Restoring Ecosystems, Strengthening Communities October 20 25, 2012 Tampa, Florida

Transcription

1 6 th National Conference on Coastal and Estuarine Habitat Restoration Restoring Ecosystems, Strengthening Communities October 20 25, 2012 Tampa, Florida 1

2 From There to Here and Beyond The Situation Challenges we re facing I see it, I don t believe it, give me more information Modeling Monitoring Mapping Working with local government Partnerships Moving from Oh Gee to assessing our options What if? Options Where 2

3 Systems Approach to Geomorphic Engineering (SAGE) Merging Green and Gray Solutions to Support Transforming Coastal Landscapes and Communities Investigating Living Shoreline Approaches in New Jersey Dorina Frizzera, Environmental Scientist NJDEP, Office of Science 3

4 Challenges Facing the NJ Coastline Shallow Coastal Flooding Nor easters Tropical Storms Hurricanes Storm Surge Sea Level Rise Subsidence Erosion Wind Human Alterations to the Marsh 4

5 5 Titus & Wang, 2008

6 Sea Level Rise (SLR) New Jersey SLR Trend: ~ 4 mm/year (~15.8 in/century) 1 Delaware Estuary SLR Projections: ~ in x IPCC Global SLR Projections: in x Global projections Underestimate local rates of sea level rise! 1. NOAA Sea Level Rise Trends Partnership for the Delaware Estuary Climate Change and the Delaware Estuary. P IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 6

7 Sea Level Rise Along the Delaware Bay Inundation at Mean High Higher Water 7

8 Sea Level Rise by , 1, and 1.5 meter vertical rise above MHHW Sea Level Rise + Flood Inundation Identify Vulnerable Infrastructure and Natural Resources Bathtub Model Example 8

9 DK Loss of Marsh Acreage and Health 9

10 I see it, I don t believe it, give me more information Modeling Risk varies by geographic location Evolving need for knowledge and data Rely on partnerships to collect/provide LiDAR, Tide Data, Wetlands Monitoring Mapping A new perspective ecosystem services and the economy Vulnerability Mapping Partnerships Working with local government and others 10

11 Recognition that Risk Varies 11

12 Evolving Knowledge & Continued Data Acquisition Wetland Monitoring & Assessment Installation of Sediment Elevation Tables (SETS) Mid-Atlantic Coastal Wetlands Assessment Coastal Flooding Updated FEMA NFIP FIRMS Up-to-date and more refined LiDAR Installation of New Tidal Gauges Evolving Sea Level Rise, Storm Surge Models and Nor easter Models Vulnerability Mapping Sea Level Rise Projections Regionalized Sea Level Rise Projections Regionalized Modeling Tools for Local Planners 12

13 Coastal Ecosystem Services 13

14 Coastal Vulnerability Index Identifying Susceptible Land Areas Environmental Constraint Model Classifies Variation in Natural Vulnerability Scalable to Municipal, County, State Utilizes Existing Data Sources Building upon Existing Methodologies 14

15 Coastal Vulnerability Mapping 15

16 Now that we have all this information, what happens if we do nothing? > 25% Potential loss of tidal wetlands in the Delaware River and Bay Conversion of >100,000 ha Wetlands to Water Conversion of >40,000 ha Uplands to Wetlands DK

17 Adaptation Options Protection of Natural Buffers Acquisition Regulation Structure or Zoning Setbacks Strategic Retreat Allow marsh to be converted to open water Save the marshes/wetlands were we can Adaptation Strategies such as: Managing Sediment Transport and/or Deposition (Beneficial Re-Use) Managing Water Flows (Dam Removal; Culvert Sizing) Living Shorelines - Yes, shoreline stabilization but with a green infrastructure component focus on ecosystem services. 17

18 18

19 19

20 20

21 21

22 Maurice River at its confluence with the Delaware River DK Photo Courtesy of Jeff Gebert, ACOE 22

23 Greenwich Township, Delaware Bayshore NJDEP, Coastal Management Office Coastal Community Vulnerability Mapping

24 Mussel Powered Living Shorelines for Salt Marsh Erosion Control Danielle Kreeger Partnership for the Delaware Estuary David Bushek Haskin Shellfish Research Lab Rutgers University ther Scientists: Laura Whalen, Joshua Moody and Angela Padeletti Funding: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, NJ DEP Coastal Management Program, New Jersey Sea Grant 24

25 Partnership for the Delaware Estuary Mussel Powered Living Shorelines for Salt Marsh Erosion Control Blue-Collar Bivalves Practitioner s Guide: Shellfish-Based Living Shorelines for Salt Marsh Erosion Control and Environmental Enhancement in the Mid-Atlantic Living Shorelines: Healthy Shores, Healthy Communities 25

26 NJDEP Proposed Rule Changes Authorizes habitat creation, restoration and enhancement, and living shorelines, or protection of the habitat, water quality functions and values of wetlands, wetland buffers, and open water areas. Habitat, and restoration, enhancement, and living shoreline plans are acceptable provided they are: Required by, and/or approved by and carried out by a government agency; Carried out by a government resource protection agency (Park Commission); charitable conservancy; A living shoreline project designed and/or sponsored by a federal agency or implemented by a college or university for the purposes of research. Establishing a living shoreline to protect, restore or enhance a habitat Establishes guidelines including the provision of public access; disturbance area below MHW < 1 acre; where the living shoreline is intended to restore an existing shoreline to a previous location the 26 project may not exceed the footprint of the shoreline to be restored.

27 NOAA, Coastal Management Office, NJDEP, Stevens Institute of Technology Develop a Matrix which will: Identify all factors which must be considered in assessing the viability of a living shoreline project more than just wind fetch and wave energy specific to local geography, geomorphology, development and adjacent conditions Identify the appropriate living shoreline treatment that corresponds to the factors identified; potential of cost considerations each treatment Help to inform permitting staff during review of applications Potentially inform staff and management on future modifications to permit rules and policy Allowing application for private property owners as an alternative to bulkheading and revetments Provide guidance to marine consultants 27

28 Living Shorelines for shoreline protection and habitat creation in New Jersey Issue: Shoreline Erosion and habitat loss in the Barnegat Bay Wes A. Bickford 1.2, Dorina Frizzera 1 1 Office of Coastal Management, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 2 NOAA Coastal Management Fellow Wesley.Bickford@dep.state.nj.us Step 1: Assessment of current shoreline types Step 2: Pairing shoreline types with potential Living Shorelines treatments Bulkhead Absence of Intertidal Habitat MHW MTL MLW Traditional Armored Shoreline: Bulkheads do not provide any habitat benefits and are therefore not recommended unless necessary. Bulkheads may be the only option in very high energy systems where Living Shoreline failure is likely. Left: Erosion rates based on Landuse/Land cover data over a 15 year period (NJOCM). Right: Shoreline analysis in Barnegat Bay (Lathrop & Bogner 2001). Comparison of Land use/land cover data between 1995 and 2007 shows significant shoreline erosion in the Barnegat Bay Lathrop and Bogner (2001) found that 71% of Barnegat Bay's shoreline buffer zone was developed and/or altered, leaving only 29% in natural land cover Additionally, 45% of the Barnegat Bay shoreline is impacted by bulkheads Many groups are beginning to pilot Living Shorelines projects along the bay for erosion and habitat benefits There is no standard reference aligning methods with existing shoreline types for the Barnegat Bay watershed in New Jersey Project Overview The NJOCM will determine the suitability of NJ shorelines to Living Shorelines projects The study will inform and develop a Practitioner s Guide to Living Shoreline Development in the Barnegat Bay region Will inform interested parties of the types of projects that fit their location of interest based on ecological and geophysical constraints Practitioners guide will help individuals, government agencies, and NGO s plan for the design, costs, and permits associated with Living Shorelines projects The Barnegat Bay estuary has a high diversity of shoreline types Many areas are highly developed and heavily utilized (top left) Many undeveloped wetlands share close proximity with dense development (top right) NJ OCM will perform an inventory and energy analysis of dominant shoreline types in the Barnegat Bay No dissipation of wave energy Erosion can often occur behind a bulkhead leading to failure Altering a shoreline can often have ramifications for adjacent properties. In this case, the Living Shoreline has caused a build-up of sediments transported by longshore drift Tom s River TWP, NJ Step 3: Consideration of current uses and adjacent shorelines Wave energy Mean Tide Level dissipated by breakwater References: Lathrop, R.G., and J.A. Bogner Habitat Loss and Alteration in the Barnegat Bay Region. Journal of Coastal Research 32: Berkeley TWP, NJ Direction of littoral or longshore drift must be considered Sites utilizing Living Shorelines can still support many human uses Eroded Natural Shoreline Eroded Natural Shoreline Eroded Natural Shoreline Intertidal Habitat: Tidal marsh Intertidal Habitat: Tidal marsh Intertidal Habitat: Tidal marsh Coir Fiber Log Coir Fiber Log Coir Fiber Log Sill Intertidal Habitat: SAV Breakwater MHW MTL MLW MHW MTL MLW MHW MTL MLW Soft Structural Living Shoreline: Soft designs may work for very low energy tidal creeks. They allow sediment to naturally accumulate behind coir fiber logs. Tidal marsh grasses are then planted. They likely will not withstand high wave energy. Hybrid Living Shoreline: Hybrid designs are the most versatile Living Shoreline approaches. The pair soft materials like coir fiber logs with more structural materials like rocks for breakwaters. They can provide a tremendous habitat benefit. Hybrid Living Shoreline: Depending on the wave energy at the site, hybrid projects can have a small or large structural component. Site history, erosion rates, substrate, and surroundings should also be considered in a hybrid living shoreline design. Step 4: Pilot projects in a variety of energy regimes D. Frizzera A site like the one above may benefit from a breakwater offshore to slow the energy caused by high fetch. With slowed wave energy, coir fiber logs could help to trap sediment. Depending on the sediment load, sediment may need to be brought in (e.g. dredge spoil). D. Frizzera A site like the one above is likely eroding due to high wave energy undercutting the bluff. To slow this without grading, one approach would be to create a marsh 28 sill that slows wave energy in front of the bluff. Coir fiber logs can be added against the bluff itself.

29 29

30 Mosquito Cove 30

31 Berkeley Island, Barnegat Bay 31

32 Edwin B. Forsythe, USF&WS Refuge and the Jacques Cousteau National Estuarine Research Reserve 32

33 Camden River Waterfront the Confluence of the Cooper and Delaware Rivers 33

34 Maurice River at its confluence with the Delaware River Courtesy, Jeff Gebert 34 ACOE

35 Maurice River 35

36 36

37 Our Success Will Depend on : The partnerships we build; Our ability to demonstrate that living shorelines are GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE that deliver ecosystem services; Our ability to demonstrate that living shorelines are a viable adaptation strategy that will lead to resilience; and, Our ability to move from planning to adaptation now sea level rise is not waiting for us. 37

38 38

39 Special thanks to the: Thank You. Army Corps of Engineers, SAGE Partnership for the Delaware Estuary, Dr. Danielle Kreeger Photos courtesy of ACOE, PDE, Google, DFrizzera Contact Information Dorina Frizzera Environmental Scientist, AICP NJDEP, Office of Science 39

40 40

41 41

42 42

43 43