Journal of Coastal Research SI 89 150-157 Coconut Creek, Florida 2020

Shoreline Evolution along a Placer Mining Beach of South-West

Coast of India
Ravindran Prasad†*, Leela Sheela Nair†, Njaliplackil Philipose Kurian†, and
Thirumali Nageshrao Prakash†

† www.cerf-jcr.org
Coastal Processes Group
ESSO-National Centre for Earth Science Studies
Thiruvananthapuram 695011, Kerala, India

ABSTRACT

Prasad, R.; Sheela Nair, L.; Kurian, N.P., and Prakash, T.N., 2020. Shoreline evolution along a placer mining beach
of south-west coast of India. In: Sheela Nair, L.; Prakash, T.N.; Padmalal, D., and Kumar Seelam, J. (eds.), Oceanic
and Coastal Processes of the Indian Seas. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 89, pp. 150-157. Coconut
Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.

www.JCRonline.org The Chavara coast of 22 km length located along the south-west coast of India is well known for its rich heavy
mineral deposits, also called as black sand deposits. Since 1930, the Indian Rare Earths Ltd. (IREL) and its
predecessor companies have been engaged in beach sand mining along this coast for the extraction of heavy
minerals. The mining of beach sand by the IREL and Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd. (KMML) has been much
beyond the sustainable limits for the past one and a half decades as indicated by different studies, and has caused
drastic beach and innershelf morphological changes. In this study numerical modelling is carried out using the
LITLINE module of LITPACK to simulate the shoreline evolution along this coast. The model outputs are calibrated
and validated using the shorelines derived from satellite imageries and field measurements for the years 2000, 2006,
2010 and 2015. The calibrated and validated model has been used for further simulations for the period of 2000–
2022 by inserting groins in tally with the field scenarios for different years. The influence of the short and long
groins is predominant at the northern end, near to the Kayamkulam breakwater. If the present scenario persists, the
deposition at the southern breakwater at Kayamkulam will be stabilized by the year of 2022. Orientation of the
shoreline in the groin field area is found to be in accordance with the predominant northerly longshore transport. Due
to the impact of intense mining, the recession in the shoreline and caving-in at the mining site will be even up to
300 m during the period of 2000–2022. The simulations show that the observed caving-in at the mining sites will
aggravate further in the years to come if unsustainable mining is continued.

ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: Shoreline evolution, numerical modelling, mining, erosion.

INTRODUCTION
Coastal zones are highly dynamic and constantly changing “Chavara coast” (Figure 1), where commercial mining of beach
environments with changes occurring over many time scales, in sand is taking place for extraction of heavy minerals.
response to the forces acting upon them (Baily and Nowell, The Chavara coast is well known for its rich heavy mineral
1996; Moore, 2000; Pajak and Leatherman, 2002). The deposits (Kurian et al., 2001; Prakash et al., 1991; Prakash
coastlines are defined as the interface between the land and et al., 2007), but the concentration of heavy minerals has come
water (Dolan, Fenster, and Holme, 1991). The rates of erosion, down over the years which is attributed to excessive beach sand
accretion, sediment transport etc. are extremely important while mining (Kurian et al., 2012; Prakash et al., 2016). Excessive
considering this dynamic coastal environment. Coastal erosion is sand mining has also resulted in beach erosion and drastic
one of the major issues faced by many countries, which is due to beach-innershelf morphological changes (Prasad et al., 2016b;
both natural processes and anthropogenic activities (Masalu, Rajith et al., 2008). In the recent years several groins have been
2002). The construction of coastal structures for the constructed along this coast for protection of the eroding coast.
developmental activities and also for the shore protection However, it remains to be confirmed whether these structures
measures will induce erosion (Omuombo, Olago, and Odada, have helped in any way to combat erosion. There are reports that
2013). The scenario becomes all the more precarious if beach these structures have exacerbated the problem of coastal erosion.
sand mining takes place in the coastal stretch. The present study In this paper the shoreline evolution of this eroding coast has
discusses the shoreline evolution of a coastal stretch along the been studied with reference to the contributing factors using
south of south-west coast of India, popularly known as the numerical models.
____________________
DOI: 10.2112/ SI89-025.1 received 13 August 2018; accepted in STUDY AREA
revision 13 May 2019. The study area is a 22 km coastal stretch located along the
*Corresponding author: [email protected] southwest coast of India, extending from the Neendakara inlet in
©
Coastal Education and Research Foundation, Inc. 2020 the south to the Kayamkulam inlet in the north. This coastal
 Shoreline Evolution along a Placer Mining Beach of South-West Coast of India 151
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

sector is situated in the Kollam district of the southern state of METHODS

Kerala, India (Figure 1). It is a barrier beach bound by the The shoreline evolution for the Chavara coast has been
Lakshadweep Sea in the west and the Travancore-Shoranur analyzed by utilizing the DHI’s LITLINE module of LITPACK
Canal (T-S Canal) in the east. This is a micro-tidal coast with a modelling suite. The inputs for the numerical model are the data
climatic regime dominated by south-west monsoon and has a collected from the field as well as from the topographic sheets
moderate wave energy level (Baba and Kurian, 1988; Kurian, and satellite imageries. The field data collection includes the
1989). Waves are the principal hydrodynamic force driving the mapping of shoreline (High Water Line) by using GPS (Trimple
coastal processes of this coast. make) for the years of 2000, 2010 and 2015. The waves are
measured by deploying a directional wave rider buoy (Datawell,
2009) at 22 m water depth, which is about 9 km from the shore,
for a period of one year (January–December 2014). The wave
data is continuously collected at half hour interval.

Numerical Modelling of Shoreline Evolution

The basic assumption in the LITLINE model is that the
longshore sand transport occurs uniformly over the beach profile
from the berm height DB down to the depth of closure Dc (DHI,
2012). The definition sketch for shoreline change calculation
according to 1-line theory (Hanson and Kraus, 2011) is shown in
Figure 2a and the baseline orientation used in LITLINE is
shown in Figure 2b. The parameters are specified based on a
coordinate system in which x axis is the baseline quasi-parallel
to the initial coastline, and y is perpendicular to the x axis. By
considering a control volume of sand balanced during an
infinitesimal interval of time and neglecting the cross-shore
transport, the following differential equation is obtained,

∂y(x) 1 ∂Ql (x)

=- (1)
∂t hact (x) ∂x

where y(x) is the coastline position, t is the time, hact(x) = (DB +

DC) is the height of the active cross-shore profile or total height
of the control volume (where DB is the berm height and DC is
the depth of closure), Ql(x) is the longshore sediment transport
expressed in volume, and x is the longshore position or space
coordinate along the axis parallel to the trend of the shoreline.

Figure 1. Chavara coast extending from the Neendakara inlet in the

south to the Kayamkulam inlet in the north, SW coast of India.

The Chavara coast in general has an orientation in the

SSE–NNW direction while further south at the Thangassery
headland, there is a sharp change in the shoreline orientation
from 350º to 290ºN with steeper bathymetry towards south
(Baba and Kurian, 1988). The coast exhibits significant spatial
variation in the shoreline orientation with noticeable dents at the
mining sites of Vellanathuruthu–Ponmana and Kovilthottam due
to caving in of the shoreline due to mining. The southern part of
the coastal stretch from the Neendakara inlet to the
Vellanathuruthu mining site is oriented 345ºN while the Figure 2. Definition sketch for shoreline change calculation according
northern sector is 334ºN. The continental shelf of Chavara coast to1-line theory (a), baseline orientation (b), and alongshore
is of moderate slope with the 20, 50 and 100 m isobaths at discretization used in the LITLINE module of LITPACK (c) (Source:
approximate distances of 7, 26 and 54 km respectively from the Hanson and Kraus, 2011).
shoreline.

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 89, 2020

152 Prasad et al.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Equation (1) was extended to include the line discharges used as the input for simulating the actual field conditions. The
of sediment representing a source or sink of sand on the cross-shore interval is about 1 m for these cross-shore profiles.
shoreline following the work of Kraus and Harikai (1983) and is Sediment characteristics such as grain size were estimated
given by from the collected sediment samples from the beach and
innershelf from which the bed roughness and fall velocity were
∂y(x) 1 ∂Ql (x) Qsou (x) estimated. The LITLINE sediment transport table generation
=- + (2)
∂t hact (x) ∂x hact (x) ∆x program, LINTABL is used for the computation of longshore
sediment transport and LINTABL serves as another input for the
where Qsou(x) is the source/sink term expressed in volume and is coastline evolution model, which is a substitute for the
derived from the table of sediment transport rate in the surf LITDRIFT in the LITLINE module. The LINTABL calculates
zone, Δx is the alongshore discretization step. The alongshore and tabulates sediment transport rates by the method of
discretization used in the LITLINE is shown in Figure 2c. From interpolation in the tables as functions of the water level, the
an initial coastline position yintl(x), the evolution in time is surface slope due to regional currents, wave period, height and
determined by solving the above equation. The continuity direction with respect to the shoreline normal. The same
equation for sediment volumes is solved by using implicit transport table can be applied along the whole coast if the
Crank-Nicholson scheme which gives the development of the coastline is straight and uniform.
coastline position in time. Since this coastal sector is subjected to beach sand mining by
The continuity equation can be written as the two public sector companies, appropriate value of the mining
quantity which acts as sink was given as one of the major inputs
ai yi-1,t+1 + bi yi,t+1 + Ci yi+1,t+1 = di (3) for the model. Mining volumes of 67,000 m3/year for the period
2000–2010 (Kurian et al., 2002) and 134,000 m3/year for the
ai = (1 - αCN ) dQi-1 (4) period 2011–2022 (Kurian et al., 2012) are converted and given
as sink input (negative value for the sink) for a 2 km mining
∆x2 h
stretch and 10 m grid spacing along the selected mining
bi = - ai - ci (5) locations of Kovilthottam, Ponmana and Vellanathuruthu. The
∆t
sink values are distributed over the three mining sites at
ci = (1 - αCN ) dQi (6) 6.4–6.8 km, 8.8–9.6 km and 9.8–10.6 km towards north from the
northern arm of the Neendakara breakwater.
Coastal protection structures such as breakwaters, groins and
di = ai yi-1,t + bi yi,t + ci yi+1,t - ∆x (Qi,t - Qi-1,t - QSi ) (7) seawall constructed along the coastal sector of Neendakara–
Kayamkulam are given as input using the appropriate grid no.
where αCN is the Crank-Nicholson factor which determines the starting from northern arm of the Neendakara breakwater. It is
implicit or explicit solution scheme (αCN = 0 gives fully implicit not possible to include all the 26 groins available along this
solution, αCN = 1 gives fully explicit solution). The system of coastal sector, since the model can accommodate only 20 groins
equation for all longshore position can be solved by Gauss as input. Thus only 20 major groins were given as input to the
elimination and ai, bi, ci and di can be found from the present model.
time step.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Inputs for the Model The model outputs were calibrated and validated using
The basic input data for the LITLINE model are the satellite imageries and the measured shorelines. The baseline
alongshore relative coastline alignment along with profile shoreline was the surveyed shoreline of the year 2000. The
description, active depth of transport and depth contour angles at surveyed shorelines for different years viz. 2006, 2010 and 2015
each grid point, cross-shore profile bathymetry, wave properties were used for the calibration of the model. Thus the trend in the
(wave height, period and angle), water levels, wind, position and shoreline orientation for both the short and long time span i.e.
size of structures and position and magnitudes of sources/sinks. 2000–2006, 2000–2010 and 2000–2015 was examined and was
The coastline position was given for the 24 km coastal stretch compared with the Google imageries for the same period.
extending from Neendakara inlet in the south to the Several statistical parameters can be used to assess the quality of
Kayamkulam inlet in the north at 10 m grid spacing for an the performance of the numerical models. Among these,
accurate representation of the shoreline. The initial coastline is Relative Mean Absolute Error (RMAE) is used to evaluate the
given as a distance from baseline and for the preparation of this accuracy and performance of the LITLINE model (Pender and
coastline position, the shoreline for the year 2000 was used as Karunarathna, 2013; van Rijn et al., 2003) and is given by
the baseline data. The baseline is drawn at a shore parallel angle
of 154ºN which is close to the general shoreline orientation 〈 |Y - X| 〉
along the coast. The wave and cross-shore profile including the RMAE = 〈 |X| 〉
(8)
sediment characteristics are the inputs to the LITLINE module.
Cross-shore bathymetric profile extracted from the measured where Y is the simulated value (shoreline change), X is the
bathymetry was given as the basic input for the model. Four measured value and <..> denotes the averaging procedure.
numbers of cross-shore profiles extending to a depth of 10 m is For the modelling of shoreline evolution, a baseline is fixed
and the distance from the coastline to the baseline is set as the

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 89, 2020

 Shoreline Evolution along a Placer Mining Beach of South-West Coast of India 153
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

initial coastline. The angle of normal to the baseline is given as considered in the model at the mining sites (i.e. sink input is
90˚ w.r.t north and the height of the active beach is set to 3 m for given as zero) and omitted the breakwater at the Kayamkulam
the coastline specification in the model. For the input cross- inlet. It can be seen from the Figure 5a that the dent in the
shore profiles in the model, the limiting depth for the offshore mining site is completely filled due to the advancement of
contour is set to 10 m. Courant number and Crank-Nicolson shoreline by the year of December 2006. The erosion/recession
factor used for the computation is 1 and 0.25 respectively. The of the shoreline is observed at the northern end of the
initial coastline is divided into grid spacings of 10 m for the Kayamkulam inlet (Figure 5b). This observation corroborates
24 km coastal stretch, starting from the extreme south of well with the results from the long-term shoreline change during
Neendakara breakwater and extending up to the Kayamkulam 1968–1989 (Prasad et al., 2016b), which is shown in Table 2,
breakwater. The model run has been performed for the period where the erosion is predominant at the northern end of the
2000–2015, by accommodating the coastal protection structures coastal stretch. But after the construction of Kayamkulam
constructed during different years. Appropriate sink input is breakwater at the northern end during the period of 2000–2007,
provided to the model at the mining sites of Kovilthottam, the accretion is dominant.
Ponmana and Vellanathuruthu so that the effect of beach sand
mining is also incorporated. The observed shoreline of 2006,
2010 and 2015 show good corroboration with the simulated one
as can be seen in Figure 3a, b and c. The simulation result for
the year of 2015 is superimposed with the Google image for the
same period (Figure 4a and b). The statistical error estimates for
the simulated and measured shoreline along the Chavara coast
for the years 2006, 2010 and 2015 is shown in Table 1. The
Relative Mean Absolute Error (RMAE) is about 0.04 (4%) for
the 2000–2006 shoreline simulation. But RMAE is about 0.05
(5%) for the simulation period of 2000–2010 and 2000–2015.
Thus the model is calibrated for both short- and long-term
scenarios.

Table 1. Statistical error estimates for the simulated and measured

shoreline along the Chavara coast for the years 2006, 2010 and 2015.

Year *RMAE
2000–2006 0.04
2000–2010 0.05
2000–2015 0.05
*RMAE - Relative Mean Absolute Error

Table 2. Long-term shoreline change (m) along the Chavara coast

during different periods (after Prasad et al., 2016b).

Shoreline Change (m)

Location 1968– 1989– 1968– 1968– 2006–
1989 2006 2006 2015 2015
Azhikkal (NK-1) -57 +152 +95 -30 -122
Azhikkal South
-132 +63 -69 -178 -113
(NK-3)
Srayikkadu (NK-5) -118 +32 -86 -195 -110
*Vellanathuruthu
-52 -79 -131 -260 -130
(NK-6)
*Ponmana (North) -25 -175 -200 -388 -187
*Ponmana (South) -26 -185 -211 -367 -155
*Kovilthottam
# # # -100 -22
(NK-7)
Karithura (NK-8) # # -19 -34 -12
Puthanthura # # -13 -22 -12
Neendakara # # -10 -10 +2
* Mining sites; # No beach; +ve Accretion; -ve Erosion
Figure 3. Simulated and measured shoreline along the Neendakara-
For validation of the model, the simulation was performed for Kayamkulam coastal sector for the years 2006 (a), 2010 (b), and
each period (i.e. for the years 2000–2015) by introducing the 2015 (c).
coastal structures relevant for the period. No mining was

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 89, 2020

154 Prasad et al.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

The calibrated and validated LITLINE model has been used field, due to the predominant northerly transport along the
for further simulation of the shoreline evolution. In addition to coastal stretch. End point erosion is observed at the end of the
this, the longshore sediment transport rate for the coastal sector groin field which is about 2 km south of Kayamkulam
of Chavara is computed by using LITDRIFT module of breakwater (Figure 6b). The extent of erosion is up to the
LITPACK. The annual net longshore sediment transport in the seawall (assuming that the seawall will be well maintained)
surf zone (Table 3) for this coastal sector is 78,961 m3, where since all the other locations except the mining sites and 2 km
the southerly transport is 15,560 m3/year during the months of south of Kayamkulam breakwater are protected by seawall.
June–July and the northerly transport dominates (94,521
m3/year) during the remaining months (Prasad et al., 2016a).
The simulation of the shoreline evolution was performed for the
period of 2000–2022 by inserting groins in tally with the field
scenarios of different years. The simulated shorelines for 2006,
2010, 2015, 2018 and 2022 are presented in Figures 6 and 7. For
better presumption, the shoreline evolution is superimposed on
the recent satellite image (Google image) for the year of 2016
and is shown in Figure 8a, and b for both the northern sector
near to Kayamkulam breakwater and mining sites. Figure 8c
shows the enlarged view of the Vellanathuruthu–Ponmana
mining site.

Table 3. Monthly and Annual longshore sediment transport (LST) in the

surf zone at Srayikkadu (located approx. 2 km to the south of
Kayamkulam inlet) computed using LITDRIFT (after Prasad et al.,
2016a).
Figure 4. Simulated shoreline along the Neendakara–Kayamkulam
coastal sector for the year 2015 superimposed on satellite image (Google
Monthly LST in the surf image) for the northern sector near to Kayamkulam inlet (a), and
Shore
Month zone (m3/month) using Ponmana mining site (b).
Normal (o N)
LITDRIFT
Jan. 2014 240 7,301
Feb. 2014 244 7,272
Mar. 2014 242 9,090
Apr. 2014 234 12,130
May. 2014 234 17,732
Jun. 2014 241 -6,712
Jul. 2014 241 -8,848
Aug. 2014 241 3,179
Sep. 2014 241 12,100
Oct. 2014 239 11,173
Nov. 2014 241 8,047
Dec. 2014 240 6,496
Annual surf zone longshore transport (m3/year)
Northerly Transport 94,521
Southerly Transport -15,560
Net Transport 78,961
Gross Transport 110,081
Note: negative sign indicates southerly transport

The simulated shorelines of 2006 and 2010 at the mining site

(Figure 6a) are not under the influence of the groins and hence a
realignment of the shoreline with overall retreat is observed in
2006 and 2010. However the scenario changed after 2013, when
two more groins were constructed at the Ponmana mining site.
Due to the impact of intense mining, the recession in the
shoreline will be even up to 300 m from the initial shoreline by
the end of December 2022 (Figures 6a and 7). The influence of
the short and long groins is predominant at the northern end,
Figure 5. Simulated shoreline for the years 2001–2006 at mining site (a),
near to the Kayamkulam breakwater. If the present scenario and south of Kayamkulam inlet (b). The simulation was performed (i)
persists, the accumulation at the northern arm of the breakwater without incorporating breakwaters and groins and (ii) by providing zero
will be stabilized by the year of 2022 (Figures 6b and 7). sink i.e. no mining.
Advancement in the shoreline is noticed in between the groin

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 89, 2020

 Shoreline Evolution along a Placer Mining Beach of South-West Coast of India 155
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

This study using numerical modelling has brought out the (Kurian et al., 2002; Prasad et al., 2016b) shows that the yearly
shoreline changes that the whole Chavara coast has undergone average extraction of beach sand by these firms has almost
during the past four and a half decades. The beaches of this doubled during the period of 2001–2010 over the previous
coast are eroding and are evident from the earlier studies decade. As concluded by Prasad et al. (2016b), the
conducted by Prakash and Verghese (1987); Prasad et al. replenishment from the offshore is no match for the intake and
(2016b); Rajith et al. (2008); Sreekala, Baba, and Muralikrishna this leads to erosion and caving in of the beach at the mining
(1998). The whole coastline, except the mining sites, is sites.
protected by seawall which also shows the erosive nature of this
coast.

Figure 6. Simulated shoreline for the years 2006, 2010, 2015, 2018 and
2022 at the mining site (a), and south of Kayamkulam inlet (b). The
simulation was performed with the influence of breakwaters, groins and
seawall.
Figure 7. The simulated shoreline for the selected sectors of the Chavara
coast for the years 2006, 2010, 2015, 2018 and 2022. The measured
shoreline for the year 2000 which is the baseline for the simulation is
The results from the shoreline evolution modelling conducted also shown in the figure.
for the Chavara coast shows that the mining at the present rate
may have a devastating effect on the mining sites, particularly at
Ponmana, where the shoreline retreats up to 250 m by 2022, Estimations of longshore sediment transport in the surf zone
from the shoreline of 2006. The recession in the shoreline during by Black et al. (2008); Prasad et al. (2016a); Sheela Nair et al.
the period of 1968–2006 is about 200 m (Table 2). So by (2015) show that the net surf zone longshore transport is
integrating both the results of observation and shoreline northerly, and this is evident from the huge accretion at the
evolution modelling during the period of 1968–2022, it can be southern arm of the Kayamkulam breakwater. The shoreline
seen that about 450 m of shoreline recession will take place at evolution modelling in the present study also shows this
the mining site during these five and a half decades. Comparison accretion pattern, which is predicted to be stabilized by the end
of the observed and modelled results for the period of 2000– of the year 2022 (Figures 6b and 7). The groins along the coast
2022 shows shoreline recession of about 300 m at the mining constructed during the period 2009–2015 also obstruct the
sites. northerly longshore transport, and the beaches at the leeward
The beach sand extraction by two public sector companies is side get starved of sediments which in turn brought out localized
the main forcing factor for these observed shoreline changes. shoreline changes all along the coastal stretch. This is observed
The available data on beach sand extraction by these firms in the present shoreline evolution simulations too.

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 89, 2020

156 Prasad et al.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the Director, National Centre for Earth
Science Studies (NCESS), for providing the facilities. We also
acknowledge the contributions of the scientific officers and
supporting staff of the Coastal Processes Group of NCESS.

LITERATURE CITED
Baba, M. and Kurian, N.P., 1988. Ocean Waves and Beach
Processes of Southwest Coast of India and their Prediction.
Thiruvananthapuram, India: Centre for Earth Science
Studies, 249p.
Baily, B. and Nowell, D., 1996. Techniques for monitoring
coastal change: a review and case study. Ocean and
Coastal Management, 32(2), 85-95.
Black, K.P.; Kurian, N.P.; Mathew, J., and Baba, M., 2008.
Open coast monsoonal beach dynamics. Journal of Coastal
Research, 24(1), 1-12. doi:10.2112/04-0289
Datawell, 2009. Wave Rider Reference Manual, DWR-MkIII.
Datawell BV Oceanographic Instruments, The Netherlands.
DHI, 2012. LITLINE - Coastline Evolution, LITLINE User
Guide. Horsholm, Denmark: Danish Hydraulic Institute,
165p.
Dolan, R.; Fenster, M.S., and Holme, S.J., 1991. Temporal
analysis of shoreline recession and accretion. Journal of
Coastal Research, 7(3), 723-744.
Hanson, H. and Kraus, N.C., 2011. Long-term evolution of a
long-term evolution model. In: Roberts, T.M.; Rosati, J.D.,
and Wang, P. (eds.), Proceedings, Symposium to Honor Dr.
Nicholas C. Kraus. Journal of Coastal Research, Special
Issue No. 59, pp. 118-129. ISSN 0749-0208
Kraus, N.C. and Harikai, S., 1983. Numerical model of the
shoreline change at Oarai Beach. Coastal Engineering,
7(1), 1-28.
Kurian, N.P., 1989. Shallow water wave transformation. In:
Baba M. and Hameed, T.S.S. (eds.), Ocean Wave Studies
Figure 8. Shoreline evolution simulated for the Chavara coast for
different years (2000, 2006, 2010, 2015, 2018 and 2022): south of
and Applications. Thiruvananthapuram, India: Centre for
Kayamkulam inlet (a), Vellanathuruthu–Ponmana mining site (b), and Earth Science Studies, pp. 15-32.
enlarged view of the mining site (c). The simulated shorelines are Kurian, N.P.; Hameed, T.S.S.; Prakash, T.N.; Sheela Nair, L.;
superimposed on the Google image for January 2016. Thomas, K.V.; Reji, S.; Raju, D.; Ajitkumar, M.;
Prasad, R.; Sandeep, K.K., and Linikrishna, K.L., 2012.
Study on Depletion of Heavy Mineral Content in the Beach
CONCLUSIONS Washings of IREL, Chavara. Thiruvananthapuram, India:
Numerical modelling of shoreline evolution along the Centre for Earth Science Studies (Final report submitted to
Chavara coast has been carried out by using LITLINE module of Indian Rare Earths Ltd.), 290p.
LITPACK modelling suite. The LITLINE model which was Kurian, N.P.; Prakash, T.N.; Jose, F., and Black, K.P., 2001.
calibrated and validated for the coast using surveyed shoreline Hydrodynamic processes and heavy mineral deposits of the
data for the years 2006, 2010 and 2015 has been used to southwest coast, India. Journal of Coastal Research,
simulate the shoreline changes during the period of 2000–2022. Special Issue 34, (ICS 2000, New Zealand), 154-163.
The simulation was performed by inserting groins in tally with ISSN 0749-0208
the field scenarios for the respective years. The results reveal Kurian, N.P.; Prakash, T.N.; Thomas, K.V.; Hameed, T.S.S.;
that the recession in the shoreline at the mining sites will be to Chattopadhyay, S.; Baba, M.; Black, K.P., and Mathew, J.,
the extent of 300 m during 2000–2022. This caving in of the 2002. Heavy Mineral Budgeting and Management at
shoreline at the mining sites is attributed to the unsustainable Chavara. Thiruvananthapuram, India: Centre for Earth
mining volumes at the sites. In addition to this, the construction Science Studies (Final report submitted to Indian Rare
of ill-conceived coastal structures like breakwaters, groins and Earths Ltd.), 513p.
seawalls all along the coast is another contributing factor to Masalu, D.C.P., 2002. Coastal erosion and its social and
these observed shoreline changes. It can be concluded that the environmental aspects in Tanzania: A case study in illegal
observed caving in at the mining sites will aggravate further in sand mining. Coastal Management, 30(4), 347-359.
the years to come if the unsustainable mining is continued. doi:10.1080/089207502900255

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 89, 2020

 Shoreline Evolution along a Placer Mining Beach of South-West Coast of India 157
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Moore, L.J., 2000. Shoreline mapping techniques. Journal of Journal of the Geological Society of India, 29, 390-398.
Coastal Research, 16(1), 111-124. Prasad, R.; Sheela Nair, L.; Kurian, N.P., and Prakash, T.N.,
Omuombo, C.A.; Olago, D.O., and Odada, E.O., 2013. Coastal 2016a. Erosion and heavy mineral depletion of a placer
erosion. Developments in Earth Surface Processes, 16, mining beach along the southwest coast of India: Part I–
331-339. doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-59559-1.00022-0 Nearshore sediment transport regime. Natural Hazards, 83,
Pajak, M.J. and Leatherman, S., 2002. The high water line as 769-796. doi:10.1007/s11069-016-2368-z
shoreline indicator. Journal of Coastal Research, 18(2), Prasad, R.; Sheela Nair, L.; Kurian, N.P.; Prakash, T.N., and
329-337. Varghese, T.I., 2016b. Erosion and heavy mineral depletion
Pender, D. and Karunarathna, H., 2013. A statistical process of a placer mining beach along the southwest coast of
based approach for modelling beach profile variability. India: Part III – Short- and long-term morphological
Coastal Engineering, 81, 19-29. changes. Natural Hazards, 83, 823-847.
Prakash, T.N.; Black, K.P.; Mathew, J.; Kurian, N.P.; Thomas, doi:10.1007/s11069-016-2346-5
K.V.; Hameed, T.S.S.; Vinod, M.V., and Rajith, K., 2007. Rajith, K.; Kurian, N.P.; Thomas, K.V.; Prakash, T.N., and
Nearshore and beach sedimentary dynamics in a placer Hameed, T.S.S., 2008. Erosion and accretion of a placer
dominated coast, southwest India. Journal of Coastal mining beach of SW Indian coast. Marine Geodesy, 31,
Research, 23(6), 1391-1398. 128-142.
Prakash, T.N.; Raju, G.K., and Prithviraj, M., 1991. Sheela Nair, L.; Sundar, V., and Kurian, N.P., 2015. Longshore
Radioelement distribution in river, beach, and offshore sediment transport along the coast of Kerala in southwest
areas and their significance to Chavara placer deposit, India. Procedia Engineering, 116, 40-46.
southern Kerala coast of India. Geo-Marine Letters, 11(1), doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.262
32-38. doi:10.1007/BF02431052 Sreekala, S.P.; Baba, M., and Muralikrishna, M., 1998.
Prakash, T.N.; Varghese, T.I.; Prasad, R.; Sheela Nair, L., and Shoreline changes of Kerala coast using IRS data and aerial
Kurian, N.P., 2016. Erosion and heavy mineral depletion of photographs. Indian Journal of Marine Science, 27(1), 144-
a placer mining beach along the southwest coast of India: 148.
Part II – Sedimentological and mineralogical changes. van Rijn, L.C.; Walstra, D.J.R.; Grasmeijer, B.; Sutherland, J.;
Natural Hazards, 83, 797-822. doi:10.1007/s11069-016- Pan, S., and Sierra, J.P., 2003. The predictability of cross-
2350-9 shore bed evolution of sandy beaches at the time scale of
Prakash, T.N. and Verghese, A.P., 1987. Seasonal beach storms and seasons using process-based profile models.
changes along Quilon district coast, Kerala. Coastal Engineering, 47, 295-327.

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 89, 2020