Friday Photos: Whidbey Island Erosion

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Whidbey Island, Washington is a fantastic place to see glacial deposits while you enjoy some seascapes.

You can also see excellent evidence of why it's not a good idea to build on a bluff. We didn't actually mean to see those. My intrepid companion and I meant to go see a fine example of a clastic dike. I should have remembered lessons learned from Doctor Who: "Turn Left." If I had, we'd have ended up at Blowers Bluff as intended. But, like Donna, we turned right, and will have to get it right (left?) on a second go.

No matter. It turned out to be a happy little accident. There's enough in the bluff that is not Blowers Bluff to keep a person interested in both geology and sea critters happy for hours. And it has some textbook examples of erosion.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


These glacial sediments are quite firm, even hard, but they're more like dried mud than rocks: classic unconsolidated sediments, which haven't had the opportunity to turn to stone just yet. And between the waves from Puget Sound and the gargantuan amounts of rain we get here in the winter, they have a habit of eroding rapidly.

This is why Scenic Heights Road is endeavoring to become Scenic Lows Road.

There were moments photographing this bluff when I questioned the wisdom of standing beneath it. This closeup of the eroded bit of road should explain why:

The US Geological Survey estimates that 51% of Island County's shorelines are unstable (pdf). All around Puget Sound, you can see signs of mass wasting. Waves make the bluffs too steep, while soaking rains cause the compacted sediments to lose cohesion, leading to landslides and debris flows. It can get rather exciting round here in the winter.

Before I began my geological adventures, I used to think I'd like a nice house on the seashore, probably perched up high with a view of the ocean. These days, I'm content living inland. Don't get me wrong: I liked The Little Mermaid, but I'd rather not have "Under the Sea" stuck in my head because that's where my house landed.

 

References:

Tucker, Dave (2010): "Blowers Bluff, Whidbey Island." Northwest Geology Field Trips.

Crucher, Suzanne (2008): "Determination of Shoreline Erosion Rates of Double Bluff." University of Washington Earth & Space Sciences.

Shipman, Hugh (2004): "Coastal Bluffs and Sea Cliffs on Puget Sound, Washington." U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1693.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe