher and Giosan2013; Anthony, Reference Anthony2015; Warrick, Reference Warrick2020).

The goal of this paper is to examine and summarise the temporal variability in terrestrial sediment supply to the coast over the decadal to century timescales important to coastal land management. We focus on littoral systems that are derived from terrestrial sources of sediment, which are generally found along active continental margins of the world and have small, steep coastal watersheds that are collectively the dominant supply of sediment to the world’s coasts (Inman and Nordstrom, Reference Inman and Nordstrom1971; Milliman and Syvitski, Reference Milliman and Syvitski1992; Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013). Because of the efficient transfer of sediment through these small, steep watersheds (Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013; Romans et al., Reference Romans, Castelltort, Covault, Fildani and Walsh2016), we will highlight how coastal supplies of sediment are influenced by natural hazards, infrequent events and ongoing and pending climate change. We acknowledge that the sediment budgets of many coastal systems, such as barrier islands and atolls, are not influenced by these watershed processes, owing to negligible sediment contributions from terrestrial landscapes to these coastal landforms (Meade, Reference Meade1982; Woodroffe et al., Reference Woodroffe, Samosorn, Hua and Hart2007; Perry et al., Reference Perry, Kench, O’Leary, Morgan and Januchowski-Hartley2015). We also acknowledge that terrestrial supplies of sediment may not be fully integrated into littoral cells, because of offshore transport to the deep sea either during the river discharge event or in the years, decades or centuries following these events (Mulder et al., Reference Mulder, Syvitski, Migeon, Faugères and Savoye2003; Khripounoff et al., Reference Khripounoff, Vangriesheim, Crassous and Etoubleau2009; Casalbore et al., Reference Casalbore, Chiocci, Scarascia Mugnozza, Tommasi and Sposato2011; Liu et al., Reference Liu, Hsu, Hung, Chang, Wang and Rendle-Bühring2016; Romans et al., Reference Romans, Castelltort, Covault, Fildani and Walsh2016; Steel et al., Reference Steel, Simms, Warrick and Yokoyama2016; Warrick, Reference Warrick2020). As such, we are reminded that every river and coastal setting is unique, and that care should be taken to understand sediment sources, dispersal processes and timescales, and sinks for each coastal system. In the synthesis below, we summarise characteristic shoreline changes caused by time-varying river sediment discharge and provide considerations for future research and monitoring in the light of ongoing climate change and sea-level rise.

River sediment discharge to the coast

There are abundant examples of fluvial sediment discharge events influencing coastal sediment budgets and morphodynamics. One of these examples is observed at the Rio Rimac of Peru (Figure 1), which discharges exceptional amounts of sediment to the coast during years of high precipitation (French and Mechler, Reference French and Mechler2017; Guzman et al., Reference Guzman, Ramos and Dastgheib2020). During these wet years, the shoreline at the river mouth progrades hundreds of metres seaward, resulting in a river mouth delta with several distributary channels (Figure 1a–d). Following progradation, the delta recedes because of decreases in river sediment discharge and northward littoral sediment transport from wave action (Figure 1e–j). The littoral transport causes beach widening at least 7 km downdrift of the Rio Rimac mouth (Guzman et al., Reference Guzman, Ramos and Dastgheib2020). Similar patterns of coastal progradation followed by recession and sediment spreading are observed at river mouths around the world as they respond to time-varying sediment inputs (Inman and Nordstrom, Reference Inman and Nordstrom1971; Hicks and Inman, Reference Hicks and Inman1987; Cooper, Reference Cooper1993; Anthony and Blivi, Reference Anthony and Blivi1999; Barnard and Warrick, Reference Barnard and Warrick2010; Casalbore et al., Reference Casalbore, Chiocci, Scarascia Mugnozza, Tommasi and Sposato2011; Giosan et al., Reference Giosan, Coolen, Kaplan, Constantinescu, Filip and Filipova-Marinova2012; Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013; Anthony et al., Reference Anthony, Marriner and Morhange2014; Bendixen et al., Reference Bendixen, Iversen, Bjørk, Elberling, Westergaard-Nielsen, Overeem, Barnhart, Khan, Box, Abermann, Langley and Kroon2017; Besset et al., Reference Besset, Anthony and Sabatier2017; Luo et al., Reference Luo, Yang, Wang, Zhang and Li2017; East et al., Reference East, Stevens, Ritchie, Barnard, Campbell-Swarzenski and Collins2018; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Stevens, Miller, Harrison, Ritchie and Gelfenbaum2019). Satellite imagery can provide important observations of the spatial and temporal response of shorelines to new contributions of river sediment (Besset et al., Reference Besset, Anthony, Brunier and Dussouillez2016, Reference Besset, Anthony and Bouchette2019; Guzman et al., Reference Guzman, Ramos and Dastgheib2020; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Vos, East and Vitousek2022), and example satellite records of the multitude of coastal systems with active river sediment supplies are provided in Figure 2.

Figure 1. The influence of river sediment discharge on the coastal morphology and shoreline positions at the mouth of Rio Rímac, Peru, from 2016 to 2021. As described by Guzman et al. (Reference Guzman, Ramos and Dastgheib2020), heavy flooding in early 2017 resulted in massive growth of the river mouth delta and spreading of this sediment northward in the subsequent years, similar to the coastal morphodynamics following flooding in 1983 and 1998. Imagery from Google Earth.

Figure 2. Examples of coastal changes at the mouths of small rivers of the world resulting from contributions of new sediment. Imagery from Google Earth.

Unusually large sediment discharge events can produce shoreline changes that persist for decades or centuries, as evidenced by coastal accretion and geomorphic changes caused by upland volcanic activity on sediment transport from the Santo Tomas River of the Philippines and the Rio Salamá of Guatemala (Figure 3). Coastal accretion at the mouths of both systems extended hundreds of metres to several kilometres offshore of the pre-eruption shorelines, and sediment inputs influenced shoreline positions for several to tens of kilometres along the coast (Kuenzi et al., Reference Kuenzi, Horst and McGehee1979; Siringan and Ringor, Reference Siringan and Ringor2007). The shoreline accretion from the eruption of Santa Maria, Guatemala, continues to extend more than 1 km offshore of the pre-eruption shoreline even though the volcanic event occurred over 120 years ago, providing evidence for the longevity of coastal impacts from rare, but massive, sediment discharge events (Kuenzi et al., Reference Kuenzi, Horst and McGehee1979; Figure 3b).

Figure 3. Decadal to century persistence of coastal accretion from increases in river sediment yield resulting from volcanic activity in coastal watersheds. (a) The mouth of the Santo Tomas River 28 years after the eruption of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines. (b) The mouth of Rio Salamá almost 120 years after the eruption of Santa Maria, Guatemala. Additional shorelines from before and immediately following the eruptions from publicly available Landsat imagery or interpretations of Kuenzi et al. (Reference Kuenzi, Horst and McGehee1979). Imagery from Google Earth.

Detailed accounting of shoreline responses to river inputs can be obtained where physical monitoring or remote sensing records are adequately frequent (Hicks and Inman, Reference Hicks and Inman1987; Barnard and Warrick, Reference Barnard and Warrick2010; Besset et al., Reference Besset, Anthony, Brunier and Dussouillez2016, Reference Besset, Anthony and Bouchette2019; Vos et al., Reference Vos, Harley, Splinter, Simmons and Turner2019a; Guzman et al., Reference Guzman, Ramos and Dastgheib2020; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Vos, East and Vitousek2022). For example, the combination of satellite-derived shoreline positions from Landsat and Sentinel-2 imagery using the CoastSat technique (Vos et al., Reference Vos, Splinter, Harley, Simmons and Turner2019b) and estimates of littoral-grade sediment discharge (Barnard and Warrick, Reference Barnard and Warrick2010) for the Santa Clara River, California, shows how the shoreline responds differently in space and time to elevated river sediment discharge (Figure 4). Sand discharge by the Santa Clara River is punctuated by several wet years, including 1983, 1993, 1995, 1998 and 2005, which combined contributed almost 20 Mt, or approximately 13 million cubic metres, of littoral-grade sand to the coast (Figure 4a,b). The shoreline at the Santa Clara River mouth accreted rapidly during these wet years, followed by multiple-year to decadal-scale shoreline recession towards previous positions (Figure 4c,d). In contrast, shorelines greater than 1,000 m downcoast from the river mouth had progressively lagged and muted accretion responses (Figure 4e–g). Overall, the beach 2,000 m downcoast of the river mouth accreted approximately 60 m between 1990 and 2020 as a result of sediment spreading from the combined river sediment discharge events of the 1990s and 2005 (Figure 4e,f; Barnard and Warrick, Reference Barnard and Warrick2010). Combined, these river mouth systems show that sediment input signals can vary greatly in time and that these signals may propagate across and along the shoreline, as described in more detail by coastal observations and theory (Komar, Reference Komar1973; Hicks and Inman, Reference Hicks and Inman1987; Inman et al., Reference Inman, Jenkins, McLachlan, Orme, Leatherman, Whitman and Schwartz2005; Casalbore et al., Reference Casalbore, Chiocci, Scarascia Mugnozza, Tommasi and Sposato2011; Anthony, Reference Anthony2015; East et al., Reference East, Stevens, Ritchie, Barnard, Campbell-Swarzenski and Collins2018; Besset et al., Reference Besset, Anthony and Bouchette2019; Warrick, Reference Warrick2020).

Figure 4. River sediment discharge and shoreline positions of the Santa Clara River, California, highlighting the effects of infrequent events on shoreline accretion and the spatial and temporal variations of shoreline response to new sediment. (a) Annual rainfall at a National Weather Service station near the river. (b) Littoral-grade sand (>125 μm) discharge from the Santa Clara River after Barnard and Warrick (Reference Barnard and Warrick2010); data from 2009 to 2021 were not estimated due to a lack of river gauging. (c–g) Shoreline positions from five transects derived from CoastSat analyses of Vos et al. (Reference Vos, Splinter, Harley, Simmons and Turner2019b). Shoreline positions are normalised to the average position of each transect from 1990 to 1992 when the shoreline was consistently narrow. (h) Satellite imagery of the Santa Clara River mouth following the 2005 sediment discharge events from Google Earth. Locations of the shoreline from a September 2004 image and the CoastSat transects are shown.

Temporal variability in river sediment discharge

Infrequent river sediment discharge events that dramatically alter coastal morphology and shoreline positions – such as the floods on the Rio Rímac (Figure 1) and the Santa Clara River (Figure 4), volcanic-related sediment discharge shown for the Santo Tomas River and Rio Salamá (Figure 3) or profound accretion from storm-induced debris-flow activity, as Casalbore et al. (Reference Casalbore, Chiocci, Scarascia Mugnozza, Tommasi and Sposato2011) documented on the coast of Sicily – provide important examples of how temporal variations in terrestrial sediment supply can strongly influence littoral systems over spatial scales of kilometres to tens of kilometres and temporal scales of years to over a century. As such, we will explore a few examples of the temporal variability of river sediment discharge, and especially the role of infrequent large discharge events, in the export of sediment from the land to the sea.

To assist with this exploration, we have included a series of sediment discharge records from watersheds ranging from a small, steep river draining the rugged Big Sur coast of California to the world’s largest river, the Amazon (Figure 5). Sediment discharge records from these rivers reveal that the smaller watersheds are generally more punctuated by infrequent high-discharge events, whereas the massive Amazon River has relatively constant sediment discharge from year to year. Additionally, the records also highlight the effects of perturbations, such as wildfires, floods, earthquakes, typhoons and human impacts, on year-to-year variations in sediment discharge (Figure 5), which are described more fully in original investigations of these and other rivers (Dadson et al., Reference Dadson, Hovius, Chen, Dade, Lin and Hsu2004; Gran and Montgomery, Reference Gran and Montgomery2005; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Yang, Saito, Liu, Sun and Wang2007; Hovius et al., Reference Hovius, Meunier, Lin, Chen, Chen and Dadson2011; Lee et al., Reference Lee, Huang, Lee, Jien, Zehetner and Kao2015; Gray, Reference Gray2018; Montanher et al., Reference Montanher, de Morais Novo and de Souza Filho2018; Collins et al., Reference Collins, Oakley, Perkins, East, Corbett and Hatchett2020; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Vos, East and Vitousek2022). Sediment discharge is especially elevated when a landscape perturbing event, such as wildfire or an earthquake, is followed by heavy precipitation, such as shown in the records from the Big Sur River and Choshoi River watersheds (Figure 5a,b; Dadson et al., Reference Dadson, Hovius, Chen, Dade, Lin and Hsu2004; Hovius et al., Reference Hovius, Meunier, Lin, Chen, Chen and Dadson2011; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Vos, East and Vitousek2022). Over larger watershed scales of hundreds of thousands to millions of square kilometres, events such as earthquakes or wildfires impact relatively small areas compared to the river’s total drainage basin area and thus contribute only marginally to the overall temporal variations in sediment fluxes (Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013; Francis et al., Reference Francis, Fan, Hales, Hobley, Xu and Huang2022). Thus, temporal variability in sediment discharge from the large rivers of the world is often attributed to factors that influence broader areas of these watersheds, such as widespread land use change from agriculture development, dams on the mainstem river or climate patterns influencing the hydrology of the broader basin (Walling, Reference Walling2006; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Yang, Saito, Liu, Sun and Wang2007; Zheng et al., Reference Zheng, Xu, Cheng, Wang, Xu and Wu2018; Syvitski et al., Reference Syvitski, Ángel, Saito, Overeem, Vörösmarty and Wang2022; Figure 5c).

Figure 5. Annual sediment discharge measurements for four different rivers highlighting how temporal variations are influenced by perturbations such as wildfires, floods and earthquakes and the size of the watershed. Time series shown in (a)–(d) have been transformed into ranked annual exceedance values in (e) using the cumulative sediment discharge measured in each river. Recurrence intervals were estimated by the reciprocal of the annual exceedance probabilities. Data for (a)–(d) were derived from Warrick et al. (Reference Warrick, Vos, East and Vitousek2022), Lee et al. (Reference Lee, Huang, Lee, Jien, Zehetner and Kao2015), Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Yang, Saito, Liu, Sun and Wang2007), and Montanher et al. (Reference Montanher, de Morais Novo and de Souza Filho2018), respectively. Descriptive terms about the watershed sizes (right-hand side) are derived from discussion in Romans et al. (Reference Romans, Castelltort, Covault, Fildani and Walsh2016).

For the four rivers used in our example, the cumulative sediment discharge of the smaller rivers is more heavily dictated by infrequent events than the larger rivers. This is shown by the steepness of the cumulative sediment discharge curves in Figure 5e, which provides contrast between small rivers such as the Big Sur River of California, for which sediment discharge during the two biggest years represented roughly two-thirds the 50-yr sediment discharge to the coast, and the Amazon River, for which the sediment discharged every year is relatively constant. The high temporal variability in the Big Sur River is largely related to the combined effects of two wildfire and heavy precipitation events (labelled ‘Fire + Flood’; Figure 5a; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Vos, East and Vitousek2022), although sediment discharge from this river is still strongly variable in time if these events are not considered in the records (Figure 5e). The inverse relationship between watershed size and temporal variability in river sediment discharge shown in Figure 5 is consistent with broader understanding of the erosion and sediment transport for rivers throughout the world (Hicks et al., Reference Hicks, Gomez and Trustrum2000; Dadson et al., Reference Dadson, Hovius, Chen, Dade, Lin and Hsu2004; Kao and Milliman, Reference Kao and Milliman2008; Gonzalez-Hidalgo et al., Reference Gonzalez-Hidalgo, Batalla, Cerdà and de Luis2010; Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013; Gray, Reference Gray2018). As such, small, steep watersheds may be considered ‘reactive’ with respect to perturbing effects on sediment discharge, whereas large, continental-scale watersheds may be considered more ‘buffered’ against these effects (cf. Romans et al., Reference Romans, Castelltort, Covault, Fildani and Walsh2016).

The accounting of sediment discharge to the coast – such as shown in Figure 5 – is generally derived from sampling of river sediment fluxes and applications of models derived from these data (Walling and Fang, Reference Walling and Fang2003; Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013; Syvitski et al., Reference Syvitski, Ángel, Saito, Overeem, Vörösmarty and Wang2022). Unfortunately, the length of river sampling records is generally limited to intervals of years to several decades (Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013; Warrick and Milliman, Reference Warrick and Milliman2018). Although monitoring records are essential for identifying rates and trends in river sediment transport (Gray, Reference Gray2018), the largest historical events may not be captured by limited duration of sediment sampling. In fact, the exclusion of the largest sediment discharge events is a primary factor for why river sampling records may underestimate long-term watershed sediment yields (Kirchner et al., Reference Kirchner, Finkel, Riebe, Granger, Clayton and King2001; Covault et al., Reference Covault, Craddock, Romans, Fildani and Gosai2013). Combined, this suggests that long-term sediment discharge to the coast – especially from the globally important small, steep rivers – is primarily related to the magnitude and frequency of rare large events.

Climate change

Climate change is modifying the event frequency and intensity of several watershed sediment yield factors discussed above, including the amount and intensity of precipitation and the size, frequency and intensity of wildfires (Westerling et al., Reference Westerling, Hidalgo, Cayan and Swetnam2006; Pachauri et al., Reference Pachauri and Mayer2015; Sankey et al., Reference Sankey, Kreitler, Hawbaker, McVay, Miller and Mueller2017; Swain et al., Reference Swain, Langenbrunner, Neelin and Hall2018; Ball et al., Reference Ball, Regier, González-Pinzón, Reale and Van Horn2021; Touma et al., Reference Touma, Stevenson, Swain, Singh, Kalashnikov and Huang2022). Additionally, rising temperatures are changing the hydrology and sediment yields of both Arctic and alpine landscapes (Bendixen et al., Reference Bendixen, Iversen, Bjørk, Elberling, Westergaard-Nielsen, Overeem, Barnhart, Khan, Box, Abermann, Langley and Kroon2017; Li et al., Reference Li, Lu, Overeem, Walling, Syvitski and Kettner2021a; Irrgang et al., Reference Irrgang, Bendixen, Farquharson, Baranskaya, Erikson and Gibbs2022; Vergara et al., Reference Vergara, Garreaud and Ayala2022). As such, there is a growing understanding that climate change is causing fundamental changes to the rate of sediment delivery from many landscapes to fluvial and coastal landforms. These effects are most clearly evident in Arctic settings, where terrestrial sediment inputs have increased at the same time that ice-free conditions in the adjacent seas are getting longer (Bendixen et al., Reference Bendixen, Iversen, Bjørk, Elberling, Westergaard-Nielsen, Overeem, Barnhart, Khan, Box, Abermann, Langley and Kroon2017; Irrgang et al., Reference Irrgang, Bendixen, Farquharson, Baranskaya, Erikson and Gibbs2022). Combined, this is resulting in the expansion of some Artic deltas – such as those along the Greenland coast – and accelerated erosion on many wave-exposed Arctic shorelines (Bendixen et al., Reference Bendixen, Iversen, Bjørk, Elberling, Westergaard-Nielsen, Overeem, Barnhart, Khan, Box, Abermann, Langley and Kroon2017; Irrgang et al., Reference Irrgang, Bendixen, Farquharson, Baranskaya, Erikson and Gibbs2022). There is also growing evidence for changes in fluvial sediment discharge in lower latitudes, as wildfire and precipitation are actively changing with climate (Lee et al., Reference Lee, Huang, Lee, Jien, Zehetner and Kao2015; East and Sankey, Reference East and Sankey2020; Touma et al., Reference Touma, Stevenson, Swain, Singh, Kalashnikov and Huang2022). Climate-induced changes are expected to continue with time, and they may dramatically alter sediment budgets of rivers and their downstream coasts.

Conceptual model and future directions

As highlighted above, infrequent fluvial sediment discharge events are a driving factor for many coastal littoral systems worldwide. This time-dependent variability commonly results in wet conditions delivering considerably more sediment than dry conditions do, and when these wet conditions are combined with increases in hillslope sediment supplies from wildfires, earthquakes or volcanic activity, sediment discharge can be exceptional. That is, infrequent events are generally responsible for the majority of sediment transport to the coast (Milliman and Farnsworth, Reference Milliman and Farnsworth2013).

We have integrated these concepts into a conceptual model of hypothetical watershed sediment yields and shoreline positions for a small, steep watershed that efficiently conveys sediment from source regions to the coast (cf. Romans et al., Reference Romans, Castelltort, Covault, Fildani and Walsh2016) that will be used to discuss historic and future trajectories of coastlines (Figure 6). In this simple model, there are several perturbations to watershed sediment yield: precipitation, which causes landscape erosion and downstream flooding; wildfire, which denudes the landscape and increases the potential for soil erosion; earthquakes, which liberate regolith throughout the watershed and volcanic activity, which introduces new sediment materials and disrupts the watershed landscape (Figure 6). As highlighted above, the effects of wildfires on watershed sediment yield are enhanced when they are followed closely by heavy precipitation, as denoted by three ‘fire + flood’ events in the hypothetical records (Figure 6). Additionally, the conceptual model includes characteristic human impacts to sediment yields, including increases from land use such as agriculture and road building and decreases from the construction of dams (Kosmas et al., Reference Kosmas, Danalatos, Cammeraat, Chabart, Diamantopoulos and Farand1997; Vörösmarty et al., Reference Vörösmarty, Meybeck, Fekete, Sharma, Green and Syvitski2003; Syvitski, Reference Syvitski2005; Walling, Reference Walling2006; Anthony et al., Reference Anthony, Marriner and Morhange2014; Luo et al., Reference Luo, Yang, Wang, Zhang and Li2017; Li et al., Reference Li, Li, Zhu, Meadows, Zhu and Zhang2021b; Syvitski et al., Reference Syvitski, Ángel, Saito, Overeem, Vörösmarty and Wang2022).

Figure 6. Conceptual model of coastal responses to watershed processes for a theoretical small, steep river basin (after the fire-flood model of Keller et al., Reference Keller, Valentine and Gibbs1997). Relative sediment yield of the watershed is influenced by stochastic events, including floods, wildfires, earthquakes, volcanic activity and combined events, such as wildfire followed by flooding (‘F + F’). The shoreline position of the littoral cell responds to increases in watershed sediment yield with accretion events (upward pointing arrows) because of the efficient transfer of river sediment to the littoral cell. Future shoreline positions (right-hand side) will be determined by balance between sediment supply and sea-level rise. Moreover, highlighted are hypothetical intervals of river sampling, climate change effects, land-use-change effects and damming of the river.

The time-varying rate of sediment yield, driven in large part by infrequent events and human impacts, has direct effects on the shoreline position of the littoral cell near the river mouth (Figure 6). For our hypothetical system, small increases in sediment yield result in short-lived changes in the shoreline position, much like the coastal response to monitored events in the Santa Clara River (cf. Figure 4). The five large sediment yield events (highlighted with grey shading; Figure 6) cause fundamental changes in the shoreline position as shown by accretion events (arrows; Figure 6). These large events are conceptually similar to the volcanic events highlighted above (cf. Figure 3). Lastly, human impacts may result in coastal accretion or erosion trends, depending on the nature and scale of these impacts (Figure 6).

A few additional items are emphasised in the conceptual model. First, although the river sampling records (blue shading; Figure 6) are shown to capture several decades of sediment discharge including an era of human impacts, they do not include some of the largest and most significant events of the past two centuries. This is rather common for actual river records given that they are commonly years to decades in length (Warrick and Milliman, Reference Warrick and Milliman2018). To properly understand century-scale or longer sediment yields, river sampling records should be integrated with either an understanding of the role, magnitude and frequency of events that are not included in the sampling record, or with broader geologic understanding of the discharge record from measurements such as sediment cores or cosmogenic nuclides (Walling, Reference Walling1988; Lamoureux, Reference Lamoureux2000; Kirchner et al., Reference Kirchner, Finkel, Riebe, Granger, Clayton and King2001; von Blanckenburg, Reference Von Blanckenburg2005; Covault et al., Reference Covault, Craddock, Romans, Fildani and Gosai2013). Additionally, the lack of exceptional events in most sampling records highlights the importance of records that do include these unique events (e.g., Kuenzi et al., Reference Kuenzi, Horst and McGehee1979; Gran and Montgomery, Reference Gran and Montgomery2005; Korup, Reference Korup2012; Ritchie et al., Reference Ritchie, Warrick, East, Magirl, Stevens and Bountry2018; Fan et al., Reference Fan, Scaringi, Korup, West, Westen and Tanyas2019; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Vos, East and Vitousek2022), largely because they allow for the new understanding to be transferred to longer timescales and to other river systems. Second, in looking towards a future with continued climate change (yellow shading; Figure 6), the sustainability of coastal landforms such as the littoral systems highlighted here will depend on whether sediment contributions to the coast can balance the erosion caused by sea-level rise and associated impacts (FitzGerald et al., Reference FitzGerald, Fenster, Argow and Buynevich2008; Syvitski et al., Reference Syvitski, Kettner, Overeem, Hutton, Hannon and Brakenridge2009; Giosan et al., Reference Giosan, Syvitski, Constantinescu and Day2014; Nienhuis et al., Reference Nienhuis, (Ton) Hoitink and Törnqvist2018; Reimann et al., Reference Reimann, Vafeidis, Brown, Hinkel and Tol2018; Schuerch et al., Reference Schuerch, Spencer, Temmerman, Kirwan, Wolff and Lincke2018; Hoitink et al., Reference Hoitink, Nittrouer, Passalacqua, Shaw, Langendoen and Huismans2020). That is, the future of the world’s shorelines will be determined not only by global eustatic sea-level changes, but also by many local factors such as the rate and variability of sediment supply and the conditions and processes that are responsible for transporting sediment throughout the coastal zone (Casalbore et al., Reference Casalbore, Chiocci, Scarascia Mugnozza, Tommasi and Sposato2011; Anthony, Reference Anthony2015; Nienhuis et al., Reference Nienhuis, Ashton, Nardin, Fagherazzi and Giosan2016; Steel et al., Reference Steel, Simms, Warrick and Yokoyama2016; Caldwell et al., Reference Caldwell, Edmonds, Baumgardner, Paola, Roy and Nienhuis2019; Warrick, Reference Warrick2020).

Summarising, the future of many coasts will be tied to terrestrial sediment inputs (Anthony and Blivi, Reference Anthony and Blivi1999; Syvitski et al., Reference Syvitski, Kettner, Overeem, Hutton, Hannon and Brakenridge2009; Giosan et al., Reference Giosan, Coolen, Kaplan, Constantinescu, Filip and Filipova-Marinova2012, Reference Giosan, Syvitski, Constantinescu and Day2014; Anthony et al., Reference Anthony, Marriner and Morhange2014), so a better understanding of the magnitude, frequency and implications of sediment supply rates is needed. This is especially true for infrequent events, which as noted above can dominate long-term coastal sediment budgets and can redefine coastal morphology. As coastal communities have multiple management options to confront the challenges of climate change, including actively nourishing landforms with imported sediment (de Schipper et al., Reference de Schipper, de Vries, Ruessink, de Zeeuw, Rutten and van Gelder-Maas2016; Ludka et al., Reference Ludka, Guza and O’Reilly2018; Armstrong and Lazarus, Reference Armstrong and Lazarus2019), these will need to be balanced with an understanding of the inherent coastal processes and morphodynamics, including natural sediment supplies. In some cases, watershed sediment supplies may be adequate to produce relatively constant shoreline positions for decades or more; in other cases, sediment discharge may be inadequate to keep up with sea-level rise, and coastal erosion and land loss will ensue (Figure 6).

To build this understanding under the current and future conditions of climate change requires collaborative communication and research efforts across hydrologic, geomorphic and coastal research groups. We encourage the continued development and progress of cross-disciplinary studies of coastal landforms, especially with respect to the linkages between watershed processes and coastal morphodynamics. Although this requires integration across several discipline boundaries (hydrology, oceanography, geomorphology, ecology, meteorology and climate science), it is essential to build this cross-disciplinary understanding where terrestrial and coastal systems are integrally linked. Additionally, because this work will be highly relevant for coastal communities worldwide that are actively confronting the effects of climate change through land use and expenditure decisions, it is valuable to integrate stakeholder collaboration and the challenges that coastal managers face into research goals and methods (Lemos et al., Reference Lemos, Arnott, Ardoin, Baja, Bednarek and Dewulf2018; Ulibarri et al., Reference Ulibarri, Goodrich, Wagle, Brand, Matthew and Stein2020). Although the coming era will provide considerable uncertainty for coastal communities and their natural resources, it is crucial that coastal scientists continue to develop relevant information and understanding about our changing coasts.

Open peer review

To view the open peer review materials for this article, please visit http://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available from scientific reports and publications (from Kuenzi et al., Reference Kuenzi, Horst and McGehee1979; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Yang, Saito, Liu, Sun and Wang2007; Barnard and Warrick, Reference Barnard and Warrick2010; Lee et al., Reference Lee, Huang, Lee, Jien, Zehetner and Kao2015; Montanher et al., Reference Montanher, de Morais Novo and de Souza Filho2018; Warrick et al., Reference Warrick, Vos, East and Vitousek2022), the imagery database contained within Google Earth Pro at https://www.google.com/earth/versions/#earth-pro, and the CoastSat shoreline position database at http://coastsat.wrl.unsw.edu.au/.

Acknowledgements

We are thankful for the support of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) of this work, including the USGS Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program and a USGS Mendenhall postdoctoral fellowship to H.D. Peter Swarzenski provided comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

Author contributions

All authors provided contributions to the development, organisation and writing of this article. J.A.W. compiled data and imagery and drafted the figures.

Financial support

This work was supported by the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program and the USGS’s Mendenhall Research Fellowship Program.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests exist.

References

Anthony, EJ (2015) Wave influence in the construction, shaping and destruction of river deltas: A review. Marine Geology 361, 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2014.12.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anthony, EJ and Blivi, AB (1999) Morphosedimentary evolution of a delta-sourced, drift-aligned sand barrier–lagoon complex, western Bight of Benin. Marine Geology 158, 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-3227(98)00170-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anthony, EJ, Marriner, N and Morhange, C (2014) Human influence and the changing geomorphology of Mediterranean deltas and coasts over the last 6000 years: From progradation to destruction phase? Earth-Science Reviews 139, 336–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2014.10.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, SB and Lazarus, ED (2019) Masked shoreline erosion at large spatial scales as a collective effect of beach nourishment. Earths Future 7, 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF001070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashton, AD and Giosan, L (2011) Wave-angle control of delta evolution. Geophysical Research Letters 38, L13405. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL047630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, G, Regier, P, González-Pinzón, R, Reale, J and Van Horn, D (2021) Wildfires increasingly impact western US fluvial networks. Nature Communications 12, 2484. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22747-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnard, PL and Warrick, JA (2010) Dramatic beach and nearshore morphological changes due to extreme flooding at a wave-dominated river mouth. Marine Geology 271, 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2010.01.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendixen, M, Iversen, LL, Bjørk, AA, Elberling, B, Westergaard-Nielsen, A, Overeem, I, Barnhart, KR, Khan, SA, Box, JE, Abermann, J, Langley, K, and Kroon, A, 2017. Delta progradation in Greenlanddriven by increasing glacial mass loss. Nature, 550, pp.101–104. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23873CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Besset, M, Anthony, EJ and Bouchette, F (2019) Multi-decadal variations in delta shorelines and their relationship to river sediment supply: An assessment and review. Earth-Science Reviews 193, 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2019.04.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besset, M, Anthony, EJ, Brunier, G and Dussouillez, P (2016) Shoreline change of the Mekong River delta along the southern part of the South China Sea coast using satellite image analysis (1973–2014). Géomorphologie: Relief, Processus, Environnement 22, 137–146. https://doi.org/10.4000/geomorphologie.11336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besset, M, Anthony, EJ and Sabatier, F (2017) River delta shoreline reworking and erosion in the Mediterranean and Black Seas: The potential roles of fluvial sediment starvation and other factors. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene 5, 54. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.139Google Scholar
Caldwell, RL, Edmonds, DA, Baumgardner, S, Paola, C, Roy, S and Nienhuis, JH (2019) A global delta dataset and the environmental variables that predict delta formation on marine coastlines. Earth Surface Dynamics 7, 773–787. https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-7-773-2019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casalbore, D, Chiocci, FL, Scarascia Mugnozza, G, Tommasi, P and Sposato, A (2011) Flash-flood hyperpycnal flows generating shallow-water landslides at Fiumara mouths in Western Messina Strait (Italy). Marine Geophysical Research 32, 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11001-011-9128-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, BD, Oakley, NS, Perkins, JP, East, AE, Corbett, SC and Hatchett, BJ (2020) Linking mesoscale meteorology with extreme landscape response: Effects of narrow cold frontal rainbands (NCFR). Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 125, e2020JF005675. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JF005675Google Scholar
Cooper, JAG (1993) Sedimentation in a river dominated estuary. Sedimentology 40, 979–1017. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1993.tb01372.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, JAG (2001) Geomorphological variability among microtidal estuaries from the wave-dominated South African coast. Geomorphology 40, 99–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-555X(01)00039-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Covault, JA, Craddock, WH, Romans, BW, Fildani, A and Gosai, M (2013) Spatial and temporal variations in landscape evolution: Historic and longer-term sediment flux through global catchments. Journal of Geology 121, 35–56. https://doi.org/10.1086/668680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dadson, SJ, Hovius, N, Chen, H, Dade, WB, Lin, J-C, Hsu, M-L, et al. (2004) Earthquake-triggered increase in sediment delivery from an active mountain belt. Geology 32, 733. https://doi.org/10.1130/G20639.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Schipper, MA, de Vries, S, Ruessink, G, de Zeeuw, RC, Rutten, J, van Gelder-Maas, C, et al. (2016) Initial spreading of a mega feeder nourishment: Observations of the Sand Engine pilot project. Coastal Engineering 111, 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2015.10.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duvat, VKE (2019) A global assessment of atoll island planform changes over the past decades. WIREs Climate Change 10, e557. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
East, AE and Sankey, JB (2020) Geomorphic and sedimentary effects of modern climate change: Current and anticipated future conditions in the western United States. Reviews of Geophysics 58, e2019RG000692. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
East, AE, Stevens, AW, Ritchie, AC, Barnard, PL, Campbell-Swarzenski, P, Collins, BD, et al. (2018) A regime shift in sediment export from a coastal watershed during a record wet winter, California: Implications for landscape response to hydroclimatic extremes. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 43, 2562–2577. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, X, Scaringi, G, Korup, O, West, AJ, Westen, CJ, Tanyas, H, et al. (2019) Earthquake‐induced chains of geologic hazards: Patterns, mechanisms, and impacts, Reviews of Geophysics 57, 421–503. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018RG000626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FitzGerald, DM, Fenster, MS, Argow, BA and Buynevich, IV (2008) Coastal impacts due to sea-level rise. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 36, 601–647. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.earth.35.031306.140139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, O, Fan, X, Hales, T, Hobley, D, Xu, Q and Huang, R (2022) The fate of sediment after a large earthquake. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 127, e2021JF006352. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JF006352Google Scholar
French, A and Mechler, R (2017) Managing El Niño Risks Under Uncertainty in Peru: Learning from the Past for a More Disaster-Resilient Future. Available at http://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/14849/1/French_Mechler_2017_El%20Ni%C3%B1o_Risk_Peru_Report.pdf (accessed 31 January 2022).Google Scholar
Friedrichs, CT and Perry, JE (2001) Tidal salt marsh morphodynamics: A synthesis. Journal of Coastal Research 27, 7–37.Google Scholar
Frihy, OE, Shereet, SM and El Banna, MM (2008) Pattern of beach erosion and scour depth along the Rosetta promontory and their effect on the existing protection works, Nile Delta, Egypt. Journal of Coastal Research 244, 857–866. https://doi.org/10.2112/07-0855.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giosan, L, Coolen, MJL, Kaplan, JO, Constantinescu, S, Filip, F, Filipova-Marinova, M, et al. (2012) Early anthropogenic transformation of the Danube–Black Sea system. Scientific Reports 2, 582. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00582CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giosan, L, Syvitski, JPM, Constantinescu, S and Day, J (2014) Protecting the world’s deltas. Nature 516, 31–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Hidalgo, JC, Batalla, RJ, Cerdà, A and de Luis, M (2010) Contribution of the largest events to suspended sediment transport across the USA. Land Degradation & Devlopement 21, 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gran, KB and Montgomery, DR (2005) Spatial and temporal patterns in fluvial recovery following volcanic eruptions: Channel response to basin-wide sediment loading at Mount Pinatubo, Philippines. GSA Bulletin 117, 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1130/B25528.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, AB (2018) The impact of persistent dynamics on suspended sediment load estimation. Geomorphology 322, 132–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2018.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzman, E, Ramos, C and Dastgheib, A (2020) Influence of the el niño phenomenon on shoreline evolution. Case study: Callao Bay, Perú. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 8, 90. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse8020090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heron, SD, Moslow, TF, Berelson, WM, Herbert, JR, Steele, GA and Susman, KR (1984) Holocene sedimentation of a wave-dominated barrier-island shoreline: Cape Lookout, North Carolina. In Greenwood, B and Davis, RA (eds), Developments in Sedimentology Hydrodynamics and Sedimentation in Wave-Dominated Coastal Environments. Elsevier, pp. 413–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0070-4571(08)70157-2Google Scholar
Hicks, DM, Gomez, B and Trustrum, NA (2000) Erosion thresholds and suspended sediment yields, Waipaoa River Basin, New Zealand. Water Resources Research 36, 1129–1142. https://doi.org/10.1029/1999WR900340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, DM and Inman, DL (1987) Sand dispersion from an ephemeral river delta on the Central California coast. Marine Geology 77, 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-3227(87)90119-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoitink, AJF, Nittrouer, JA, Passalacqua, P, Shaw, JB, Langendoen, EJ, Huismans, Y, et al. (2020) Resilience of river deltas in the Anthropocene. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 125, e2019JF005201. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JF005201Google Scholar
Hovius, N, Meunier, P, Lin, C-W, Chen, H, Chen, Y-G, Dadson, S, et al. (2011) Prolonged seismically induced erosion and the mass balance of a large earthquake. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 304, 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2011.02.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inman, DL, Jenkins, SA, McLachlan, A, Orme, AR, Leatherman, SP, Whitman, D, et al. (2005) Accretion and erosion waves on beaches. In Schwartz, ML (ed.), Encyclopedia of Coastal Science. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 1–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3880-1_1Google Scholar
Inman, DL and Nordstrom, CE (1971) On the tectonic and morphologic classification of coasts. Journal of Geology 79, 1–21.Google Scholar
Irrgang, AM, Bendixen, M, Farquharson, LM, Baranskaya, AV, Erikson, LH, Gibbs, AE, et al. (2022) Drivers, dynamics and impacts of changing Arctic coasts. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment 3, 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-021-00232-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kao, SJ and Milliman, JD (2008) Water and sediment discharge from small mountainous rivers, Taiwan: The roles of lithology, episodic events, and human activities. Journal of Geology 116, 431–448. https://doi.org/10.1086/590921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, EA, Valentine, DW and Gibbs, DR (1997) Hydrological response of small watersheds following the southern California Painted Cave Fire of June 1990. Hydrological Processes 11, 401–414. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1085(19970330)11:4<401::AID-HYP447>3.0.CO;2-P3.0.CO;2-P>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khripounoff, A, Vangriesheim, A, Crassous, P and Etoubleau, J (2009) High frequency of sediment gravity flow events in the Var submarine canyon (Mediterranean Sea). Marine Geology 263, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2009.03.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchner, JW, Finkel, RC, Riebe, CS, Granger, DE, Clayton, JL, King, JG, et al. (2001) Mountain erosion over 10 yr, 10 ky, and 10 my time scales. Geology 29, 591–594.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komar, PD (1973) Computer models of delta growth due to sediment input from rivers and longshore transport. Geology Society of America Bulletin 84, 2217–2226.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komar, PD (1998) Beach Processes and Sedimentation, 2nd Edn. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Korup, O (2012) Earth’s portfolio of extreme sediment transport events. Earth-Science Reviews 112, 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2012.02.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kosmas, C, Danalatos, N, Cammeraat, LH, Chabart, M, Diamantopoulos, J, Farand, R, et al. (1997) The effect of land use on runoff and soil erosion rates under Mediterranean conditions. CATENA 29, 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0341-8162(96)00062-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuenzi, WD, Horst, OH and McGehee, RV (1979) Effect of volcanic activity on fluvial-deltaic sedimentation in a modern arc-trench gap, southwestern Guatemala. Geology Society of America Bulletin 90, 827–838.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamoureux, S (2000) Five centuries of interannual sediment yield and rainfall-induced erosion in the Canadian High Arctic recorded in lacustrine varves. Water Resources Research 36, 309–318. https://doi.org/10.1029/1999WR900271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, T-Y, Huang, J-C, Lee, J-Y, Jien, S-H, Zehetner, F and Kao, S-J (2015) Magnified sediment export of small mountainous rivers in Taiwan: Chain reactions from increased rainfall intensity under global warming. PloS One 10, e0138283. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138283CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lemos, MC, Arnott, JC, Ardoin, NM, Baja, K, Bednarek, AT, Dewulf, A, et al. (2018) To co-produce or not to co-produce. Nature Sustainability 1, 722–724. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0191-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, D, Lu, X, Overeem, I, Walling, DE, Syvitski, J, Kettner, AJ, et al. (2021a) Exceptional increases in fluvial sediment fluxes in a warmer and wetter High Mountain Asia. Science 374, 599–603. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abi9649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, M, Li, T, Zhu, L, Meadows, ME, Zhu, W and Zhang, S (2021b) Effect of land use change on gully erosion density in the black soil region of northeast China from 1965 to 2015: A case study of the Kedong county. Frontiers in Environmental Science 9, 652933. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2021.652933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, JT, Hsu, RT, Hung, J-J, Chang, Y-P, Wang, Y-H, Rendle-Bühring, RH, et al. (2016) From the highest to the deepest: The Gaoping River–Gaoping Submarine Canyon dispersal system. Earth-Science Reviews 153, 274–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2015.10.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludka, BC, Guza, RT and O’Reilly, WC (2018) Nourishment evolution and impacts at four southern California beaches: A sand volume analysis. Coastal Engineering 136, 96–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.02.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, XX, Yang, SL, Wang, RS, Zhang, CY and Li, P (2017) New evidence of Yangtze delta recession after closing of the Three Gorges Dam. Scientific Reports 7, 41735. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41735CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meade, RH (1982) Sources, sinks, and storage of river sediment in the Atlantic drainage of the United States. Journal of Geology 90, 235–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milliman, JD and Farnsworth, KL (2013) River Discharge to the Coastal Ocean: A Global Synthesis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Milliman, JD and Syvitski, JPM (1992) Geomorphic/tectonic control of sediment discharge to the ocean: The importance of small mountainous rivers. Journal of Geology 100, 525–544. https://doi.org/10.1086/629606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montanher, OC, de Morais Novo, EML and de Souza Filho, EE (2018) Temporal trend of the suspended sediment transport of the Amazon River (1984–2016). Hydrological Sciences Journal 63, 1901–1912. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2018.1546387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulder, T, Syvitski, JPM, Migeon, S, Faugères, J-C and Savoye, B (2003) Marine hyperpycnal flows: Initiation, behavior and related deposits. A review. Marine and Petroleum Geology 20, 861–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2003.01.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, AB, Knaapen, MAF, Tal, M and Kirwan, ML (2008) Biomorphodynamics: Physical-biological feedbacks that shape landscapes: OPINION. Water Resources Research 44. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nienhuis, JH, Ashton, AD, Edmonds, DA, Hoitink, AJF, Kettner, AJ, Rowland, JC, et al. (2020) Global-scale human impact on delta morphology has led to net land area gain. Nature 577, 514–518. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1905-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nienhuis, JH, Ashton, AD, Nardin, W, Fagherazzi, S and Giosan, L (2016) Alongshore sediment bypassing as a control on river mouth morphodynamics. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 121, 664–683. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JF003780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nienhuis, JH, Ashton, AD, Roos, PC, Hulscher, SJ and Giosan, L (2013) Wave reworking of abandoned deltas. Geophysical Research Letters 40, 5899–5903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nienhuis, JH, (Ton) Hoitink, AJF and Törnqvist, TE (2018) Future change to tide‐influenced deltas. Geophysical Research Letters 45, 3499–3507. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL077638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orton, GJ and Reading, HG (1993) Variability of deltaic processes in terms of sediment supply, with particular emphasis on grain size. Sedimentology 40, 475–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1993.tb01347.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pachauri, RK, Mayer, L and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds) (2015) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Geneva, Switzerland: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Google Scholar
Perry, CT, Kench, PS, O’Leary, MJ, Morgan, KM and Januchowski-Hartley, F (2015) Linking reef ecology to island building: Parrotfish identified as major producers of island-building sediment in the Maldives. Geology 43, 503–506. https://doi.org/10.1130/G36623.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reimann, L, Vafeidis, AT, Brown, S, Hinkel, J and Tol, RSJ (2018) Mediterranean UNESCO World Heritage at risk from coastal flooding and erosion due to sea-level rise. Nature Communications 9, 4161. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06645-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritchie, AC, Warrick, JA, East, AE, Magirl, CS, Stevens, AW, Bountry, JA, et al. (2018) Morphodynamic evolution following sediment release from the world’s largest dam removal. Scientific Reports 8, 13279. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-30817-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romans, BW, Castelltort, S, Covault, JA, Fildani, A and Walsh, JP (2016) Environmental signal propagation in sedimentary systems across timescales. Earth-Science Reviews 153, 7–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2015.07.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romans, BW, Normark, WR, McGann, MM, Covault, JA and Graham, SA (2009) Coarse-grained sediment delivery and distribution in the Holocene Santa Monica Basin, California: Implications for evaluating source-to-sink flux at millennial time scales. Geology Society of America Bulletin 121, 1394–1408. https://doi.org/10.1130/B26393.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankey, JB, Kreitler, J, Hawbaker, TJ, McVay, JL, Miller, ME, Mueller, ER, et al. (2017) Climate, wildfire, and erosion ensemble foretells more sediment in western USA watersheds: Future fire and sediment. Geophysical Research Letters 44, 8884–8892. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuerch, M, Spencer, T, Temmerman, S, Kirwan, ML, Wolff, C, Lincke, D, et al. (2018) Future response of global coastal wetlands to sea-level rise. Nature 561, 231–234. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0476-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siringan, FP and Ringor, CL (2007) Changes in the position of the Zambales shoreline before and after the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption: Controls of shoreline change. Science Diliman 7–8, 1–13.Google Scholar
Splinter, KD, Turner, IL, Reinhardt, M and Ruessink, G (2017) Rapid adjustment of shoreline behavior to changing seasonality of storms: Observations and modelling at an open-coast beach. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 42, 1186–1194. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steel, E, Simms, AR, Warrick, J and Yokoyama, Y (2016) Highstand shelf fans: The role of buoyancy reversal in the deposition of a new type of shelf sand body. Geology Society of America Bulletin 128, 1717–1724. https://doi.org/10.1130/B31438.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, DL, Langenbrunner, B, Neelin, JD and Hall, A (2018) Increasing precipitation volatility in twenty-first-century California. Nature Climate Change 8, 427–433. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0140-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syvitski, J, Ángel, JR, Saito, Y, Overeem, I, Vörösmarty, CJ, Wang, H, et al. (2022) Earth’s sediment cycle during the Anthropocene. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment 3, 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-021-00253-wCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syvitski, JPM (2005) Impact of humans on the flux of terrestrial sediment to the global coastal ocean. Science 308, 376–380. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1109454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syvitski, JPM, Kettner, AJ, Overeem, I, Hutton, EWH, Hannon, MT, Brakenridge, GR, et al. (2009) Sinking deltas due to human activities. Nature Geoscience 2, 681–686. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tessler, ZD, Vörösmarty, CJ, Overeem, I and Syvitski, JPM (2018) A model of water and sediment balance as determinants of relative sea level rise in contemporary and future deltas. Geomorphology 305, 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2017.09.040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Touma, D, Stevenson, S, Swain, DL, Singh, D, Kalashnikov, DA and Huang, X (2022) Climate change increases risk of extreme rainfall following wildfire in the western United States. Science Advances 8, eabm0320. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abm0320CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ulibarri, N, Goodrich, KA, Wagle, P, Brand, M, Matthew, R, Stein, ED, et al. (2020) Barriers and opportunities for beneficial reuse of sediment to support coastal resilience. Ocean & Coastal Management 195, 105287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2020.105287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vergara, I, Garreaud, R and Ayala, Á (2022) Sharp increase of extreme turbidity events due to deglaciation in the subtropical Andes. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 127, e2021JF006584. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JF006584Google Scholar
Vitousek, S, Barnard, PL, Fletcher, CH, Frazer, N, Erikson, L and Storlazzi, CD (2017) Doubling of coastal flooding frequency within decades due to sea-level rise. Scientific Reports 7, 1399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Von Blanckenburg, F (2005) The control mechanisms of erosion and weathering at basin scale from cosmogenic nuclides in river sediment. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 237, 462–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2005.06.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vörösmarty, CJ, Meybeck, M, Fekete, B, Sharma, K, Green, P and Syvitski, JPM (2003) Anthropogenic sediment retention: Major global impact from registered river impoundments. Global and Planetary Change 39, 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8181(03)00023-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vos, K, Harley, MD, Splinter, KD, Simmons, JA and Turner, IL (2019a) Sub-annual to multi-decadal shoreline variability from publicly available satellite imagery. Coastal Engineering 150, 160–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2019.04.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vos, K, Splinter, KD, Harley, MD, Simmons, JA and Turner, IL (2019b) CoastSat: A Google Earth Engine-enabled Python toolkit to extract shorelines from publicly available satellite imagery. Environmental Modelling & Software 122, 104528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2019.104528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walling, DE (1988) Erosion and sediment yield research – Some recent perspectives. Journal of Hydrology 100, 113–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(88)90183-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walling, DE (2006) Human impact on land–ocean sediment transfer by the world’s rivers. Geomorphology 79, 192–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.06.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walling, DE and Fang, D (2003) Recent trends in the suspended sediment loads of the world’s rivers. Global and Planetary Change 39, 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8181(03)00020-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, H, Yang, Z, Saito, Y, Liu, JP, Sun, X and Wang, Y (2007) Stepwise decreases of the Huanghe (Yellow River) sediment load (1950–2005): Impacts of climate change and human activities. Global and Planetary Change 57, 331–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2007.01.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warrick, JA (2020) Littoral sediment from rivers: Patterns, rates and processes of river mouth morphodynamics. Frontiers in Earth Science 8, 355. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2020.00355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warrick, JA and Milliman, JD (2018) Do we know how much fluvial sediment reaches the sea? Decreased river monitoring of U.S. coastal rivers. Hydrological Processes 32, 3561–3567. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warrick, JA, Stevens, AW, Miller, IM, Harrison, SR, Ritchie, AC and Gelfenbaum, G (2019) World’s largest dam removal reverses coastal erosion. Scientific Reports 9, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50387-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warrick, JA, Vos, K, East, AE and Vitousek, S (2022) Fire (plus) flood (equals) beach: Coastal response to an exceptional river sediment discharge event. Scientific Reports 12, 3848. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-07209-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westerling, AL, Hidalgo, HG, Cayan, DR and Swetnam, TW (2006) Warming and earlier spring increase western U.S. forest wildfire activity. Science 313, 940–943. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1128834CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winterwerp, JC, Erftemeijer, PLA, Suryadiputra, N, van Eijk, P and Zhang, L (2013) Defining eco-morphodynamic requirements for rehabilitating eroding mangrove-mud coasts. Wetlands 33, 515–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-013-0409-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodroffe, CD, Samosorn, B, Hua, Q and Hart, DE (2007) Incremental accretion of a sandy reef island over the past 3000 years indicated by component-specific radiocarbon dating. Geophysical Research Letters 34, L03602. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL028875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, LD and Short, AD (1984) Morphodynamic variability of surf zones and beaches: A synthesis. Marine Geology 56, 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-3227(84)90008-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, LD, Syvitski, JPM, Nichols, CR and Zinnert, J (2019) Coastal morphodynamics and ecosystem dynamics. In Wright, LD and Nichols, CR (eds), Tomorrow’s Coasts: Complex and Impermanent. Coastal Research Library. Cham: Springer, pp. 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75453-6_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, HF, Yang, SL, Xu, KH, Wu, H, Shi, BW, Zhu, Q, et al. (2017) Erosion potential of the Yangtze Delta under sediment starvation and climate change. Scientific Reports 7, 10535. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-10958-yCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, SL, Luo, X, Temmerman, S, Kirwan, M, Bouma, T, Xu, K, et al. (2020) Role of delta‐front erosion in sustaining salt marshes under sea‐level rise and fluvial sediment decline. Limnology and Oceanography 65, 1990–2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, S, Xu, YJ, Cheng, H, Wang, B, Xu, W and Wu, S (2018) Riverbed erosion of the final 565 km of the Yangtze River (Changjiang) following construction of the Three Gorges Dam. Scientific Reports 8, 11917. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-30441-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1. The influence of river sediment discharge on the coastal morphology and shoreline positions at the mouth of Rio Rímac, Peru, from 2016 to 2021. As described by Guzman et al. (2020), heavy flooding in early 2017 resulted in massive growth of the river mouth delta and spreading of this sediment northward in the subsequent years, similar to the coastal morphodynamics following flooding in 1983 and 1998. Imagery from Google Earth.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Examples of coastal changes at the mouths of small rivers of the world resulting from contributions of new sediment. Imagery from Google Earth.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Decadal to century persistence of coastal accretion from increases in river sediment yield resulting from volcanic activity in coastal watersheds. (a) The mouth of the Santo Tomas River 28 years after the eruption of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines. (b) The mouth of Rio Salamá almost 120 years after the eruption of Santa Maria, Guatemala. Additional shorelines from before and immediately following the eruptions from publicly available Landsat imagery or interpretations of Kuenzi et al. (1979). Imagery from Google Earth.

Figure 3

Figure 4. River sediment discharge and shoreline positions of the Santa Clara River, California, highlighting the effects of infrequent events on shoreline accretion and the spatial and temporal variations of shoreline response to new sediment. (a) Annual rainfall at a National Weather Service station near the river. (b) Littoral-grade sand (>125 μm) discharge from the Santa Clara River after Barnard and Warrick (2010); data from 2009 to 2021 were not estimated due to a lack of river gauging. (c–g) Shoreline positions from five transects derived from CoastSat analyses of Vos et al. (2019b). Shoreline positions are normalised to the average position of each transect from 1990 to 1992 when the shoreline was consistently narrow. (h) Satellite imagery of the Santa Clara River mouth following the 2005 sediment discharge events from Google Earth. Locations of the shoreline from a September 2004 image and the CoastSat transects are shown.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Annual sediment discharge measurements for four different rivers highlighting how temporal variations are influenced by perturbations such as wildfires, floods and earthquakes and the size of the watershed. Time series shown in (a)–(d) have been transformed into ranked annual exceedance values in (e) using the cumulative sediment discharge measured in each river. Recurrence intervals were estimated by the reciprocal of the annual exceedance probabilities. Data for (a)–(d) were derived from Warrick et al. (2022), Lee et al. (2015), Wang et al. (2007), and Montanher et al. (2018), respectively. Descriptive terms about the watershed sizes (right-hand side) are derived from discussion in Romans et al. (2016).

Figure 5

Figure 6. Conceptual model of coastal responses to watershed processes for a theoretical small, steep river basin (after the fire-flood model of Keller et al., 1997). Relative sediment yield of the watershed is influenced by stochastic events, including floods, wildfires, earthquakes, volcanic activity and combined events, such as wildfire followed by flooding (‘F + F’). The shoreline position of the littoral cell responds to increases in watershed sediment yield with accretion events (upward pointing arrows) because of the efficient transfer of river sediment to the littoral cell. Future shoreline positions (right-hand side) will be determined by balance between sediment supply and sea-level rise. Moreover, highlighted are hypothetical intervals of river sampling, climate change effects, land-use-change effects and damming of the river.

Author comment: Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines — R0/PR1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.pr1 [Opens in a new window]
Jonathan A Warrick [Opens in a new window] Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, United States
Revision round: 0
Role: author

Comments

Dear Editors--

We are pleased to provide the invited review article attached for the new journal Coastal Futures. Thank you for this opportunity, and we look forward to the review process.

Sincerely,

--Jonathan Warrick

Review: Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines — R0/PR2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.pr2 [Opens in a new window]
Revision round: 0
Role: reviewer
Recommendation/decision: accept

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to Author: This is a brief review paper which highlights some examples of substantial coastal growth/decay associated with pulses of fluvial sediment input, e.g., related to floods, fires, volcanic events, and earthquakes. The inclusion of some lesser-known case studies of rapid deltaic growth (and decay) nicely complements the summary of some well-known case studies, and helps lend some objective context to coastal changes which may seem unusually abrupt and disconcerting but in reality represent natural event-based processes. A nice contrast is provided between sediment delivery from large systems like the Amazon (wherein event-type delivery is heavily modulated by the large spatial scale and long transfer times in the watershed) versus smaller rivers. It would be interesting to see some specific quantifiable case studies included about how climate change has impacted coastal sediment delivery and coastal landforms. It may also be worth citing the satellite record in the timeline of available data sources (in addition to river discharge records and isotope studies of coastal sediment deposits).

Review: Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines — R0/PR3

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.pr3 [Opens in a new window]
Revision round: 0
Role: reviewer
Recommendation/decision: accept

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to Author: The manuscript “Extreme events- how watershed processes... will shape our coastlines” is a concise review of controls on sediment supply to mostly tectonically active coastlines. The manuscript includes some really interesting ideas, which are clearly conveyed to the reader with excellent writing and beautiful figures. I have no significant recommendations for revision; I assess the manuscript could be published as is. That said, I do have three ideas for the authors to take or leave.

Idea 1.

This manuscript is a review of sediment delivery to the coast, but how much of that sediment stays along the coast or littoral zone, and how much might reach deeper water? Lots of tectonically active settings might promote bypass of the lion’s share of sediment beyond the coast, and it’s interesting to consider that sediment budget. Moreover, the deep-water sediment budget is relevant to understanding the coast: in spite of lots of sediment ending up in deep water, coastal changes are still evident. The authors mention this sediment budget as future work, but it might be worth some elaboration because folks have been working on this, including in the Santa Clara River example of southern California (for a review, see: Romans, B. W., Castelltort, S., Covault, J. A., Fildani, A., & Walsh, J. P. (2016). Environmental signal propagation in sedimentary systems across timescales. Earth-Science Reviews, 153, 7-29, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0012825215300222).

Idea 2.

I like the hypothetical Figure 6. I think the manuscript might benefit from some discussion of the lag between forcing and sediment supply response along the coast. Apologies if this was covered in the manuscript and I missed it. A lot of this type of thing is covered in the Romans et al. review paper I cited above. Other papers that cover the lag between upstream forcing and sediment supply measured at catchment outlet:

Li, Q., Gasparini, N. M., & Straub, K. M. (2018). Some signals are not the same as they appear: How do erosional landscapes transform tectonic history into sediment flux records?. Geology, 46(5), 407-410, https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/geology/article/46/5/407/529027/.

Sharman, G. R., Sylvester, Z., & Covault, J. A. (2019). Conversion of tectonic and climatic forcings into records of sediment supply and provenance. Scientific reports, 9(1), 1-7, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-39754-6.

Idea 3.

A key point is the importance of extreme events and their disproportionate impact on sediment delivery to the coast. For example, lines 63-66: “We conclude that sediment inputs to coastal systems are highly variable with time, and that the variability and trends in sediment input are as important, if not more important, to characterize as long-term averages.”

The authors might take a look at one of our papers on this topic, which compares short- and long-term measures of sediment delivery through catchments and discusses the impact of extreme events in smaller, tectonically active catchments:

Covault, J. A., Craddock, W. H., Romans, B. W., Fildani, A., & Gosai, M. (2013). Spatial and temporal variations in landscape evolution: Historic and longer-term sediment flux through global catchments. The Journal of Geology, 121(1), https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/668680.

Our paper also addresses averaging sediment supply over different time scales, such as discussed in lines 223-227 of this paper: “Unfortunately, the length of river sampling records are generally limited to years to several decades (Milliman and Farnsworth, 2013; Warrick and Milliman, 2018). Although monitoring records are essential for identifying rates and trends in river sediment transport (Gray, 2018), the largest historical events may not be captured by limited duration of sediment sampling.” Actually, comparing sediment load measures over different time can potentially shed light on the importance of extreme events on sediment delivery to the coast in certain settings. For example, if extreme events aren’t captured in a short-term record (e.g., a stream gauge), the average sediment load measure will be too low. Our paper also potentially addresses some of the future work listed by the authors in lines 291-299: “To properly understand century-scale or longer sediment yields, river sampling records should be integrated with... broader geologic understanding of the discharge record from measurements such as sediment cores or cosmogenic nuclides...”

To reiterate my initial comment: the paper is really good as is. The authors should feel free to ignore any of the ideas I shared.

A final thought is that the authors might also consider citing these papers, which I didn’t see in the list of references cited:

Milliman, J. D., & Syvitski, J. P. (1992). Geomorphic/tectonic control of sediment discharge to the ocean: the importance of small mountainous rivers. The journal of Geology, 100(5), 525-544.

Inman, D. L., & Jenkins, S. A. (1999). Climate change and the episodicity of sediment flux of small California rivers. The Journal of geology, 107(3), 251-270. (Particularly relevant to southern CA examples, like Santa Clara)

Feel free to reach out with questions,

Jake Covault

650-906-0883

[email protected]

Recommendation: Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines — R0/PR4

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.pr4 [Opens in a new window]
Brad Murray Division of Earth and Climate Scinces, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, United States
Date of review:  17 June 2022
Revision round: 0
Role: Associate Editor
Recommendation/decision: minor-revision

Comments

Comments to Author: This manuscript is well written, clear, concise and presents a valuable synthesis of an important topic, as both reviewer recommendations of ‘accept’ attest to. I think this will be a valuable contribution to Coastal Futures, and little revision seems necessary. I am recommending ‘minor revision’ to give the authors the opportunity to consider the potentially valuable suggestions for additional discussion points, especially from reviewer #1.

Decision: Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines — R0/PR5

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.pr5 [Opens in a new window]
Tom Spencer Geography, Cambridge University, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Revision round: 0
Role: Editor in Chief
Recommendation/decision: minor-revision

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines — R1/PR6

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.pr6 [Opens in a new window]
Jonathan A Warrick [Opens in a new window] Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, United States
Revision round: 1
Role: author

Comments

25-Jun-2022

Dear Editors,

We are excited to resubmit the invited paper, CFT-21-0011 " Fires, Floods, and Other Extreme Events — How Watershed Processes Under Climate Change Will Shape Our Coastlines" to Cambridge Prisms: Coastal Futures following review and revision.

As noted in the review, our manuscript was found to be, “well written, clear, concise and present(ing) a valuable synthesis of an important topic, as both reviewer recommendations of ‘accept’ attest to,” and the recommendation was for ‘minor revision’ so we could consider the suggestions of the reviewers.

We are pleased to note that these review comments were very helpful, and that we used them to improve the manuscript as detailed below in our point-by-point write up. Additionally, we have edited the manuscript ever so slightly to help improve communication, add a few additional references, and conserve space. In the end, we think you will find a manuscript that continues to conform to the intent and formatting considerations of the journal, while being improved in its presentation and thoroughness.

In summary, it has been an honor to be invited to write this paper and to have received such positive comments from the reviewers and editor, and we look forward to helping get this work into print.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Warrick

Recommendation: Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines — R1/PR7

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.pr7 [Opens in a new window]
Brad Murray Division of Earth and Climate Scinces, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, United States
Revision round: 1
Role: Associate Editor
Recommendation/decision: accept

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: Fires, floods and other extreme events – How watershed processes under climate change will shape our coastlines — R1/PR8

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2022.1.pr8 [Opens in a new window]
Tom Spencer Geography, Cambridge University, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Revision round: 1
Role: Editor in Chief
Recommendation/decision: accept

Comments

No accompanying comment.