About 80-90% of U.S. East Coast barrier beaches have experienced erosion in the last 100 years. South Carolina’s coastline forms no exception, a third of its developed shoreline experiences erosion. Among these eroding shorelines is Hilton Head Island, the second largest barrier island on the U.S. East Coast. Until now, erosion here has been addressed through traditional local beach nourishments. An alternative approach to the traditional nourishment method, are so-called feeder nourishments or feeder beaches. The potential advantages of the feeder nourishment concept over the traditional method are reduction of the nourishment frequency, containment of the ecological stress in a relatively small area, and a short to medium term increase of local available space for recreation and the environment. Given the potential advantages above, the residents of Hilton Head Island asked TU Delft to investigate the possibility of applying a feeder nourishment at their shoreline. Currently, a pilot project known as “The Sand Engine” is examined along the Dutch coast. Several studies into its morphological behaviour show that this feeder nourishment can be beneficial to the sediment budget of a larger coastal cell. Because of the promising results at the Sand Engine pilot project, it is tempting to state that a feeder-nourishment could also be applied at Hilton Head Island. The problem, however, is that the conditions at Hilton Head Island and the Sand Engine are different. There are two main differences between Hilton Head Island and the Sand Engine. First, Hilton Head is subjected to a relative calm wave climate in comparison to the Sand Engine. Second, the presence of two tidal inlets at Hilton Head, compared to a relative straight and uninterrupted coastline at the Sand Engine. As a result, the conclusions drawn from the Sand Engine pilot project do not necessarily hold for Hilton Head Island as well. The main objective of this thesis is to analyse the morphological behaviour of a feeder nourishment located at Hilton Head Island. First, to study its potential as a measure against erosion at Hilton Head. Second, to compare its morphological behaviour to that of the Sand Engine. And third, to be able to examine the potential of the concept for the Atlantic southeast coast of the U.S. in general. The morphological development of a feeder nourishment at Hilton Head Island was simulated with Delft3D over the course of 1 year for different model scenarios, with varying forcing conditions and varying bathymetric features. The effect of the relative calm wave climate at Hilton Head Island in comparison to the Sand Engine is twofold. First, the contribution of wave forcing to the total erosional volume of the feeder nourishment after 1 year is smaller as compared to the Sand Engine. Eliminating all driving forces besides wave forcing reduces the total erosional volume to 58% at Hilton Head, in comparison to 75% at the Sand Engine. Second, the contribution of storm events to the total erosional volume after 1 year from the feeder nourishment is smaller at Hilton Head compared to the Sand Engine. It measures 23% at Hilton Head, in comparison to 60% at the Sand Engine. To assess the impact of the two tidal inlets on the feeder nourishment, they were closed off. Closing of the tidal inlets eliminates any (potential) residual currents. This reduces the total amount of sediment that is eroded from the feeder nourishment by 7% compared to a reference scenario with open tidal inlets. Before construction of the feeder nourishment the coastline south of the nourishment experienced a net sediment outflux of approximately 4000 m3/year. After construction of the feeder nourishment, the southern section experiences a net import of sediment of approximately 100.000 m3/year. Meaning that the southern section, on average, has transitioned from being erosive to accreting. Up to 500 meter away from the nourishment the cross-shore profile shows a seaward movement of the shoreline position of approximately 25 m compared to the original situation without nourishment. Before construction of the feeder nourishment the coastline north of the nourishment experienced a net sediment outflux of approximately 40.000 m3/year. After construction of the feeder nourishment, this net outflux of sediment has decreased to approximately 25.000 m3/year. This shows that the feeder nourishment is feeding sediment to the northern section, but at a rate that is not sufficient to keep up with the underlying erosion rate. The northern domain, on average, still experiences a sediment outflux and stays erosive. Roughly 50 m of coastline directly north of the feeder nourishment experiences a seaward movement of the shoreline position. However, moving further away from the nourishment, the shoreline remains erosive. The Atlantic southeast coast of the United States is made up of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida’s east coast. The South Carolina and Georgia coastline are comparable in both hydrodynamic conditions and geomorphological setting. They are mixed-energy coasts, broken up by numerous tidal inlets, and home to short barrier islands with complex sediment transport patterns. North Carolina’s and Florida’s east coast are wave-dominated, with relative straight shorelines. Which is distinctly differences from the conditions found at Hilton Head Island. Therefore, the potential of the feeder nourishment concept is only analysed for South Carolina’s and Georgia’s coastline. The presence of numerous tidal inlets leads to strongly varying conditions along the coastlines of both states. The developed locations along South Carolina’s coastline that require erosion mitigating measures are south Debidue beach, North Island, Hunting Island and Daufuskie Island. Along Georgia’s coastline there are only some erosion hotspots along Sea Island’s coastline that require erosion mitigation measures. The wave climate at all the above mentioned location is similar to Hilton Head. A southeast swell, with a narrow range of directions and an annual wave height of roughly 1,0 m. The same goes for the tidal range. The results at Hilton Head show that erosion on adjacent coastal sections can be lessened and/or prevented by constructing a feeder nourishment. Given that these locations are subjected to similar conditions, the construction of a feeder nourishment could potentially be an effective measure to prevent or lessen the occurring erosion.