Using forecasts to protect Federal facilities in the path of Hurricane Isabel

Hurricane Isabel made landfall as a Category 2 Hurricane on 18 September 2003, on the North Carolina Outer Banks between Cape Lookout and Cape Hatteras, then coursed northwestward through Pamlico Sound and west of Chesapeake Bay where it downgraded to a tropical storm. Wind damage on the west and southwest shores of Pamlico Sound and the western shore of Chesapeake Bay was moderate, but major damage resulted from the storm tide. The NOAA, National Ocean Service, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Sciences, Center for Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research at Beaufort, North Carolina and the Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomedical Research Branch at Oxford, Maryland have hurricane preparedness plans in place. These plans call for tropical storms and hurricanes to be tracked carefully through NOAA National Weather Service (NWS) watches, warnings, and advisories. When a hurricane watch changes to a hurricane warning for the areas of Beaufort or Oxford, documented hurricane preparation plans are activated. Isabel exacted some wind damage at both Beaufort and Oxford. Storm tide caused damage at Oxford, where area-wide flooding isolated the laboratory for many hours. Storm tide also caused damage at Beaufort. Because of their geographic locations on or near the open ocean (Beaufort) or on or near large estuaries (Beaufort and Oxford), storm tide poses a major threat to these NOAA facilities and the safety of federal employees. Damage from storm surge and windblown water depends on the track and intensity of a storm. One tool used to predict storm surge is the Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model of the NWS, which provides valuable surge forecasts that aid in hurricane preparation.

Preparing for and adapting to climate change impacts: Next steps for the Washington state department of National Resources Aquatic Resources Program

In response to a growing body of research on projected climate change impacts to Washington State’s coastal areas, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Aquatic Resources Program (the Program) initiated a climate change preparedness effort in 2009 via the development of a Climate Change Adaptation Strategy (the Strategy)i. The Strategy answers the question “What are the next steps that the Program can take to begin preparing for and adapting to climate change impacts in Washington’s coastal areas?” by considering how projected climate change impacts may effect: (1) Washington’s state-owned aquatic landsii, (2) the Program’s management activities, and (3) DNR’s statutorily established guidelines for managing Washington’s state-owned aquatic lands for the benefit of the public. The Program manages Washington’s state-owned aquatic lands according to the guidelines set forth in Revised Code of Washington 79-105-030, which stipulates that DNR must manage state-owned aquatic lands in a manner which provides a balance of the following public benefits: (1) Encouraging direct public uses and access; (2) Fostering water-dependent uses; (3) Ensuring environmental protection; (4) Utilizing renewable resources. (RCW 79-105-030) The law also stipulates that generating revenue in a manner consistent with these four benefits is a public benefit (RCW 79-105-030). Many of the next steps identified in the Strategy build off of recommendations provided by earlier climate change preparation and adaptation efforts in Washington State, most notably those provided by the Preparation and Adaptation Working Group, which were convened by Washington State Executive Order 70-02 in 2007, and those made in the Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment (Climate Impacts Group, 2009). (PDF contains 4 pages)

Using climate extension to assist coastal decision-makers with climate adaptation

Coastal managers need accessible, trusted, tailored resources to help them interpret climate information, identify vulnerabilities, and apply climate information to decisions about adaptation on regional and local levels. For decades, climate scientists have studied the impacts that short term natural climate variability and long term climate change will have on coastal systems. For example, recent estimates based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warming scenarios suggest that global sea levels may rise 0.5 to 1.4 meters above 1990 levels by 2100 (Rahmstorf 2007; Grinsted, Moore, and Jevrejeva 2009). Many low-lying coastal ecosystems and communities will experience more frequent salt water intrusion events, more frequent coastal flooding, and accelerated erosion rates before they experience significant inundation. These changes will affect the ways coastal managers make decisions, such as timing surface and groundwater withdrawals, replacing infrastructure, and planning for changing land use on local and regional levels. Despite the advantages, managers’ use of scientific information about climate variability and change remains limited in environmental decision-making (Dow and Carbone 2007). Traditional methods scientists use to disseminate climate information, like peer-reviewed journal articles and presentations at conferences, are inappropriate to fill decision-makers’ needs for applying accessible, relevant climate information to decision-making. General guides that help managers scope out vulnerabilities and risks are becoming more common; for example, Snover et al. (2007) outlines a basic process for local and state governments to assess climate change vulnerability and preparedness. However, there are few tools available to support more specific decision-making needs. A recent survey of coastal managers in California suggests that boundary institutions can help to fill the gaps between climate science and coastal decision-making community (Tribbia and Moser 2008). The National Sea Grant College Program, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) university-based program for supporting research and outreach on coastal resource use and conservation, is one such institution working to bridge these gaps through outreach. Over 80% of Sea Grant’s 32 programs are addressing climate issues, and over 60% of programs increased their climate outreach programming between 2006 and 2008 (National Sea Grant Office 2008). One way that Sea Grant is working to assist coastal decision-makers with using climate information is by developing effective methods for coastal climate extension. The purpose of this paper is to discuss climate extension methodologies on regional scales, using the Carolinas Coastal Climate Outreach Initiative (CCCOI) as an example of Sea Grant’s growing capacities for climate outreach and extension. (PDF contains 3 pages)

Climate change and fisheries: perspectives from small-scale fishing communities in India on measures to protect life and livelihood

Through consultations with key fisheries-based stakeholders in four States of India, this study attempts to assess perceptions of fishing communities about the impact of climate change on their lives and livelihoods. It also evaluates the traditional knowledge, institutions and practices of fishing communities that are relevant to climate-change preparedness. The study identifies adaptation and mitigation measures that may need to be adopted by fishing communities and the State in relation to climate change. Based on this overall analysis, the study proposes measures to protect the lives and livelihoods of small-scale fishing communities in the context of climate-change policies and programmes at different levels. This study will be useful for researchers, policymakers, students and anyone interested in climate change and its potential effects on the lives and livelihoods of small-scale fishing communities.

Knowledge, perceptions, impacts and roles of lakeside communities and institutions in the sustainable control of water hyacinth

The massive water hyacinth mats that covered water bodies in the 1990s had serious social and economic impacts. They affected fishing, transportation, water quality and health of fishing communities as well as production of goods and services of lake-based institutions (commercial establishments). At peak infestations, the communities and institutions were aware of and participated readily in control effort. However, after the major collapse of hyacinth in 1998, some of them relaxed in their control efforts. The status of knowledge, perception, impacts, preparedness and role of the lakeside communities and institutions to control the weed has, therefore, been monitored since the major resurgence of the weed to find out if the lakeside communities and institutions still perceive water hyacinth as a problem and the extent to which they are prepared to sustain control.