You are on page 1of 51

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation

Risk Study at Maughers Beach


Breakwater, McNabs Island

141019.00 Final Report


ISO 9001
Registered Company

Prepared for:

July 2014

Prepared by:

15 July 2014

Erica Copeland, P.Eng.


Project Engineer
Portfolio Management Division, Real Property Safety and Security
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
PO Box 1000, 50 Discovery Drive, Dartmouth, NS B2Y 3Z8
tel: (902) 426-5003
fax: (902) 426-6501
email: erica.copeland@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
Dear Mrs. Copeland:
RE:
1489 Hollis Street
PO Box 606
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Canada B3J 2R7

Telephone: 902 421 7241

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater Final
Report

We are pleased to submit our final report assessing wave agitation risks in Halifax Harbour
related to sea level rise and the condition of the breakwater at Maughers Beach on McNabs
Island. Should you have any questions or require clarification of any matter raised in this
submission, please contact me at your convenience.
We appreciate your consideration of our services for this very interesting project, and we
look forward to working with you again.

Fax: 902 423 3938


E-mail: info@cbcl.ca

Yours very truly,

www.cbcl.ca

CBCL Limited

ISO 9001

Vincent Leys, M.Sc., P.Eng.


Coastal Engineer
Direct: (902) 421-7241, Ext. 2508
E-Mail: vincentl@cbcl.ca

Registered Company

Project No: 141019.00

141019 MBEACH 2014 REVISIONS

FINAL.DOCX/VL

ED: 17/07/2014 13:27:00/PD: 17/07/2014 13:27:00

Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................i
CHAPTER 1

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1

1.1

Background ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.2

Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 1

1.3

Work Scope ......................................................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER 2

Coastal site Characterization ...................................................................................... 4

2.1

Bathymetry and Topography .............................................................................................. 4

2.2

Geomorphology and Recent Erosion .................................................................................. 5

2.3

Site Observations ................................................................................................................ 6

2.4

Water Levels ....................................................................................................................... 6


2.4.1 Tides ........................................................................................................................ 6
2.4.2 Historical Water Levels ........................................................................................... 8
2.4.3 Sea Level Rise Projections ....................................................................................... 9
2.4.4 Impact of Sea Level Rise on Extreme Event Frequency .......................................... 9

2.5

Offshore Wave Climate ..................................................................................................... 10


2.5.1 Data Sources ......................................................................................................... 10
2.5.2 Wind and Wave Height Statistics.......................................................................... 11
2.5.3 Extreme Value Analyses........................................................................................ 11

2.6

Nearshore Wave Climate .................................................................................................. 12


2.6.1 Numerical Wave Model ........................................................................................ 12
2.6.2 Storm Wave Conditions ........................................................................................ 14
2.6.3 Nearshore Currents .............................................................................................. 15
2.6.4 Impact of Existing Shore Protection Damage ....................................................... 16

CHAPTER 3

Wave Climate Changes Due to Isthmus Erosion and Sea Level Rise ........................... 17

3.1

Potential Isthmus Damage Scenarios ............................................................................... 17


3.1.1 Damage Caused by Individual Storms .................................................................. 17
3.1.2 Cumulative Damage .............................................................................................. 18
3.1.3 Hypothetical Damage Evolution ........................................................................... 19

3.2

Impacts on Wave Climate in Halifax Harbour ................................................................... 21


3.2.1 Extreme Events ..................................................................................................... 21
3.2.2 Operational Conditions ......................................................................................... 21

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater i

CHAPTER 4

Socio-Economic Considerations ................................................................................ 26

4.1

Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 26

4.2

McNabs and Lawor Islands Provincial Park ...................................................................... 26


4.2.1 Location ................................................................................................................ 26
4.2.2 Future of the Park ................................................................................................. 26

4.3

Provincial Park Amenities Potentially Impacted by Beach Erosion .................................. 27

4.4

MacNabs Island as a Tourism Product .............................................................................. 28


4.4.1 Tourism Demand-Supply Balance ......................................................................... 29
4.4.2 Travel Market........................................................................................................ 29
4.4.3 Supply Side ............................................................................................................ 29

4.5

Sea Level Rise and Isthmus Erosion Impacts .................................................................... 31

4.6

Potential Mitigation .......................................................................................................... 32

CHAPTER 5

Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 33

CHAPTER 6

References............................................................................................................... 35

Appendices
A
B

Statistics on Offshore Wind and Wave Climate (44.5N-63.4W) and Water Levels
Map of McNabs Island

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) maintains a lighthouse at the entrance of Halifax
Harbour, Nova Scotia. The lighthouse is located on an islet at the end of a cobble isthmus on the West
side of McNabs Island, extending from the end of Maughers Beach. The isthmus, which has previously
been used to access the lighthouse, is lined with an armour stone breakwater that is deteriorating due
to wave attack and overtopping. The lighthouse is now serviced by helicopter; therefore land access
along the isthmus is no longer required for operations. Before finalizing any decision on repair or
replacement of the breakwater, DFO would like to determine the impact of continued breakwater
deterioration on the surrounding geography, including the impact on operations for all stakeholders.
A numerical wave model was used to quantify the wave climate changes in Halifax Harbour that would
be caused by further breakwater deterioration and subsequent isthmus erosion, along with Sea Level
Rise (SLR) impacts. Existing and future wave agitation was investigated at key sites including Garrison
Pier in McNabs Cove (the Islands main access point), Outer Halifax Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal and
Halifaxs Container Terminals. Three scenarios were examined:
(1) Partial loss of Maughers Beach breakwater with overtopping
(2) Breakwater deterioration and breach through isthmus
(3) Full breakwater deterioration and isthmus eroded down to a submerged bar
The modeling exercise indicated that SLR alone will cause a generalized increase in wave heights over
time around McNabs Island and in Halifax Harbour. It also indicated that further breakwater
deterioration causing subsequent isthmus erosion would add to the SLR impact on wave climate in
McNabs Cove but not elsewhere in the Harbour. While it is not possible to give accurate predictions on
time frames, the modeling used provides qualitative conclusions with associated order-of-magnitude
timelines based on a hypothetically assumed isthmus damage evolution.
If the breakwater is repaired and regularly maintained (Scenario 1), the extreme wave height increase by
year 2100 is estimated at 0.2 m at Garrison Pier (SLR only, assumed at 1.0 m by 2100). The increase in
extreme wave heights at other sites examined (Outer Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal and Halterm
Terminals) due to SLR was estimated at 0.06 to 0.1 m by year 2100.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater i

If the breakwater and isthmus fully deteriorate (Scenario 3), modeling indicates that extreme wave
heights will be further increased by less than 0.02 m by 2100 in the Outer Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal
and Halterm Terminals. At Garrison Pier, this increase in wave heights by 2100 for Scenario 3 is 0.2 m.
For perspective, replacing and maintaining the breakwater would delay the inevitable increase in wave
impacts due to SLR by approximately 30 years at Garrison Pier (2100 versus 2070, under the modeling
assumptions).
The frequency of smaller wave events was also examined, which is relevant for visitor boat traffic and
berthing at Garrison Pier. The acceptable wave climate for berthing typically used for DFO Small Craft
Harbours is defined by a 0.4 m significant wave height upper limit for 10 to 20 m-long vessels, which
would apply to summer island visitor vessels. Modeling indicated that the acceptable wave height
threshold for berthing (0.4 m) at Garrison Pier is presently exceeded approximately 4 days per year, and
would be exceeded on average:
11 days/year assuming 1.0 m SLR and regular breakwater maintenance (potentially in year
2100)
11 days/year assuming 0.6 m SLR and breakwater left to deteriorate (potentially in year 2070)
18 days/year assuming 1.0 m SLR and breakwater left to deteriorate (potentially in year 2100).
The downtime periods typically occur during the winter off-season, therefore not affecting summer
visitor traffic.
Pros and Cons of Maintaining the Isthmus Breakwater

Breakwater should be repaired and maintained

Breakwater should be left to deteriorate

because:

because:

The impact of SLR on wave agitation in McNabs

Cove would not be further exacerbated;

to McNabs Cove and Garrison Pier only (not Halifax

Garrison Pier could remain the main Park access

Harbour), and would primarily affect winter off-season;

point with future visitor centre development as

planned (vision in 2005 McNabs Island

the process for a limited time and area;

and
The public could safely access the lighthouse
islet.

Increase in wave impacts due to SLR is inevitable around


the island. Breakwater maintenance would only delay

Management Plan) for an additional 30 years;

Increase in wave agitation due to deterioration is limited

Capital and ongoing maintenance expenses are


significant;

Alternative landing sites on the Island are suitable SLR


adaptation options (Ives Cove, Timmonds Cove); and

The isthmus area offers an opportunity to educate Island


visitors on coastal processes.

Based on the modeling results, we offer the following conclusions:


The deterioration of the breakwater and the resulting erosion will not impact the islet on which
the lighthouse is located and therefore will not impact departmental operations.
The deterioration of the breakwater and the resulting erosion is expected to cause a relatively
low impact on the local wave climate and in the worst case scenario will only moderately delay
the impact of sea level rise.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater ii

CHAPTER 1

1.1

INTRODUCTION

Background

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) maintains a lighthouse at the entrance of Halifax
Harbour, Nova Scotia. The lighthouse is located on an islet at the end of a cobble isthmus on the West
side of McNabs Island, extending from the end of Maughers Beach (Figure 1). The isthmus extends from
the converging ends of both Maughers Beach to the Northeast of the lighthouse, and Hangmans Beach
to the Southeast. The isthmus, which has previously been used to access the lighthouse, is lined with an
armour stone breakwater that is deteriorating due to wave attack and overtopping. Significant damage
was caused to the breakwater by Hurricane Juan in September 2003.
The lighthouse is now serviced by helicopter; therefore land access along the isthmus is no longer
required for operations. Before finalizing any decision on repair or replacement of the breakwater, DFO
would like to determine the impact of continued breakwater deterioration on the surrounding
geography, including the impact on operations for all stakeholders.

1.2

Objectives

The objectives of the study are as follows:


Determine the potential evolution of breakwater damage and isthmus erosion under extreme
storms and sea level rise;
Quantify the wave climate at target locations under existing and future conditions, accounting for
the impacts of sea level rise, breakwater damage and isthmus erosion; and
Consider potential socio-economic impacts of higher wave agitation in McNabs Cove for the McNabs
Island Park, and in the Outer Harbour if it is impacted by breakwater failure.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 1

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 2

1.3

Work Scope

Coastal Site Characterisation (Chapter 2)


There is a wealth of historical information on the lighthouse and beach and their shore protection works
dating back to the early 20th century. The information includes surveys, ground and air photos,
numerous design reports and construction drawings. Historical information was summarized by PWGSC
in a 2007 design study report. The characterization was further augmented in this assessment by the
following investigations:
Site visit;
Water level analyses;
Offshore wind and wave climate; and
Development of a nearshore wave transformation model.
Impacts of isthmus erosion and sea level rise on wave climate (Chapter 3)
A numerical wave model was used to quantify the wave climate changes in Halifax Harbour that would
be caused by further breakwater deterioration and subsequent isthmus erosion, along with Sea Level
Rise (SLR) impacts. Existing and future wave agitation was investigated at key sites including Garrison
Pier in McNabs Cove (the Islands main access point), Outer Halifax Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal and
Halifaxs Container Terminals. Three scenarios were examined:
(1) Partial loss of Maughers Beach breakwater with overtopping
(2) Breakwater deterioration and breach through isthmus
(3) Full breakwater deterioration and isthmus eroded down to a submerged bar
Socio-Economic Considerations (Chapter 4)
Maughers Beach is one of the most popular day-use areas on McNabs Island and is a natural attraction
for visitors. Based on a review of currently available literature and Island visitor data, this study presents
a cursory commentary on the economic value at stake if commercial, tourism and recreational activities
in the area were to be affected by the deterioration of the Maughers Beach isthmus. The scope for this
desktop task is of a preliminary nature, and does not stand as a detailed impact assessment.
Conclusions are presented in Chapter 5.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 3

CHAPTER 2

2.1

COASTAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION

Bathymetry and Topography

Regional soundings from the Canadian Hydrographic Service (CHS) Navigation Charts 4202 and 4203
(Halifax Harbour) were obtained in electronic format from DFO. High-resolution multibeam soundings
from 2009 were provided by PWGSC for the Maughers Beach and McNabs Cove area. Soundings and
GPS cross-section survey points in Chart Datum (CD) are displayed on Figure 2.1. The Maughers Beach
Isthmus Breakwater and lighthouse presently shelters McNabs Cove. The detailed topography of the
isthmus and lighthouse area is shown on Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.1

Local Multibeam and GPS Cross-Section Survey Coverage (Chart Datum)

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 4

Figure 2.2

2.2

Topography of Maughers Beach Isthmus and Lighthouse Area


Based on 15 Oct 2012 Topographic survey provided by PWGSC

Geomorphology and Recent Erosion

The geomorphology and coastal processes of the island were studied in detail by Dr. Gavin Manson
(1999, 2008). McNabs Island is comprised of a series of connected glacial till drumlins derived from
shale, sandstone and mudstone from the Carboniferous age. Beaches are formed by deposition of
material from eroding drumlin bluffs. The highest rates of erosion occur on the exposed southwestern
side of the Island, which supplies sediment to the beaches to the North. Hangmans Beach to the
southeast of the Maughers Beach isthmus is an exposed and steep cobble beach footing an eroding cliff.
Eroded material feeds the beach and is transported by breaking waves towards the isthmus to the
Northwest. The large natural cobble berm crest is typically 5 to 6 m CD, sloping down as the peninsula
narrows toward the isthmus until it meets the armourstone crest at 4.0 m CD or less. On the Northeast
side of the isthmus, Maughers Beach is protected from the large southerly waves, and therefore
supports a gentler beach of finer sediment, including from wind-blown transport.
The following recent observations were provided by Cathy McCarthy of the Friends of McNabs Island
Society. In 2003 Hurricane Juan opened a tidal inlet into McNabs Pond, cutting Maughers Beach in two
sections and destroying the boardwalk and cribwork to the lighthouse along the isthmus. Garrison Pier
suffered minor damage. An oil pipeline along Garrison Road was exposed and leaking. It was capped and
remained capped until the pipeline, the pump house and storage tanks were removed in 2010. During
this remediation work, the vegetation along Garrison Road was removed. Erosion along the road has
been an issue since then. Anecdotal observations would also indicate that recent erosion along
Garrison Road is more likely related to the destabilization of the road bed during remediation works in
2010 than to the deterioration of the isthmus breakwater since 2003.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 5

2.3

Site Observations

A visual assessment of the site and surrounding shorelines was conducted on the morning of March 7th,
2013. Photos are shown on Figure 2.3. The predicted tide was 0.3 m CD (low) at 10:29 am. Offshore
wave buoy records (see section 2.5.1) indicate heavy seas, with wave heights ranging from 3.4 m
(significant wave height) to 5.6 m (maximum wave height) with a 9 s peak period. Heavy swells were
observed along the cobble beach and isthmus.
Cribwork behind the armour protection was destroyed by Hurricane Juan over a distance of 100 m, with
only ruins now visible. A 60 m-long western section remains standing, with various degrees of
settlement and localized damage from amour stone pushed onto the deck. The armour stone section in
front of the remains of the crib exhibits the most damage and the smaller stones have been washed
onto the North side of the isthmus. Even at low tide, some overtopping was visibly occurring across the
damaged section of the armour stone. The site can be accessed by the public from Maughers Beach and
safety hazards include unstable rocks and crib ruins combined with overwash during heavy seas.
A limited armour stone sampling exercise was conducted during the field visit. Eight stones deemed
representative were sized within a safe and stable area at the eastern end of the breakwater. Based on
measurements along three axes and assuming a rock density of 2,650 kg/m3, the median weight of the
sample was approximately 4 tonnes, which is in the lower range of the 4-6 t range specified on the
historical drawings provided by PWGSC. The median stone weight over the whole structure would be
difficult to determine with certainty due to difficult access and potentially unstable conditions.

2.4

Water Levels

Water levels are a critical factor for coastal wave damage assessments because they determine the
maximum wave breaking height at near-shore locations in shallow waters. Extreme water levels, being a
combination of tide, storm surge and relative sea level rise (SLR), allow larger waves to travel further in
the near-shore region. A tide gauge is in operation at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography (BIO). The
continuous tide gauge record for Halifax Harbour is available from 1919 to present, which was analysed
in detail for historical SLR trend and extreme value analyses of storm peaks.
2.4.1 Tides
Local astronomical tides are semi-diurnal, with two high waters and two low waters occurring during
each 25-hour lunar day. The tidal range is 2.1m for a large tide and 1.5m for a mean tide, and the mean
water level is at 1.0m above Chart Datum (source: Canadian Hydrographic Service 2013 Tide and Current
Tables). Tidal levels are listed in Table 2.1.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 6

Approaching the site


from the Southeast
along Hangmans
Beach.

Looking West from


eastern end of the
breakwater.

Overtopping at low
tide.

Looking East at the


most damaged
breakwater section
from the remaining
crib deck.

Figure 2.3

Site Photos, 7 March 2013

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 7

Table 2.1

2013 Water Levels in Halifax Harbour (metres above existing Chart Datum)

Storm event return period (years)


100
50
10
5
1
Tidal Elevations as published by CHS
Higher High Water Large Tide
Higher High Water Mean Tide
Mean Water Level
Lower Low Water Mean Tide
Lower Low Water Large Tide
Lowest Low Water (recorded extreme)

Metres Chart Datum


3.0
2.9
2.7
2.6
2.4

Metres CGVD28
2.2
2.1
1.9
1.8
1.6

2.2
1.8
1.0
0.3
0.0
-0.8

1.4
1.0
0.2
-0.5
-0.8
-1.6

2.4.2 Historical Water Levels


SLR along Eastern Canadas coast has been occurring since the end of the last ice age, about 10,000
years ago, when PEI was still linked to the mainland of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The tide gauge
observations in Halifax show a historical SLR rate of 0.32 m in the last 92 years (Figure 2.4). Forbes et al
(2009) estimate that 0.16 m of this trend is due to land subsidence due to post-glacial motion of the
local Earths crust, based on observations from a GPS station at the BIO. It is interesting to note that 10year trends over the last 30 years have progressively accelerated.

1.15

Mean sea level [m CD]

1.1

Annual means
92-year trend
10-year trends

1.05
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
1920

1930

Figure 2.4

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

Historical Mean Sea Level in Halifax Harbour

Storm surge is due to meteorological effects on sea level, such as wind set-up1 and low atmospheric
pressure, and can be defined as the difference between the observed water level during a storm and the
predicted astronomical tide. Extreme total water levels (including tide, storm surge and historical SLR)

Wind set-up refers to the increase in mean water level along the coast due to shoreward wind stresses on the water surface.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 8

were derived from statistics on the Halifax tide gauge data (1919-2013). An extreme value distribution
(Weibull) was optimally fitted to a series of statistically independent peaks greater than 2.4 m,
following the so-called Peak-Over-Threshold extreme value analysis technique (Appendix A Figure A.5).
The method is based on the premise that the process investigated is stationary2. To satisfy this
requirement, the tide gauge time-series was de-trended, and its mean was set to the 2013 mean sea
level (i.e. the past SLR trend was taken out). Extreme water levels are listed in Table 2.1.
2.4.3 Sea Level Rise Projections
The rate of global mean sea level is accelerating in the 21st century due to global warming impacts,
notably the melting of polar ice caps. Projections for Halifax Harbour were developed by Forbes et al in
2009, based on scenarios by IPCC AR4 (2007) and Rahmstorf (2007). Since then, SLR projections have
been updated based on climate research and recent trends, including the melting of arctic sea ice and
ice caps. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR5, 2013) recently indicated that the
current consensus is as follows:
The likely range of global mean sea level rise for 2081-2100 relative to 1986-2005 was estimated
from 0.26 m (lower bound value for low emission scenario) to 0.98 m (higher bound estimate for
high emission scenario);
There is currently insufficient evidence to evaluate the probability of specific levels above the
assessed likely range; and
There will be regional differences, with the northeastern coast of North America potentially
experiencing a sea level rise rate higher than the global average (Sallenger et al., 2012).
Time-dependent mathematical projections of global mean SLR for use in infrastructure projects were
developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers (2011). Projections were classified into a low, medium
and high category. Numerical projections starting in 2012 were computed from the equations
recommended by USACE, and are presented on Figure 2.5. A crustal subsidence factor of 0.16 m/century
for Halifax (Forbes 2009) was added to the projection. The calculation resulted in a year 2100 value of
1.06 m 0.48 m, which was used for the present study. It matches the estimates by Daigle and Richards
for coastal municipalities in NS and PEI including Halifax (2011). Projections should be revisited at least
every decade based on up-to-date scientific observations and climate model projections.
2.4.4 Impact of Sea Level Rise on Extreme Event Frequency
In terms of extreme water levels, the difference between a 10-year storm (currently 2.7 m CD) and a
100-year storm (3.0 m CD) is only 0.3 m. Given the SLR projections, extreme water levels with a low
return period today will be very common in a few decades (Figure 2.6). This needs to be considered in
coastal structure design and future damage predictions (section 3.1).

The Peak-Over-Threshold procedure selects statistically independent storm peaks occurring more than 48 hours apart. An
extreme value distribution is then fitted to the population of storm peaks for extrapolating extreme events and their associated
return periods. The procedure is statistically valid for stationary processes, i.e. processes with a probability distribution that
does not change when shifted in time. Statistical properties such as mean and variance must remain constant in time and not
follow trends.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 9

Estimated sea level rise range for Halifax - Based on USACE 2011
High

Relative sea level rise (m) Includes land subsidence of 0.157m/century

Intermediate (used for assessment)

1.8

Low

1.6
1.4
1.2

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
2010

Figure 2.5

2030

2050

2070

Retrun period [years]

2110

Sea Level Rise Projections Used in the Present Study

100

WL = 3.1 m CD

WL = 2.9 m CD (Hurricane Juan)


WL = 2.7 m CD
10

1
2010

Figure 2.6

2.5

2090

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

Influence of Sea Level Rise on Return Periods of Extreme Water Levels in Halifax

Offshore Wave Climate

2.5.1 Data Sources


Inputs to the wave study are based on two data sources located 15.5 km offshore from Maughers
Beach:
Environment Canada wave buoy C44258 observations collected at 44.502N 63.403W, from
February 2000 to February 2013; and
The MSC50 wind and wave model hindcast from January 1954 to December 2009. It contains hourly
time series of wind (speed, direction) and wave (height, period, direction) at 44.5N 63.4W (grid
point 6984 in 56m water depth). The dataset is a state-of-the art hindcast, i.e., data computed from
all existing wind and wave measurements that were re-analysed and input to a 0.1-degree
resolution ocean wave growth model that includes the effect of depth and ice cover. The MSC50
hindcast was developed by Oceanweather Inc. and is distributed by Environment Canada (Swail et
al., 2006).

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 10

Detailed comparisons revealed that the MSC50 wave heights are on average 0.09 m greater than buoy
observations, with a standard deviation of 0.34 m. To compensate for any potential inaccuracies in the
MSC50 model, the hourly dataset used for the study was assembled by merging the above two, using
the buoy observations when available and complementing with MSC50 data outside of the buoy
observation period. We note that for the purposes of this study, once the offshore wave information is
transformed to the depth-limited nearshore sites of interest, the differences in offshore data sources
are not consequential due to wave breaking.
2.5.2 Wind and Wave Height Statistics
Complete statistics are presented in graphical and tabular format in Appendix A. Wind and wave
climates are typically represented as roses, i.e., plots of frequency of given wind speed or wave height
by direction. The roses show that prevailing winds are from the northwest, west and southwest
directions with seasonal variations. Summer winds are generally below 30 km/h and from the
southwest. Winter winds are much stronger and predominantly from the northwest. Waves offshore
Halifax of significant height3 over 3 m typically come from the south, southeast and southwest
quadrants, with higher occurrences in the late fall and winter.
2.5.3 Extreme Value Analyses
Return periods for extreme significant wave heights (1, 10, 50, 100-year) 4 were estimated based on an
analysis of 67 storm peaks of significant wave height over 6 m, using the Peak-Over-Threshold
method. The best fitting Weibull statistical distribution was used to derive extreme values. A most
probable peak period (Tp) and wind speed were derived from extreme wave heights based on the joint
frequency distributions from the storm peaks. Results are listed in Table 2.2. In the near-shore wave
transformation modeling presented in the next section, these extreme values were used as offshore
boundary conditions for the wave model.
Table 2.2

Extreme Return Values for Offshore Significant Wave Heights, Associated Peak Period
and Wind Speed
Associated
Significant Wave
Return Period
Height
Peak Period
Wind Speed
Years
Metres
Seconds
m/s
km/hour
1
6.1
10.6
18.1
65
5
7.9
11.6
20.4
73
10
8.7
12.0
22.2
80
50
10.4
12.8
27.8
100
100
11.2
13.1
31.2
112

The significant wave height (Hsig) is the common parameter for characterizing the energy in a wave field. Hsig represents the
average of the third highest waves over a given time period, and is a good approximation of the typical wave height that
would be reported from visual observations. The maximum wave height within a wave field is greater than the significant wave
height by a factor of 1 to 2 typically, depending mainly on water depth, wave field parameters, and duration of observations.
4
The N-year return value represents the value that is exceeded on average once every N years.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 11

2.6

Nearshore Wave Climate

2.6.1 Numerical Wave Model


Model Description
A numerical wave model for near-shore transformation was used to transfer the offshore wave climate
to nearshore sites of interest. The Danish Hydraulic Institutes MIKE 21 Spectral Wave (SW) model was
used over a flexible mesh domain with high resolution in the project area. The model has a wide base of
users worldwide and extensive recognition from the coastal science and engineering community. It is
particularly suited for near-shore wave transformations and harbour investigations. The model
simulates the following physical phenomena:
Refraction and shoaling due to depth variations;
Dissipation due to depth-induced wave breaking;
Dissipation due to bottom friction (a typical bottom roughness of 0.04m was used);
Dissipation due to white-capping;
Non-linear wave-wave interaction;
One-time reflection from vertical walls; however the model cannot simulate wave agitation due to
multiple reflections of harbour resonance (e.g. in between the piers at Halterm Terminals). These
processes can be resolved with a finer scale phase-resolving model; and
The output radiation stresses from the breaking waves can be used in the hydrodynamic (HD)
module of MIKE21 to study near-shore currents and localized water level changes due to wave setup
(typically in the order of 10% of breaking wave height).
Modeling Methodology
The MIKE21 model domain used in the study was based on the nautical chart and a local bathymetric
survey. It includes 7,483 elements of varying size, with smaller sizes to provide high resolution in the area
of interest (Figure 2.7). The model was run in steady-state mode to evaluate operational and extreme
conditions under various scenarios of SLR and isthmus breakwater damage (Chapter 3). Extreme offshore
wave heights were assumed to coincide with extreme water levels of the same return period, as the joint
distribution of offshore wave heights and peak water levels indicates a clear correlation (Table A.4 in
Appendix A). The coupled MIKE21 SW-HD was also used to verify that water level statistics from tide gauge
observations at BIO are applicable to Maughers Beach under storm conditions.
Model Confidence Interval
The offshore wave conditions and the bathymetry are known with very good accuracy. However there
are no site-specific measurements to validate the nearshore wave model results, as is oftentimes the
case with coastal studies. The model breaking wave coefficient = Hmax/depth is considered the primary
calibration parameter. It is lowest for gentle bed slopes, and highest for steep slopes. It typically ranges
from 0.6 to 1.4, with an average value of 0.8 generally recommended for modeling studies (USACE
2006). Wave height estimates presented in this report are based on the 0.8 value. Model sensitivity tests
to the parameter were conducted. The confidence interval for modeled nearshore wave heights
presented in this study is estimated at 25%.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 12

Halterm
Container Terminal

Wave buoy and MSC50


data, 44.5N-63.4W

Point
Pleasant
Shoal

Outer
Harbour

Garrison
Pier

Maughers Beach
breakwater

Model output
locations

Figure 2.7

MIKE21 Wave Model Domain

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 13

2.6.2 Storm Wave Conditions


Examples of modeled wave fields for extreme storm conditions are shown on Figure 2.8. As waves
approach the site, the numerous shoals and narrowing of the Outer Harbour cause waves to bend
towards the shoreline (refraction) and ultimately break, reducing the amount of energy propagating into
Halifax Harbour. Refraction is controlled by wave period and water depths, i.e. longer waves refract
more. Breaking is controlled by the water/wave height ratio, so larger waves break further offshore
while greater storm surges allow higher waves nearshore. As waves propagate, refraction reduces the
influence of variations in the offshore directionality, while breaking reduces the influence of offshore
wave height for a given water level.
At the Project site, a limited amount of wave energy overtops the breakwater and further dissipates over
the shoals in its lee. A larger amount of energy refracts around the lighthouse islet into McNabs Cove.

1-year storm

Figure 2.8

100-year storm

Sample Modeled Wave Heights for Extreme Storm Condition

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 14

2.6.3 Nearshore Currents


Nearshore currents were simulated using MIKE21 HD driven by radiation stresses generated by breaking
waves in MIKE21 SW. Simulated currents during the 1-year and 100-year return storm are shown in
Figure 2.9. Breaking waves generate a strong northwestward longshore current along Hangmans Beach,
then flowing around the lighthouse and ebbing out over the shoal in the lee of the lighthouse. This
explains the formation of this shoal, made of material eroded from the cliffs along the southwestern
shore of the Island, and transported by the longshore current described. The finer sandy material is
transported further east of the lighthouse towards Maughers Beach by the remaining wave energy
refracted around the lighthouse. Strong overwash currents of 1 to 2 m/s are expected to occur during
large storms over the damaged breakwater. Such current velocities combined with breaking waves
contribute to destabilizing the existing armourstone, particularly over its damaged section. The area of
influence of the breach currents ranges from 50 to 150 m away to the North into McNabs Cove,
depending on the intensity of the storm.

1-year return
storm

Figure 2.9

100-year return
storm

Nearshore Currents during Extreme Storm Conditions

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 15

2.6.4 Impact of Existing Shore Protection Damage


The immediate impact of the existing shore protection damage is to allow an overwash current during
extreme events, as described above. The wave model was also used to investigate the potential role of
the existing breakwater deterioration on recent erosion trends near Garrison Pier. Simulated extreme
events under present water level conditions were compared between existing breakwater condition
with overwash, and repaired breakwater without overwash. It is estimated that under existing water
levels, the extreme Hsig at Garrison Pier increased by 1.4% due to present deterioration, compared with
the repaired breakwater case. Therefore the present level of breakwater deterioration is not severe
enough to impact wave climate at Garrison Pier. The impact on wave climate should deterioration be
left to continue is examined in the following Chapter.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 16

CHAPTER 3

3.1

WAVE CLIMATE CHANGES DUE TO ISTHMUS


EROSION AND SEA LEVEL RISE

Potential Isthmus Damage Scenarios

This section predicts the evolution of damage to the armoured isthmus using the shallow water
breakwater design and damage formulations by Van Der Meer (CIRIA 2007). The damage formulation is
applied using the long-term trends of extreme events based on the most likely (intermediate) sea level
rise (SLR) scenario presented in section 2.3.3.
3.1.1 Damage Caused by Individual Storms
Joint statistics on water level and offshore wave heights show that storm surges and large offshore
waves generally peak at the same time (Appendix A, Table A.4). In addition, the wave model shows that
breaking wave heights at the toe of the breakwater in 2m CD water depth are controlled by the water
level. This is due to the effect of shoals along the western shores of McNabs Island where large offshore
waves break before reaching the isthmus. Therefore breakwater damage levels, typically a function of
wave parameters, can be correlated to the storm water levels.
The Van Der Meer equation predicts the amount of damage of a given storm to the face (S,
dimensionless) of a breakwater as related to the median rock size, i.e., S=Aeroded / Dn502, where Aeroded (m2)
is the area of the armour stone face that is damaged and Dn50 is the median diameter of the armour
stone.
The equation results for breakwater damage level after one storm are shown on Figure 3.1. Historical
design drawings provided by PWGSC indicate the present armour stone weight range is 4-6 tonnes.
Limited site observations indicate that in some areas, placed armour stone weight may be on the lower
end of the specified range (i.e. 4 tonne see section 2.3). However this local observation cannot be
generalized to the whole structure.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 17

4-tonne armour stone


5-tonne armour stone

Breakwater damage [S=Eroded area/Dn50^2]

12

6-tonne armour stone

11

Failure (underlayer exposed) [S=8]

10

Intermediate damage [S=4]

Initial damage [S=2]

8
7
6
5

4
3

2
1
1.8

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

Extreme Water Level [m CD] - Determines breaking wave height

Figure 3.1

Maughers Beach Breakwater Damage vs. Extreme Water Level during One Event

3.1.2 Cumulative Damage


Extreme water levels (and therefore near-shore wave heights) with a low return period today will be
very common in a few decades due to SLR. Therefore, the design parameter of return period becomes a
moving target and the common engineering practice of designing for the N-year storm and expecting a
given probability of occurrence within the design life time is rendered invalid by SLR. CBCL Limited has
developed statistical analysis tools for coastal design that account for gradual SLR, and applied them to
the isthmus breakwater. The following analysis is based on the Van Der Meer approach to calculating
cumulative breakwater damage in shallow water after a series of storms (CIRIA 2007). Inputs include the
90-year time-series of extreme water levels corrected for future SLR. It is assumed that at the peak of
each storm maximum breaking waves are depth limited using a standard depth/wave height coefficient
of 0.8.
The evolution of damage level S in time is shown on Figure 3.2. The top panel shows the hypothetical
example of a new, undamaged, breakwater of 4t, 5t, and 6t armour stone, respectively. The equations
predict that without SLR damage would be significantly lower and 5t and 6t armour stone would protect
the structure for the next 100 years. However with SLR, damage will develop at a faster rate.
The existing damage level at the breakwater is not uniform, ranging from minimal damage near the ends
(S=2) to failure near the middle (S=8). The cumulative damage value over time will vary with the existing
(i.e. initial) damage along the structure. Based on an assumed damage level of at least 4 averaged over
the existing structure (bottom graph), complete failure (S=8) is expected within less than 50 years in
areas where 4 tonne is the prevailing stone weight.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 18

Damage development at new breakwater (S_2013 = 0)

Cumulative Damage [ S = A_eroded / Dn50^2 ]

10

6
4-tonne armour stone, with SLR
4

4-tonne armour stone, no SLR


5-tonne armour stone, with SLR
5-tonne armour stone, no SLR

6-tonne armour stone, with SLR


6-tonne armour stone, no SLR

0
2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

Likely damage development at existing breakwater without repairs (assumed S_2013=4)

Cumulative Damage

10

8
4-tonne armour stone, with SLR
6

4
2010

5-tonne armour stone, with SLR

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

Years from present

Figure 3.2

Breakwater Damage Development

3.1.3 Hypothetical Damage Evolution


The wave climate in the lee of the breakwater may change with progressing deterioration of the
isthmus. Modeling scenarios below were developed assuming that the shore protection along the
isthmus is left to deteriorate without maintenance, while the armour stone along the lighthouse islet is
properly maintained (Figure 3.3). The time frame for scenario 1 loss of shore protection is based on
the damage analyses presented above. The next stages, beyond a few decades, would likely include a
breach through the isthmus (scenario 2) gradually developing into a submerged bar (scenario 3). In
addition, in order to differentiate between the impacts of isthmus erosion and SLR on its own, a fourth
scenario was modeled assuming complete breakwater repair (no overwash) and a 1.0 m SLR.
Time frames for scenarios 2 and 3 were assigned based on judgment in order to use a corresponding SLR
estimate, because there are no numerical models that can reliably predict long-term geomorphologic
changes in seabeds of very coarse material. Therefore, the results presented here should be considered
an educated guess and their use limited to planning-level exercises.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 19

Existing conditions Intermediate armour


stone failure
Armour stone crest elevation along the isthmus
(excluding lighthouse) varies between
4 m and 1.5 m over a 15 m distance (failure
area since Hurricane Juan)

Scenario 1 Loss of shore protection


Assumed crest elevation = 1.5 m throughout
Potential time-scale = 10-50 years
Assumed sea level rise within potential
damage time-scale = 0.3 m

Scenario 2 Breach
Assumed crest elevation = -0.5 m along 60
m distance
Potential time-scale = 50-100 years
Assumed sea level rise within potential
damage time-scale = 0.6 m

Scenario 3 Erosion to gravel bar


Assumed crest elevation = -1.0 m along 120
m distance
Potential time-scale 100 years +
Assumed sea level rise within potential
damage time-scale = 1.0 m

Figure 3.3

Modeling Scenarios for Isthmus Damage

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 20

3.2

Impacts on Wave Climate in Halifax Harbour

The numerical wave model was used to quantify the wave climate changes in Halifax Harbour that
would be caused by further breakwater deterioration and subsequent isthmus erosion, along SLR
impacts. Existing and future wave agitation were investigated at the key sites including Garrison Pier in
McNabs Cove (the Islands main access point), Outer Halifax Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal and Halifaxs
Container Terminals. Both extreme events and operational conditions were investigated.
3.2.1 Extreme Events
Modeled 50-year return wave fields for each of the scenarios are shown on Figure 3.4. Extreme
significant wave heights vs. return period at sites of interest are shown on Figure 3.5. The modeling
exercise indicated that SLR alone will cause a generalized increase in wave heights over time around
McNabs Island and in Halifax Harbour. It also indicated that further breakwater deterioration causing
subsequent isthmus erosion would add to the SLR impact on wave climate in McNabs Cove but not
elsewhere in the Harbour. While it is not possible to give accurate predictions on time frames, the
modeling results provide qualitative conclusions with associated order-of-magnitude timelines based on
a hypothetically assumed isthmus damage evolution.
If the breakwater is repaired and regularly maintained (Scenario 1), the extreme wave height increase by
year 2100 is estimated at 0.2 m at Garrison Pier (SLR only, assumed at 1.0 m by 2100). The increase in
extreme wave heights at other sites examined (Outer Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal and Halterm
Terminals) due to SLR was estimated at 0.06 to 0.1 m by year 2100.
If the breakwater and isthmus fully deteriorate (Scenario 3), modeling indicates that extreme wave
heights will be further increased by less than 0.02 m by 2100 in the Outer Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal
and Halterm Terminals. At Garrison Pier, this increase in wave heights by 2100 for Scenario 3 is 0.2 m.
For perspective, replacing and maintaining the breakwater would delay the inevitable increase in wave
impacts due to SLR by approximately 30 years at Garrison Pier (2100 versus 2070, under the modeling
assumptions).
3.2.2 Operational Conditions
The frequency of smaller wave events was also examined, which is relevant for visitor boat traffic and
berthing at Garrison Pier. Wave height occurrence percentages were computed for each site of interest
based on MIKE21 SW model results and offshore statistics. A series of 986 model runs was conducted to
include all combinations of input parameters (wind speed, offshore Hsig, Tp, direction and tidal water
level). Each input condition was assigned a probability based on the offshore wave climate. Results are
shown on Figure 3.6. Each graph presents the frequency of exceedance of wave height thresholds, in
percentage of the time (1% is 3.6 days/year, and 0.01 % is 1 hour per year).
The acceptable wave climate for berthing typically used for DFO Small Craft Harbours (Table 3.1) is
defined by a 0.4 m significant wave height upper limit for 10 to 20 m-long vessels, which would apply to
summer island visitor vessels. Murphys on the Water is the main passenger boat operator using
Garrison Pier, with vessel sizes ranging from 24 to 65 feet doing approximately 20 trips per year (pers.
comm. Peter Murphy, Murphys on the water). Larger boats (Harbour Queen or Haligonian) taking big
groups are used 2 to 3 times a season, during good weather.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 21

Modeling indicated that the acceptable wave height threshold for berthing (0.4 m) at Garrison Pier is
presently exceeded approximately 4 days per year, and would be exceeded on average:
11 days/year assuming 1.0 m SLR and regular breakwater maintenance (potentially in year
2100)
11 days/year assuming 0.6 m SLR and breakwater left to deteriorate (potentially in year 2070)
18 days/year assuming 1.0 m SLR and breakwater left to deteriorate (potentially in year 2100).
The downtime periods typically occur during the winter off-season, therefore not affecting summer
visitor traffic. However impacts on winter shoreline erosion in McNabs Cove would be relevant yearround.
The increase in wave agitation at other sites in Halifax Harbour will be due almost entirely to SLR. At the
Outer Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal and Halterm Terminals, the impact of isthmus erosion would be
negligible in the context of SLR.
Finally, it is noted that the Navy once used the McNabs Cove area in the lee of the lighthouse for
mooring purposes5. Local wave agitation conditions will become worse than they were previously, which
would compromise the viability of this site if it becomes contemplated again for use in the future.

Table 3.1

Operational Wave Agitation Guidelines (DFO Planning Guidelines for Commercial


Fishing Harbours)
Frequency of Occurrence
Location
Vessel Length
Threshold Hsig
(developed for year-round fishing harbours)
0 10.7 m
0.3 m
Service / offloading
10.7 19.8 m
0.4 m
1.0-2.5 % = 3.6 to 9 days per year
Mooring basin
0 19.8 m
0.5 m
Note: the frequency of occurrence criteria (maximum 9 days per year) developed for year-round fishing
harbours would be too stringent for seasonal tourist operation.

UTM Coordinates 457500 E - 4939500 N (Figure 2.1), or 500 m to the Southwest of Garrison Pier. The mooring sites Navy A
and Navy B were indicated on the 1989 edition of CHS Chart #4203, however the current version of the chart (dated year
2000) does not show them.
CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 22

Existing
conditions

Breach,
0.6 m SLR

Loss of shore
protection,
0.3 m SLR

Gravel Bar,
1.0 m SLR

Repaired
breakwater
1.0 m SLR

Figure 3.4

Modeled 50-Year Return Wave Heights for Future Scenarios of SLR and Isthmus
Damage

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 23

Garrison Pier
1.4

Extreme Sig. Wave Height [m]

1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0

Existing

0.9

Loss of Shore Protection - 0.3m SLR

0.8

Breach - 0.6m SLR

0.7
Erosion to Gravel Bar - 1.0 m SLR

0.6

Repaired Breakwater - 1.0 m SLR

0.5
0.4
1

10

100

Storm Return Period [years]

Outer Harbour

3.0
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6

Extreme Sig. Wave Height [m]

Extreme Sig. Wave Height [m]

Point Pleasant Shoal

10
Storm Return Period [years]

100

2.6
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1

10
Storm Return Period [years]

100

Extreme Sig. Wave Height [m]

Halterm Terminals
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1

Figure 3.5

10
Storm Return Period [years]

100

Projected Increases in Extreme Wave Heights from Sea Level Rise and Isthmus Erosion

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 24

Outer Harbour

Garrison Pier
100.00

100.00

Existing Conditions

Existing Conditions

Loss of Shore Protection - 0.3 m SLR

Loss of Shore Protection - 0.3 m SLR

Breach - 0.6 m SLR

Breach - 0.6 m SLR


Erosion to Gravel Bar - 1.0 m SLR

Erosion to Gravel Bar - 1.0 m SLR


10.00

Repaired Breakwater - 1.0 m SLR

Exceedence [%]

Exceedence [%]

10.00

1.00

Repaired Breakwater - 1.0 m SLR

1.00

0.10

0.10

0.01

0.01
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.1

0.3

0.5

0.7

0.9

Point Pleasant Shoal

1.3

1.5

Halterm Terminals

100.00

100.00

Existing Conditions

Existing Conditions

Loss of Shore Protection - 0.3 m SLR

Loss of Shore Protection - 0.3 m SLR

Breach - 0.6 m SLR

Breach - 0.6 m SLR

Erosion to Gravel Bar - 1.0 m SLR


10.00

Erosion to Gravel Bar - 1.0 m SLR


10.00

Repaired Breakwater - 1.0 m SLR

Exceedence [%]

Exceedence [%]

1.1

Hsig threshold [m]

Hsig threshold [m]

1.00

0.10

Repaired Breakwater - 1.0 m SLR

1.00

0.10

0.01

0.01
0.1

0.3

0.5

0.7

0.9

1.1

1.3

1.5

1.7

0.1

0.3

0.5

Hsig threshold [m]

Figure 3.6

0.7

0.9

1.1

1.3

1.5

Hsig threshold [m]

Projected Increases in Wave Agitation from Sea Level Rise and Isthmus Erosion

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 25

CHAPTER 4

4.1

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

Objectives

As demonstrated, sea level rise (SLR) will cause increased storm wave heights in Halifax Harbour,
particularly in exposed nearshore areas. Further breakwater damage and isthmus erosion at Maughers
Beach would add to the SLR impact in McNabs Cove but not elsewhere in the Outer Harbour where the
impact would be minimal. Sites impacted in McNabs Cove include Garrison Pier, the landing wharf to
McNabs Island Park. Maughers Beach is also one of the most popular day-use areas on McNabs Island
and is a natural attraction for visitors.
This section provides commentary on the socio-economic and cultural value at stake if tourism and
recreational activities in the area were to be affected by SLR and the continuous erosion of the isthmus
at Maughers Beach.

4.2

McNabs and Lawor Islands Provincial Park

4.2.1 Location
McNabs and Lawlor Islands are located at the mouth of the Halifax Harbour. Designated in 2002,
McNabs and Lawlor Islands Provincial Park encompasses 430 hectares of land, 28 of which are owned by
the federal government as part of Parks Canadas Fort McNabs National Historic Site. The Islands are
home to a multitude of important natural and cultural heritage resources and offer opportunities for
outdoor recreation and interpretation.
4.2.2 Future of the Park
In 2005, the Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources released a Park Management Plan for the
McNabs and Lawlor Islands Provincial Park, which defines a vision and management plan that is
intended to guide park management decisions until 2030. Five principal management objectives for
McNabs and Lawlor Islands Provincial Park have been adopted. The objectives are:
1. To preserve and protect the Islands significant natural and cultural heritage elements and values.
2. To provide opportunities for a variety of high-quality outdoor recreation activities.
3. To provide opportunities for exploration, education, and appreciation of the Islands heritage values
through interpretation, information, and outdoor education programs.
4. To have the park play an important role in supporting local, regional, and provincial tourism efforts.
CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 26

5. To provide basic services and facilities to enhance visitor enjoyment of the park.
Park development plans are limited to McNabs Island and are primarily focused on providing facilities
and services that support day-use activities, wherever possible, using already existing facilities. New
facilities ought to be placed in locations with minimal impact on heritage resources, natural landscapes
and views corridors.
Interpretation and education for park visitors will be largely self-directed, facilitated by brochures, onsite interpretive panels, and publications. Special-event programming will complement individual
interpretation activities. The majority of cultural heritage sites will not be actively managed.
To be implemented in four phases, the Park Management Plan stipulated that the park was going to be
operational three years after the adoption of the plan in 2005, with the Parks and Recreation Division of
the Department of Natural Resources playing the lead role in facilitating the implementation of the plan.
According to the Friends of McNabs Island Society, funding from the Department has been slow in the
first years after implementation6 . However, the society has been successful with fundraising efforts to
fill some of the void, and has started implementing trails, shelters and interpretation panels.

4.3

Provincial Park Amenities Potentially Impacted by Beach Erosion

The Park Management Plan lays out the number of park amenities and facilities which, as a whole will
define the parks visitor experience. Figure 4.1 depicts the amenities that could potentially be impacted
directly or indirectly by the erosion of Maughers Beach.
Garrison Pier in McNabs Cove is one of two main public access points to the Island, the second being
Range Pier at Wreck Cove. In 2002, major repairs to Garrison Pier were completed and further
enhancements are planned. Garrison Pier is serviced by a number of ferry and charter boat operators
offering drop-off and pick-up as well as group charters.
McNabs cove is a key piece on the development road map for the park and is a dedicated recreation
development zone that is expected to become one of the most used areas on McNabs Island. The main
day-use area will be situated close to Garrison Pier. A visitor services centre providing information,
change rooms, toilets, food and a picnic area will be located to the east of the ferry access point.
Loosing Garrison Pier as the main ferry access and potentially relocating it to a more sheltered location
will shift the centre for visitors day use activities as most facilities and services envisioned in the 2005
Management Plan are concentrated in the west central portion of the Island.

The Rucksack, page 10.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 27

Figure 4.1

4.4

Park Amenities Potentially Affected (adapted from Figure 4, Management Plan


Development Concept)

MacNabs Island as a Tourism Product

McNabs Island Provincial Park is part of Nova Scotias Provincial Parks system that includes over 300
individual park properties throughout the province. Like its sister parks, McNabs Island Park will, when
fully in operation, be an invaluable tourism resource and its visitors will generate economic benefits
through spending in nearby communities.
The five principal park management objectives for the park all revolve around the protection and
preservation of significant natural and cultural resources for the purpose of making them accessible and
appreciated by visitors. One of the principal objectives particularly emphasizes the Parks role in
supporting local, regional and provincial tourism efforts 7.
7

Park Management Plan, page 3.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 28

As a tourism product, McNabs Island Provincial Park needs to offer a satisfying visitor experience. In
order to be successful, the park has to balance several parts of the supply side and match them with the
tourism market demand. While the park has been modestly successful in operating as a local tourism
product, removing critical infrastructure such as access points, beaches or interpretive facilities might
sway the demand-supply equation in a direction where the park loses its attraction as a destination.
4.4.1 Tourism Demand-Supply Balance
Critical to all tourism development and its planning are the many characteristics of visitors tourism
demands. All physical development and programs offered in McNabs Island Provincial Park must meet
the interests and needs of travellers. If not, economic rewards may not be obtained and the cultural
landscape of the park may be eroded. Whenever demand and supply are out of balance, planning and
development should be directed toward improving the supply-demand match.
4.4.2 Travel Market
People in the travel market are those who have the interest and ability to travel to McNabs Island
Provincial Park. McNabs Island development is mainly geared towards visitors interested in natural and
cultural heritage, outdoor recreation, and nature-based tourism. Even though the 2005 Management
Plan anticipates that visitors will be largely drawn from the local area, it is plausible that available
tourism infrastructure on the Island coupled with targeted marketing strategies could increase the
number of other Nova Scotians and out-of-province park users. Conversely, a lack of attractions for
those interested in natural and cultural heritage as well as outdoor recreation will result in lower
visitation.
A 2001 McNabs Island Visitor Survey found that 82% of visitors resided in the Halifax Regional
Municipality. 12% of visitors came from other parts of Nova Scotia, and the remainder from other
Canadian provinces and international origins. By far the most popular activity in which these visitors
were looking to engage was walking and hiking on trails, followed by nature study, camping and
picnicking.
The 2010 Nova Scotia Visitor Exit Survey prepared for the Nova Scotia Department of Economic and
Rural Development and Tourism provides useful information on a tourism market segment currently
underrepresented among McNabs Island visitors. Visitors to Nova Scotia are vital contributors to the
provincial economy where tourism is a $1.8 billion industry that accounts for roughly 32,000 jobs. In
2010, visitors to Nova Scotia spent approximately $98 per person per day during their visit. Total
expenditures were highest among overseas visitors followed by those from Western Canada, and lowest
among visitors from Atlantic Canada.
Like visitors to McNabs Island, many tourists travelling to Nova Scotia (40%) do so to participate in
outdoor activities, most commonly coastal sightseeing, hiking and beach exploring.
4.4.3 Supply Side
As outlined in Section 4.3, several elements of the supply side of McNabs Island tourism equation are
going to be impacted by SLR and the potential erosion of Maughers Beach. The supply side includes all
those programs and land uses that are designed and managed to provide for receiving visitors. In the

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 29

literature, the supply side is typically described as including the five major interdependent components
shown in Figure 4.2.

Attractions

Transporation

Services

Promotion

Figure 4.2

Information

Components of Tourism System Supply Side

Table 4.1 lists all categorized components of the supply side of McNabs Island tourism with those
elements highlighted that are potentially affected by SLR and the Maughers Beach erosion.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 30

Table 4.1

Categorized Supply Components of McNabs Tourism Product

Attractions
Trail network

Transportation
Garrison Pier

Maughers
Beach
Recreation Area
Maughers
Beach
lighthouse
Fort Ives

Range Pier

Ives Cove

Private moorage

Information
Promotion
Garrison Pier
Park brochure
Interpretation/Information
Kiosk
Fort Ives Interpretation
General tourism
literature

Services
Garrison Pier
Visitor
Services Centre
Pit toilets

Conrad and Matthew


Lynch Homes Outdoor
Education Centre
Wreck Cove Information
Kiosk

Garbage
collection

Wreck Cove
Beach
Fort McNab
National
Historic Site
Strawberry
Battery
Fort Hugonin
Conrad and
Matthew Lynch
Homes
Hugonin-Perrin
Estate
Fauna and Flora

4.5

Discover
McNabs Island
guidebook
Link with
regional
marketing
efforts

Potable water

Picnic areas
Military Road
Campground
Special events
camping

Sea Level Rise and Isthmus Erosion Impacts

As summarized in previous sections, likely impacts from SLR compounded by isthmus erosion in McNabs
Cove include:
Increased wave agitation in McNabs Cove, and
Increased shoreline erosion. Manson (2008) notes that while the breach in the isthmus may
allow increased delivery of sediment to Maughers Beach, in the long term the increase in wave
energy in the area is more likely to cause shoreline erosion than deposition.
Without mitigation, SLR and further deterioration of the shore protection of Maughers Beach isthmus
will impact a relatively well functioning McNabs Island tourism system. Short of influence to alter
market trends, the outlined losses on the supply side of the Islands tourism equation may need to be
compensated by alternate infrastructure.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 31

Most supply components would be affected by SLR and the shore protection deterioration. The reduced
availability of Garrison Pier as the main access point to the Island would be primarily felt in the winter
off-season, and its impact would therefore be limited. Also in question would be the viability of tourism
infrastructure located near Garrison Pier along McNabs Cove. The 2005 Management Plan envisions the
cove as the key piece of Island infrastructure development.

4.6

Potential Mitigation

There are several potential mitigation measures to address risks from SLR and from the possibility that
the breakwater may be left to deteriorate. Most important would be the investigation into other
potential landing sites for incoming boats from Halifax. A recent study by Dalhousie University
Community Design students presented at the 23rd Annual General Meeting of the Friends of McNabs
Island Society (May 2013), recommended Ives Cove as a short-term, and Timmonds Cove as a long term
alternative landing site to Garrison Pier, regardless of the maintenance strategy for the breakwater.
Both areas were described as accessible by all vessel types. Compounded by the present erosion of
Garrison Road along Maughers Beach, the aforementioned alternative landing sites present more
sustainable and attractive long-term alternatives to Garrison Pier, notwithstanding the future condition
of the breakwater.
Moving the main visitor landing site from the west of the Island to the east, would result in shifting the
centre of overall Island tourism development. The planned McNabs Cove interpretation kiosk and
visitor service centre could be moved and located adjacent to the new access facility. Trail routes would
also have to be realigned to connect a new pier to the Islands main attractions. The Park could then
promote Maughers Beach and the isthmus as a natural area to educate the public about dynamic
coastal processes.
All of these changes should be well communicated and planned in close collaboration with the Friends
of McNabs Island Society, as many of the Islands long-term devotees have a strong sentiment for
McNabs Cove as the gateway to the Island.
The impact from SLR on the development of the McNabs Island tourism product was not taken into
consideration in the 2005 Management Plan. SLR and more severe storm events will require the
integration of effective adaptation strategies into an updated Management Plan. A cost-benefit analysis
studying all expenditures and advantages of either a relocation of McNabs Cove tourism infrastructure
or the continuous maintenance of shore protection at the isthmus are recommended to ultimately make
an informed decision on a route forward. Regardless of the option chosen, the shorelines of McNabs
Island Provincial Park will continue to naturally reshape, and the Parks important role as a local,
regional and provincial tourism asset will remain.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 32

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining land access along the armoured isthmus to the Maughers Beach lighthouse (now serviced
by helicopter) is no longer required for operations. Three wave modeling scenarios were examined to
quantify the wave climate changes in Halifax Harbour that would be caused by further breakwater
deterioration and subsequent isthmus erosion, along with Sea Level Rise (SLR) impacts:
(1) Partial loss of Maughers Beach breakwater with overtopping
(2) Breakwater deterioration and breach through isthmus
(3) Full breakwater deterioration and isthmus eroded down to a submerged bar
The modeling exercise indicated that SLR alone will cause a generalized increase in wave heights over
time around McNabs Island and in Halifax Harbour. It also indicated that further breakwater
deterioration causing subsequent isthmus erosion would add to the SLR impact on wave climate in
McNabs Cove but not elsewhere in the Harbour. While it is not possible to give accurate predictions on
time frames, the modeling used provides qualitative conclusions with associated order-of-magnitude
timelines based on a hypothetically assumed isthmus damage evolution.
If the breakwater is repaired and regularly maintained (Scenario 1), the extreme wave height increase by
year 2100 is estimated at 0.2 m at Garrison Pier (SLR only, assumed at 1.0 m by 2100). The increase in
extreme wave heights at other sites examined (Outer Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal and Halterm
Terminals) due to SLR was estimated at 0.06 to 0.1 m by year 2100.
If the breakwater and isthmus fully deteriorate (Scenario 3), modeling indicates that extreme wave
heights will be further increased by less than 0.02 m by 2100 in the Outer Harbour, Point Pleasant Shoal
and Halterm Terminals. At Garrison Pier, this increase in wave heights by 2100 for Scenario 3 is 0.2 m.
For perspective, replacing and maintaining the breakwater would delay the inevitable increase in wave
impacts due to SLR by approximately 30 years at Garrison Pier (2100 versus 2070, under the modeling
assumptions).
The frequency of smaller wave events was also examined, which is relevant for visitor boat traffic and
berthing at Garrison Pier. The acceptable wave climate for berthing typically used for DFO Small Craft
Harbours is defined by a 0.4 m significant wave height upper limit for 10 to 20 m-long vessels, which
would apply to summer island visitor vessels. Modeling indicated that the acceptable wave height

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 33

threshold for berthing (0.4 m) at Garrison Pier is presently exceeded approximately 4 days per year, and
would be exceeded on average:
11 days/year assuming 1.0 m SLR and regular breakwater maintenance (potentially in year
2100)
11 days/year assuming 0.6 m SLR and breakwater left to deteriorate (potentially in year 2070)
18 days/year assuming 1.0 m SLR and breakwater left to deteriorate (potentially in year 2100).
The downtime periods typically occur during the winter off-season, therefore not affecting summer
visitor traffic.
Pros and Cons of Maintaining the Isthmus Breakwater

Breakwater should be repaired and maintained

Breakwater should be left to deteriorate

because:

because:

The impact of SLR on wave agitation in McNabs

Increase in wave agitation due to deterioration is limited


to McNabs Cove and Garrison Pier only (not Halifax

Garrison Pier could remain the main Park access

Harbour), and would primarily affect winter off-season;

point with future visitor centre development as

Increase in wave impacts due to SLR is inevitable around

planned (vision in 2005 McNabs Island

the island. Breakwater maintenance would only delay

Management Plan) for an additional 30 years;

the process for a limited time and area;

and

Cove would not be further exacerbated;

The public could safely access the lighthouse


islet.

Capital and ongoing maintenance expenses are


significant;

Alternative landing sites on the Island are suitable SLR


adaptation options (Ives Cove, Timmonds Cove); and

The isthmus area offers an opportunity to educate Island


visitors on coastal processes.

Based on the modeling results, we offer the following conclusions:


The deterioration of the breakwater and the resulting erosion will not impact the islet on which
the lighthouse is located and therefore will not impact departmental operations.
The deterioration of the breakwater and the resulting erosion is expected to cause a relatively
low impact on the local wave climate and in the worst case scenario will only moderately delay
the impact of sea level rise.

Prepared by:
Vincent Leys
Coastal Engineer

Reviewed by:
Alexander Wilson
Water Resources Engineer

This document was prepared for the party indicated herein. The material and information in the document reflects CBCL
Limiteds opinion and best judgment based on the information available at the time of preparation. Any use of this document
or reliance on its content by third parties is the responsibility of the third party. CBCL Limited accepts no responsibility for any
damages suffered as a result of third party use of this document.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 34

CHAPTER 6

REFERENCES

CIRIA, CUR, CETMEF 2007. The Rock Manual. The use of rock in hydraulic engineering (2nd edition). C683,
CIRIA, London.
Daigle R., Richards W. 2011. Scenarios and guidance for adaptation to climate change and sea level rise
NS and PEI municipalities. Report commissioned by the Atlantic Climate Solutions Association.
www.atlanticadaptation.ca
DHI Software 2012. MIKE, Coastal Hydraulics and Oceanography User Guide. Danish Hydraulic
Institute.
Forbes D., Manson G., Charles J., Thompson K., Taylor R. 2009. Halifax Harbour Extreme Water Levels in
the Context of Climate Change: Scenarios for a 100-year Planning Horizon. Geological Survey of
Canada Open File 6346.
Gunn C. and Var T. 2002. Tourism Planning: Basics, Concepts, Cases. Routledge. ISBN-10: 0415932688.
IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A.
Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf
Manson G. 1999. Recent and Historical Coastal Change Under Rising Sea Level, McNabs Island Area,
Halifax NS. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Science, Dalhousie
University.
Manson G. 2008. McNabs Island Geology and Coastal Processes. In: Discover McNabs Island, Second
Edition. ISBN 978-0-9699518-2-7.
McCarthy, C. 2001. McNabs Island Visitor Survey Final Report. Information Series PKS 2005-1.
McCarthy, C. 2009. Trail Rebuilding on McNabs Island Continues. The Rucksack, volume seventeen, Issue
4, Fall/Winter 2009 2010, page 10.
Nova Scotia Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism. 2011. 2010 Nova Scotia
Visitor Exit Survey.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 35

Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources. 2005. Park Management Plan Mcnabs And Lawlor Islands
Provincial Park. Information Series PKS 2005-1.
Public Works and Government Services Canada, 2007. Preliminary Design Report-Capital Restoration
and Repair of Maughers Beach Protection Works, McNabs Island, Halifax Regional Municiplaity.
P/N 325016. Prepared for DFO Waterways Program
Rahmstorf, S. 2007. A semi-empirical approach to projecting future sea-level rise. Science, 315(5810),
368-370.
Sallenger, A. H., K. S. Doran, and P. A. Howd, 2012: Hotspot of accelerated sea-level rise on the Atlantic
coast of North America. Nature Climate Change, Advanced on line publication.
Swail V.R, Cardone V.J., Ferguson M., Gummer D.J., Harris E.L., Orelup E.A. and Cox A.T. 2006. The
MSC50 Wind And Wave Reanalysis. 9th International Workshop On Wave Hindcasting and
Forecasting September 25-29, 2006 Victoria, B.C. Canada. Available from
www.oceanweather.com (accessed 30 October 2007).
Tourism Industry Association of Nova Scotia. 2011. Tourism Plan.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2006. Coastal Engineering Manual. Engineer Manual 1110-21100.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2011. Sea Level Changes Considerations for Civil Works Programs.
Circular No. 1165-2-212, 1 Oct 2011. Washington, DC 20314-1000.

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 36

APPENDIX A

Statistics on Offshore Wind and Wave


Climate (44.5N-63.4W) and Water Levels

Figure A.1
Annual Directional Frequencies of Wind Speed
Note: Calm represents all occurrences of wind speed < 1 m/s

Figure A.2
Annual Directional Frequencies of Significant Wave Heights
Note: Calm represents all occurrences of Hsig < 0.5 m

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 37

Figure A.2
Monthly Directional Frequencies of Wind Speed
Note: Calm represents all occurrences of wind speed < 1 m/s
CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 38

Figure A.3
Monthly Directional Frequencies of Significant Wave Heights
Note: Calm represents all occurrences of Hsig < 0.5 m
CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 39

Table A.1

Frequency of Exceedance for Hourly Wind Speed by Direction


Values given in % of time, 1% = 3.6 days / year

Wind speed
m/s
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Direction from

km/hr
108
90
72
54
36
18
0

0
0
0
0.0015
0.1323
0.9839
3.5618
4.9821

Table A.2

22.5
0
0.0002
0.0077
0.1000
0.8091
2.9691
4.2709

45
0
0
0.0112
0.0913
0.6358
2.5022
3.6985

67.5
0
0
0.0042
0.1152
0.5381
2.1574
3.3767

90
0
0
0.0029
0.0726
0.4965
1.8121
3.0476

112.5
0
0.0002
0.0018
0.0634
0.4504
1.8619
3.3730

135
0
0.0002
0.0020
0.0665
0.5065
2.1017
3.6625

202.5
0
0.0004
0.0031
0.0559
0.8400
5.3020
8.4825

225
0
0
0.0035
0.0783
1.1044
6.8571
10.6438

247.5
0
0
0.0064
0.1531
1.3128
6.2683
9.5581

270
292.5
0
0
0
0
0.0035 0.0037
0.3027 0.4037
2.1986 3.3670
6.6149 8.3235
9.2986 10.5982

315
0
0
0.0061
0.2207
2.3436
6.6893
8.5854

Total
337.5 exceedence %
0
0
0
0.0018
0.0018
0.0630
0.1533
2.1479
1.3299
18.1464
4.6414
67.5367
6.3227
100

Direction from

ft
36.1
34.4
32.8
31.2
29.5
27.9
26.2
24.6
23.0
21.3
19.7
18.0
16.4
14.8
13.1
11.5
9.8
8.2
6.6
4.9
3.3
1.6
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.001
0.003
0.018
0.124
0.768
1.363
1.377

Table A.3

22.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.001
0.009
0.034
0.153
0.706
1.317
1.334

45
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.001
0.014
0.068
0.278
0.950
1.574
1.601

67.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.001
0.002
0.006
0.026
0.091
0.227
0.668
1.587
2.195
2.243

90
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.000
0.002
0.005
0.009
0.017
0.038
0.072
0.158
0.394
0.900
1.679
2.707
3.628
3.725

112.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.000
0.002
0.007
0.014
0.032
0.059
0.124
0.222
0.386
0.668
1.110
1.900
3.133
4.889
6.737
7.112

135
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.001
0.006
0.011
0.021
0.039
0.081
0.144
0.227
0.398
0.693
1.220
2.214
4.025
7.158
10.188
10.722

157.5
0
0.0002
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.010
0.020
0.035
0.076
0.154
0.295
0.506
0.831
1.357
2.382
4.224
7.577
12.062
12.584

180
0
0
0
0
0
0.000
0.003
0.005
0.007
0.010
0.016
0.033
0.070
0.140
0.283
0.526
0.948
1.685
2.972
5.378
10.456
17.575
18.244

202.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.006
0.013
0.025
0.052
0.089
0.192
0.393
0.822
1.552
3.087
6.138
13.248
21.757
22.323

225
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.002
0.019
0.078
0.223
0.551
1.431
3.466
7.102
9.676
9.815

247.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.000
0.013
0.102
0.342
0.933
1.915
2.689
2.744

270
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.000
0.016
0.126
0.480
1.115
1.577
1.601

292.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.006
0.069
0.387
1.065
1.446
1.461

315
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.002
0.033
0.302
1.102
1.489
1.501

Total
337.5 exceedence %
0
0
0
0.0002
0
0.001
0
0.001
0
0.001
0
0.001
0
0.005
0
0.012
0
0.023
0
0.043
0
0.087
0
0.169
0
0.347
0
0.672
0
1.277
0
2.366
0
4.386
0.003
8.116
0.025
15.828
0.234
31.602
0.991
63.337
1.452
96.725
1.465
99.853

Significant Wave Height and Peak Period Joint Probability of Occurrence

Hsig
m
11
10.5
10
9.5
9
8.5
8
7.5
7
6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

180
0
0.0002
0.0018
0.0746
0.7119
3.5879
6.0511

Frequency of Exceedance for Significant Wave Height by Direction

Hsig
m
11
10.5
10
9.5
9
8.5
8
7.5
7
6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

157.5
0
0.0004
0.0020
0.0643
0.5180
2.2861
4.0482

ft
36.1
34.4
32.8
31.2
29.5
27.9
26.2
24.6
23.0
21.3
19.7
18.0
16.4
14.8
13.1
11.5
9.8
8.2
6.6
4.9
3.3
1.6
0

Total occurence %

CBCL Limited

0-2

2-4

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1474
0.1474

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0156
1.2671
3.8104
0.2534
5.3465

4-6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0002
0.0408
0.3754
2.7679
8.5536
4.7904
0.2565
16.7847

Peak period [s]


8-10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0029
0
0.0176
0
0.0794
0.0004
0.2025
0.0070
0.4363
0.1450
0.8135
0.6836
1.3387
2.1585
2.5838
4.4481
5.0093
8.7469
9.3315
13.6647
7.8794
0.8192
1.2542
30.6734 28.9490
6-8

10-12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0007
0.0029
0.0081
0.0200
0.0432
0.1132
0.1753
0.2973
0.4769
0.8143
1.3770
2.2260
3.0257
3.1457
2.1126
0.3060
14.1449

12-14
0
0
0.0002
0
0
0.0004
0.0013
0.0053
0.0079
0.0092
0.0213
0.0340
0.0467
0.0630
0.0992
0.1487
0.2192
0.2442
0.3027
0.4094
0.5094
0.7204
0.1174
2.9599

14-16
0
0.0002
0.0002
0
0
0
0.0029
0
0.0007
0.0026
0.0018
0.0020
0.0011
0.0079
0.0070
0.0180
0.0303
0.0522
0.0700
0.1150
0.2034
0.3475
0.0759
0.9385

16-18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0004
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0
0
0
0.0011
0.0011
0.0004
0.0031
0.0066
0.0110
0.0204
0.0107
0.0557

Total
occurence
0
0.0002
0.0004
0
0
0.0004
0.0042
0.0064
0.0116
0.0202
0.0432
0.0823
0.1786
0.3256
0.6064
1.0881
2.0236
3.7369
7.7195
15.7975
31.7685
33.3458
3.2407
100.0000

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 40

Table A.4

Offshore Hsig
m
ft
11
36.1
10.5
34.4
10
32.8
9.5
31.2
9
29.5
8.5
27.9
8
26.2
7.5
24.6
7
23.0
6.5
21.3
6
19.7
5.5
18.0
5
16.4
4.5
14.8
4
13.1
3.5
11.5
3
9.8
2.5
8.2
2
6.6
1.5
4.9
1
3.3
0.5
1.6
0
0
Total occurence %

Table A.5

Significant Wave Height and Tide Gauge Water Level Joint Probability of
Occurrence
Values given in % of time, 1% = 3.6 days / year
< 0.25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.001
0.001
0.003
0.005
0.006
0.015
0.033
0.073
0.142
0.327
0.816
1.771
2.136
0.2048
5.5337

Water Level from Halifax Tide Gauge [m CD]


0.25-0.5 0.5-0.75 0.75-1.0 1.0-1.25 1.25-1.5 1.5-1.75 1.75-2.0 2.0-2.25 2.25-2.5 2.5-2.75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0003
0
0
0
0
0
0.0003
0
0.0012
0.0006
0.0003
0
0.0003
0
0.001
0.001
0.0003
0.002
0.0006
0.0006
0.0003
0
0
0.001
0.001
0
0.001
0.0015
0.0015
0.001
0.0009
0.0006
0.0006
0
0.001
0.001
0
0.0012
0.0021
0.0012
0.0012
0.0009
0.0006
0.001
0.00
0.003
0
0.0046
0.0046
0.0036
0.0021
0.0015
0.0003
0.002
0.01
0.007
0
0.0058
0.0027
0.0055
0.0036
0.0015
0.0000
0.005
0.01
0.012
0.0161
0.0155
0.0112
0.0109
0.0079
0.0015
0.0003
0.009
0.02
0.028
0.0261
0.0246
0.0322
0.0264
0
0
0
0.015
0.04
0.050
0.0595
0.0504
0.0568
0.0389
0
0
0
0.043
0.08
0.1082
0.0896
0.0835
0.0990
0.0647
0
0
0
0.093
0.15
0.1780
0.1622
0.1698
0.1774
0.1164
0.0352
0.0052
0.0012
0.180
0.3187
0.3333
0.2825
0.3302
0.3154
0.1999
0.0620
0.0070
0.0003
0.369
0.6146
0.6158
0.5390
0.5833
0.5733
0.3163
0.0674
0.0088
0
0.878
1.2754
1.2137
1.1062
1.2046
1.1663
0.5350
0.1088
0.0067
0.0006
2.0505
2.6502
2.3373
2.2452
2.5666
2.2546
0.8720
0.1240
0.0039
0
4.3573
5.3526
4.4989
4.3856
5.1968
4.3096
1.3167
0.1270
0.0070
0
4.9294
5.6580
4.7146
4.6545
5.6482
4.3953
1.0913
0.0826
0.0012
0
0.4846
0.5256
0.4241
0.4466
0.5241
0.3661
0.1063
0.0055
0
0
13.4180 16.7147 14.5254 14.0293 16.4124 13.7704
4.7070
0.6927
0.0547
0.0046

> 2.75
0
0
0
0
0.0003
0
0
0
0.0003
0
0
0
0
0
0.0003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0009

Significant Wave Height and Wind Speed Joint Probability of Occurrence

Offshore Hsig
m
ft
11
36.1
10.5
34.4
10
32.8
9.5
31.2
9
29.5
8.5
27.9
8
26.2
7.5
24.6
7
23.0
6.5
21.3
6
19.7
5.5
18.0
5
16.4
4.5
14.8
4
13.1
3.5
11.5
3
9.8
2.5
8.2
2
6.6
1.5
4.9
1
3.3
0.5
1.6
0
0
Total occurence %

CBCL Limited

0-5
0
0
0.0002
0
0.0002
0.0006
0.0002
0.0004
0.0014
0.001
0.004
0.009
0.011
0.023
0.050
0.096
0.182
0.385
0.921
2.595
8.571
18.774
2.5900
34.2157

5-10
0
0
0
0
0
0.0004
0.0004
0.001
0
0.003
0.004
0.010
0.023
0.054
0.129
0.278
0.631
1.386
3.496
8.7509
19.1310
14.0660
0.4500
48.4157

Wind Speed [m/s]


10-15
15-20
0
0
0
0
0.0002
0
0.0002
0
0.0004
0
0.0002
0.0002
0.001
0.002
0.001
0
0.001
0.006
0.00
0.010
0.01
0.018
0.02
0.046
0.06
0.076
0.14
0.111
0.27
0.1684
0.54
0.1941
1.0131
0.2362
1.7073
0.3045
2.9995
0.3450
4.2139
0.2504
3.6417
0.0429
0.6158
0.0507
0.0549
0.0045
15.3046
1.8695

20-25
0
0
0
0
0
0.0004
0.0016
0.001
0.002
0.008
0.008
0.0063
0.0059
0.0053
0.0028
0.0047
0.0037
0.0071
0.0016
0.0016
0.0002
0.0010
0
0.0608

25-30
0
0.0002
0
0
0
0.0004
0
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0
0.0002
0.0002
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0016

Total
occurence
0
0.0002
0.0004
0.0002
0.0006
0.0022
0.0051
0.0081
0.0124
0.0250
0.0446
0.0948
0.1810
0.3348
0.6209
1.1139
2.0656
3.7894
7.7631
15.8115
31.3869
33.5078
3.0994
99.8678

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 41

Total
occurence
0
0.0003
0.0003
0.0003
0.0006
0.0027
0.0049
0.0082
0.0134
0.0273
0.0416
0.0954
0.1875
0.3394
0.6253
1.1208
2.1027
3.8293
7.8223
15.9202
31.3222
33.3116
3.0877
99.8639

Significant wave height (m)

12
11
10
9
8
7
6
67 Storm peaks over 6 m
Weibull distribution

5
4
1
10

Figure A.4

10

-1

10
Probability of exceedence
of 1 event in Tr years
(Q = 1/(1.1552 Tr))

10

-2

10

-3

Extreme Value Analysis of Offshore Significant Wave Heights


Correlation coefficient using best-fitting Weibull distribution R = 0.99743

Storm peaks over 2.4 m


Weibull distribution
3

z (m CD)

2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.4
10

Figure A.5

-1

10
Probability of exceedence
of 1 event in Tr years
(Q = 1/(1.3814 Tr))

10

-2

Extreme Value Analysis on Water Level Storm Peaks From De-trended Halifax Tide
Gauge Data
Correlation coefficient using best-fitting Weibull distribution R = 0.9881

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 42

APPENDIX B

Map of McNabs Island


Source: The Friends of McNabs Island Society
http://www.mcnabsisland.ca

CBCL Limited

Halifax Harbour Wave Agitation Risk Study at Maughers Beach Breakwater 43

McNabs Island
The Friends of McNabs Island Society

ia

Ind

P Woolnough's

oad
hR

nc
Ly

St.

Findlay
ve
Co
Farm & Pop
ins
Bottle Site Timm Trail

Anchorage

McLean's
Farm Site

Bog

Jenkins
Hill

us
ho
Te
a

Toilet

Private Property

Temporary Camp Site

Information Kiosk

Maps Produced By: Judith Chinn and Francis Kelly

12

(closed)

Teahouse

Cholera Victims
Gravesite - 1866

Navigation Aid

Hill
ins
Jenk rail
T

Hugonin
Point

Point Of Interest

Timmins Hill

Site of Hugonin-Perrin
House and
14Gardens

Carriage
Lane

Findlays
Cove

20
40
60

14

ant
Farroad
R

eL
an

oad

Trail

0
80 10 120

d
oa

Hugonin
Battery

Track

s
Timmin
rail
Cove T

ail
Tr
rm
Fa

80

Findlay's
Picnic
Grounds
on R

20
Gar
ris

1000 1500 Yards

Contour Interval 20 feet

ser
Fra

60

yR
tar

500

rmi

40

ili

40

500 Metres

Timmins
Cove

rail
ts T

He

Matthew Lynch House

Former
Lighthouse
Site
10

250

Road

20

d
Ol

et
Stre
ythe
Fors

60

Pleasure
Grounds

Ho
we

DavisConrad
House

Jack Lynch
House

Yards 500

60 80

20

Wharf &
Floating Dock
(DNR Wharf)

20 40

d.
tR
in
Po

Fort
Ives

mcnabsisland.ca
Metres 250

l
rai
mT
Far
ser
Fra

es
Iv

20
40
60

40

Fraser
Farm

Ives Cove

Searchlight
Emplacement

Trainer
Farm

20

Ives
Point

P.O. Box 31240, Gladstone RPO


Halifax, NS B3K 5Y1
Phone:(902)434-2254

Indian Point

ail
t Tr

oin
nP

Detention
Barracks Site

Garrison Pier
Detentio

riso

80

ish

st F

ck Road

oad

nR

McNabs Cove

Fro

n Barra

Gar

100

Bro
ok

60

mp
Water Pu
Road
House

rsh

40

wart Tr a

il

40

20

Wreck
Cove

lt
bo
am l
W Trai

rri

40

ad
Ro

Brow Hill
Trail

McNabs
Cemetery

60

80

T
0

ton

lli

Concrete
Rangefinder
Platforms

Cu

Range
Hill

10

10

Fort
McNab

20

son

McNabs
House Site

McNeil/Farrel
Point

Ga

Trail
ond
abs P
McN

Strawberry
Battery

McNabs
Pond

Colin St
e

20

Marsh

Hangmans
Marsh

gmans Beach
Han

Maugers Beach
Lighthouse

rs B

uge

Ma

Ma

ach

Marsh
ll
Hi
een rail
Gr ve T
Co

20
40
60
80

Green
Hill

r
ou
rb
Ha

Thrumcap
Hook

Doyles
Point

ste

Th
r
Co umc
ve ap

rn

Pa

20

Ea

Green Hill
Cove

rail
eT

ng
Ra

40

20

Culliton
Point

ax
lif
Ha

HALIFAX

ht
lig 60
rch ad
o
R

a
Se

le
Rif

Kilometres

Searchlight
Emplacement

DARTMOUTH

ai
Tr

ail

ht Tr

chlig

Bedford
Basin

rm
Fa

Sear

80

ssa

Big
Thrumcap

Lawlor Island

McNabs
Island

Devils Island

40

ge

Main Burial Site of Cholera Victims


from the S.S. England, 1866

Source of Maps:
Friends of McNabs
LRIS
Natural Resources Canada
Copyright 2000

You might also like