Coastal Erosion is Swallowing Our Shores, But There’s a Glimmer of Hope—Here’s Why
January 18, 2026 — 1:00pm
Imagine strolling along a picturesque beach only to find discarded fridges, tangled wires, and rusted appliances washing ashore. This wasn’t a dystopian nightmare but a stark reality for the residents of Port Fairy, Victoria, in 2012. Coastal erosion had begun devouring the dunes, unearthing an old landfill site buried decades ago. And this is the part most people miss: it wasn’t just an eyesore—it was a warning sign of a much larger crisis.
Port Fairy resident Nick Abbott recalls the chilling moment he realized the scale of the problem. “We were seeing the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “If left unchecked, our beloved beach could become a dumping ground for decades-old waste.” But here’s where it gets controversial: while coastal erosion is undeniably linked to climate change, the solutions aren’t as straightforward as building higher walls or moving inland. In fact, some interventions might be doing more harm than good.
By 2013, Abbott and fellow residents took matters into their own hands, measuring erosion with posts, ropes, and laser levels. In 2018, they upgraded to drones, hoping to map the problem from above. Yet, despite their efforts, the relentless Southern Ocean waves and fierce winds continued to carve away at the shoreline. Port Fairy’s plight is a stark reminder of the accelerating threat of coastal erosion, exacerbated by rising sea levels.
But here’s the glimmer of hope: new research from bayside Melbourne suggests that human intervention, when aligned with natural processes, can stabilize eroding beaches. At Sandringham on Port Phillip Bay, coastal geomorphologist David Kennedy found that a combination of sand replenishment and rock groynes—structures extending perpendicular to the shore—has slowed erosion over the past 20 years. But here’s where it gets controversial: while these methods work in sheltered bays, they might not hold up against the raw power of the open ocean, as seen in places like Port Fairy.
Kennedy’s peer-reviewed study, published in Frontiers in Earth Science, highlights the dynamic nature of coastlines. “We tend to view landforms as static, but they’re more like a dog’s tail—constantly in motion,” he explains. The key, he argues, is working with nature, not against it. Hard structures like seawalls often deflect wave energy, causing erosion to worsen nearby—a phenomenon observed at Port Fairy’s former tip site, where a rock wall protected one area but left neighboring dunes vulnerable.
Meanwhile, at another Port Fairy beach, known as the night soil site, erosion exposed old toilet cans and other waste. Vegetation matting was installed to stabilize the dunes and promote plant growth, offering a nature-based solution. Blake Allan, scientific lead of Deakin University’s coastal drone program, notes that while this approach has helped, it’s just one piece of the puzzle. “We can’t rely on quick fixes,” he warns. “Decisions based on single events are like Band-Aids—they don’t address the root cause.”
So, what’s the way forward? Kennedy believes it’s about tailoring solutions to each location. For exposed areas like Port Fairy, Loch Sport, Inverloch, and Silverleaves, a one-size-fits-all approach won’t work. “We’ve created a human-modified world,” he says. “Now, we need to work with what nature throws at us to preserve the places we love. If we don’t, we’ll end up with seawalls and no beaches.”
Controversial Question for You: Is it ethical to prioritize protecting human-built structures over natural coastlines? Or should we let nature take its course, even if it means losing beloved beaches? Share your thoughts in the comments—this debate is far from over.
Start your day informed. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter [insert link] for the latest stories, analysis, and insights.
