SAN CLEMENTE, CA — A San Clemente-based environmental group warned Tuesday that emergency seawalls are contributing to beach erosion nationwide, while most coastal states lack safeguards to prevent temporary barriers from becoming permanent.
The Surfrider Foundation's 2026 State of the Beach Report found that 27 of 30 coastal and Great Lakes states evaluated received grades of C or lower for their laws governing emergency shoreline protection projects.
The organization said no state earned an A, while only Connecticut, Oregon and Texas received B grades. Five states -- Alaska, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi and Wisconsin -- received failing grades. California received a C grade in the report.
The report also found that 40% of states lack minimum legal safeguards against unnecessary permanent shoreline armoring.
The findings come as coastal communities face increasing erosion and flooding threats from storms, elevated tides and rising sea levels.
In Southern California, the report cited emergency construction along a railroad corridor in San Clemente, where roughly 27,000 tons of large rocks, known as riprap, have been placed along the coast under a series of emergency permits issued since 2021. According to Surfrider, the barriers have made a stretch of beach connecting the Trestles surfing area to the rest of San Clemente impassable.
The organization warned that such projects can protect infrastructure in the short term while contributing to long-term beach erosion and loss of public access.
The report describes what it calls an "Emergency to Permanent Permit Pipeline," in which property owners or government agencies install seawalls, rocks or other barriers under emergency permits, only for the structures to remain in place or eventually receive permanent authorization.
Surfrider contends that shoreline armoring can prevent sand from naturally replenishing beaches, restrict the movement of the shoreline and accelerate erosion on neighboring properties.
The organization evaluated state laws using seven criteria, including how emergencies are defined, whether written authorization is required, whether temporary structures must be removed and whether enforcement procedures are established.
The grades reflect state laws rather than how consistently those laws are enforced, according to the report.
Emma Haydocy, Surfrider's senior manager for its Coasts and Climate Initiative, said recurring and predictable coastal hazards, including storms and elevated tides, should not automatically justify emergency construction that may permanently alter shorelines.
"An emergency permit should buy time for meaningful adaptation -- not become a poor substitute for it," Haydocy said in a statement.
The organization pointed to examples in other states, including Hawaii, where sandbags authorized as a temporary measure at a West Maui condominium complex in 2007 remain in place nearly two decades later.
In Oregon, 20 of 29 emergency shoreline armoring permits issued over the past decade were granted during a single erosion event in 2021, according to the report.
Surfrider recommended that states narrow their definitions of coastal emergencies, require written authorization before emergency construction, establish removal deadlines and develop long-term responses to erosion.
The organization proposed limiting emergency shoreline structures to a maximum of two years and prioritizing alternatives such as dune restoration, natural shoreline protection and planned relocation.
Surfrider also cited recent policy developments in Florida, Hawaii and Oregon as examples of states reconsidering their approaches to emergency coastal protection.
The foundation, established in Malibu in 1984, advocates for the protection of oceans, waves and beaches through a national network of volunteer chapters and student clubs.
Sign up for free local newsletters and alerts for the
San Clemente Patch
Patch.com is the nationwide leader in hyperlocal news.
Visit Patch.com to find your town today.