Defenders of Wildlife Blog

Noah Matson, Vice President of Landscape Conservation and Climate Adaptation

Storm damage in New Jersey

When Superstorm Sandy swept ashore in late October, it left an almost unimaginable level of damage: thousands of residents still displaced, entire communities destroyed and an economic toll that promises to make Sandy one of the costliest natural disasters in history. But it also swept away our illusions that we can carry on with business as usual in a changing climate.

Sandy exposed incredible vulnerabilities to coastal storms and floods in the region. While the storm was unprecedented, the effects of climate change, namely higher sea levels and larger storms, mean that we can no longer operate as if a recurrence is only a remote possibility.  It’s clear that we cannot simply rebuild; we must also rethink the way we approach recovery efforts, and begin to prepare for future extreme weather events and sea level rise by rebuilding in a way that makes us less vulnerable to future damage.

Defenders of Wildlife has argued that in many cases, this will require restoring and enhancing natural ecosystems that provide flood control and storm surge attenuation while also providing other benefits including clean water, wildlife habitat, and economic and recreational opportunities.  Our publication “Harnessing Nature,” published earlier this year, describes several of these projects and the benefits they can provide.

After a disaster of Sandy’s magnitude, the need for federal assistance to help the region recover could not be more apparent or more urgent. The U.S. Senate has responded by putting forth a $60 billion emergency funding bill, and we are pleased to see that it shows tremendous foresight in its recognition of the role that coastal ecosystems can play in protecting communities from weather-related disasters. The funding bill helps accomplish this by providing:

Storm surge damage at Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge (Credit: USFWS Northeast)

•    $78 million to restore and repair national wildlife refuges.  Thirty-five refuges were closed following the storm and some still remain closed. The overall damage to refuges was equivalent to 16% of the System’s overall annual budget – but would’ve been much worse if not for the natural protection provided by refuge wetlands and dunes. These funds will help shore up these natural defenses and repair facilities so that visitors can return.

•    Nearly $350 million to restore and protect coastal and estuarine habitats, like dunes and salt marshes. Habitat restoration in coastal areas will help buffer communities from storms and recover fisheries- and coastal habitat-based economies. Some of this money will allow acquisition or easements of important natural areas, so they are protected from development and can continue to provide flood and storm protection benefits to communities in addition to their ecological, recreational and economic value.

•    $125 million to help restore and protect storm-abating wetlands on farmland land and other private lands.  This program provides funding to remove debris from stream channels, stabilize stream banks and restore damaged uplands stripped of protective vegetative cover, thus reducing flood risk. The program also funds easements to reduce development along river floodplains, reducing risk to people and property while also conserving habitat and improving water quality.

•    Funds to plan and construct flood-reducing projects that support the long-term sustainability of coastal ecosystems: This money will help different agencies work together to identify people and places that are vulnerable to flooding. It also provides $2.9 billion to the Army Corps of Engineers to “reduce future flood risk in ways that will support the long-term sustainability of the coastal ecosystem and communities.”  The bill also requires the Army Corps to reevaluate previously authorized projects in light of recent extreme weather events, as well as scientific projections of future climate-related risks.

The general provisions of the funding bill also require federal agencies to plan for future risks of increased extreme weather events and sea level rise in all recovery efforts. This is really a paradigm shift that could get the country on the road to re-thinking instead of just rebuilding.

Before and after images of flood damage from Hurricane Sandy at Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge (Credit: USFWS)

Unfortunately, as is common with these kinds of “must-pass bills,” a few bad provisions have been slipped in. We strongly oppose two measures that would limit environmental review and public participation, which may lead to poor planning, communities more vulnerable to disaster risks and many other concerns:

•    The bill authorizes any Army Corps flood protection project that is under study (i.e. any project throughout the nation that was begun before Hurricane Sandy) provided that the Corps demonstrates the project is cost-effective. This would allow projects to move forward even if they have serious environmental problems, like impacts to endangered wildlife.

•    It also unnecessarily implements “streamlining” that would allow circumventing environmental laws when providing disaster assistance. The individual laws in question (The Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act) already include emergency provisions that allow for expedited reviews and procedural changes to protect human health and safety in response to disasters and emergencies. There is no need to open the door to blanket waivers of environmental laws.

We believe this essential funding will provide much-needed relief to the victims of this devastating hurricane.  If Congress retains the forward-thinking provisions and strikes the ones that waive public interest requirements, we’ll get a bill that will not only help the region recover, but will also reduce its vulnerabilities to future extreme climate-related events and the enormous loss of lives and livelihoods these events bring.

A few years ago the road stretched beyond the guardrail.

The road just ended. Literally. The van we were in pulled right up to the steel highway railing, beyond which lay some crumbled asphalt, a short spit of beach, and the wide open expanse of Delaware Bay. There was no parking lot, no cul-de-sac to turn around; just unfinished road and a steel barrier.

Only a few years ago the end of the road was farther out. So was the sea. And decades ago, the water’s edge was hundreds of yards out, evidenced by an old WWII-era pier, whose remnant pilings jutted way out in the now open water. This coastline was changing, and changing fast.

Our group of conservation organizations and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service staff spilled out of the van. Standing on the shores of the Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge, one of the largest protected areas in the state of Delaware, we were on a trip to better understand the issues facing the coastal national wildlife refuges of Delaware and the eastern shore of Virginia. We followed refuge manager Michael Stroeh down the beach, tripping over old stems and roots of marsh grasses and shrubs that poked through the sand as reminders of what was here only a few short years before. It was April, and though the region had experienced the warmest March on record, the wind was biting cold. I cinched the hood of my wind breaker over my head as we stopped our jaunt up the beach.

All aboard the airboat!

Prime Hook is divided into three units, separated by roads that run from the inland to the coast. The roads also serve as dikes. In the 1980s, to make up for lost freshwater wetlands elsewhere, the Fish and Wildlife Service used the dikes to make a wetland impoundment system, managing the water levels to convert the once tidal, saltwater marshes into freshwater marshes – better habitat for migrating ducks, geese, and shorebirds. But once considered an innovative solution, this system now makes the refuge extremely vulnerable to the effects of sea-level rise and increased storm surge.

Taking to the water

We boarded an airboat for the next part of our tour. (If you have never been on an airboat, they are LOUD, even with earplugs and [slightly rusty] external ear protection.) I reminded myself that I was still outside, in nature, at a national wildlife refuge, on the water—rare for a D.C.-based conservationist.

We skipped across the water to the interior of the marsh. We were in the middle of a 4,000 acre wetland that used to be full of emergent vegetation. But where marsh grasses should have surrounded us, it was open water in every direction. The marsh was gone.

“In 2009, a Veteran’s Day Storm created the inlet and brought in the slug of sand and saltwater with its storm surge, killing all of the freshwater vegetation,” explained Susan Guiteras, the refuge’s supervisory biologist. “If we had been able to close the inlet quickly, we may have been able to change the salinity and reestablish the marsh plants. But that would have only been a temporary fix anyway. Once the freshwater plants died, their roots couldn’t hold the marsh muck together, so the peat just washed away, deepening the water to a depth that even saltwater-tolerant plants could not establish.” The habitat had simply washed away.

Prime Hook refuge provides important habitat for migratory birds.

Preparing for the future

The scenario at Prime Hook reflects a broader challenge for refuges in a warming world: as the climate changes, we can no longer count on protected areas delivering the same benefits and habitats they once did. Conservationists need to understand how the impacts in one place affect species and ecosystems over a much larger area, and what can be done to help them adapt to those changes.

Fortunately, the refuge has been working closely with the state of Delaware to strategize about conserving the entire “Bayshore” landscape, planning how to slowly transition the freshwater reservoirs into more resilient saltwater systems to avoid a catastrophic loss from a future storm. Federal and state agencies, conservation groups and other partners are beginning to follow suit, mapping out existing conservation areas, developing shared conservation priorities, and partnering to achieve those priorities across the landscape.

Prime Hook is just one of the first refuges to experience these changes in such a dramatic way. There are over 160 coastal national wildlife refuges across the country. These areas need to begin taking steps to prepare for the changes to come. And with waters inching up along our coasts all the time, there isn’t a moment to waste.

Learn more:

For more information about the impacts of sea-level rise on national wildlife refuges, and recommendations to help them prepare, see Defenders’ recently-released report: National Wildlife Refuges and Sea-Level Rise: Lessons from the Frontlines.

Flooding after Hurricane Katrina

As pointed out in several analyses of the Hurricane Katrina tragedy, the hurricane was no natural disaster – it was a disaster created by ineffective institutions before, during and after the storm.

Some of the most important decisions that left New Orleans vulnerable to an event like Katrina were made by the Army Corps of Engineers, the nation’s lead agency on levee construction and flood control.  Studies show New Orleans was at risk to flooding and storm surge from hurricanes prior to the storm hitting, yet the Corps and many other political players and agencies failed to take those warnings into account when designing, building and maintaining the hurricane protection system.

“The Homeland Security Committee’s investigation of the Hurricane Katrina disaster showed the catastrophic consequences of being ill-prepared for a natural disaster. Our more recent hearing revealed that federal programs have not taken climate change into account in their underwriting or budgets.  It is absolutely critical that the Army Corps prepare for the potential impacts of global climate change, which are expected to include increased droughts, floods, and more intense hurricanes.” –Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), 2007

The Army Corps has instituted many reforms since Katrina.  One, its “Responding to Climate Change” program, seeks to help the Corps be science-based and forward-looking to anticipate future natural disasters and climate risks like sea level rise.  But in the third installment of its reckless attacks on the federal government preparing for climate risks, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a rider to the 2012 Energy and Water spending bill that strips funding for this critical program.  Given the Army Corp’s responsibilities for flood and coastal protection, this amendment puts communities at increased risk of flood and storm damage.

Rep. Rob Woodall (R-GA), who sponsored the amendment, charged that climate change was not in the Army Corps’ mission. Yet climate change directly threatens the agency’s mission – to “Provide vital public engineering services in peace and war to strengthen our Nation’s security, energize the economy, and reduce risks from disasters.”  Apparently Rep. Woodall and the 218 other representatives who approved the rider don’t think the Army Corps should be thinking about how we prepare for future Hurricane Katrinas.

The Woodall rider will cost us in dollars and lives.  The Senate should reject it outright.

Learn more about the importance of a broad, comprehensive strategy to preparing for the impacts of climate change.

Forest fire, courtesy USDA

In a disturbing trend of attacking the government’s ability to prepare for climate risks, the House passed an amendment to the fiscal 2012 agriculture spending bill that would prohibit the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) from implementing new regulations on climate change adaptation.  This amendment puts the nation at increased risk of food disruptions, forest fires and huge economic losses.

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), who introduced the amendment, bizarrely claimed USDA’s climate adaptation policy was somehow a “backdoor door attempt to put a cap-and-trade program in place in the Department of Agriculture.”

Far from it. The commonsense USDA policy says only that agencies should plan for that future in a way that will prevent food disruptions, massive forest fires and economic hardships. It reads, “Through adaptation planning, USDA will develop, prioritize, implement and evaluate actions to minimize climate risks and exploit new opportunities that climate change will bring.”

The nation is still immersed in intense weather and climate-related disasters – from the Mississippi flood, to the Texas drought, to the Arizona fire.  Some of these extreme events are happening in the same place.

“I can’t get my crop out of one side of the levee because it’s too dry and I’ve lost my crop on the other side of the levee because it’s floating away,” said George Lacour, 48, of Morganza, Louisiana. The state is bearing the brunt of much of the Mississippi flood as well as a state-wide severe drought.

Looking at the past record would not have prepared anyone for the devastating weather events this year – and the future is going to be different yet. Don’t we want our government to be planning for those changes?

The conditions we are seeing this year are breaking records.  According to Texan Matt Farmer, ”It’s as dry as I’ve ever seen it in my lifetime. I don’t remember a drought this widespread. I’ve got a lot of country that’s blowing, but I can’t do a thing about it.”

This year’s events are also consistent with the conditions researchers project are coming with climate change.  Looking at the past record would not have prepared anyone for the devastating weather events this year – and the future is going to be different yet. Don’t we want our government to be planning for those changes?

Flooded farmland, courtesy USDA

Jamie Rappaport Clark, executive vice president for Defenders of Wildlife, said, “America’s farms, forests and ranchlands not only feed our country, but also help support abundant and diverse wildlife populations. Our food security, property and wildlife heritage are all at risk from increased frequency and severity of heat waves, droughts, floods, fires and pests.

“Rep. Scalise and the 237 other members of the House are inhibiting the USDA’s ability to help farmers and forest owners and managers prepare for a future that includes more of the extreme weather events we have just experienced this spring. The future is not going to be the same as the past. This commonsense USDA policy says let’s plan for that future in a way that will prevent food disruptions, massive forest fires and economic hardships.”

The Senate should do right by the country’s farmers, forests and the people and wildlife that rely on them, and reject this amendment.

Learn more:

Read about Congress’ June 3 vote to put the lives, livelihoods, property and security of Americans at increased risk.

Learn more about the importance of a broad, comprehensive strategy to preparing for the impacts of climate change.

Courtesy FWS

Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a rider on the fiscal 2012 Department of Homeland Security spending bill that would prohibit the Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) from participating in the administration’s Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force.  This amendment puts the nation at increased risk to lives, livelihoods, property and security and could end up costing taxpayers untold sums of money by preventing DHS from preparing for those risks.

The rider was championed by Rep. John Carter (R-TX), who charged that DHS should be focusing spending on securing the nation and not duplicating efforts of other agencies like EPA and NOAA.  Unfortunately, Rep. Carter and the other members who voted for the amendment don’t appear to understand the diversity of functions and agencies in DHS, nor the risks they face with increased climate change and variability. To provide just two examples, DHS includes the U.S. Coast Guard and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency).

Just days before the Carter rider passed, Coast Guard Rear Admiral Thomas Ostebo toured part of the Arctic Ocean off Barrow, Alaska to look at and discuss the challenges of the loss of sea ice due to climate change and the subsequent increased shipping, tourist cruises, oil drilling and other activity off the Alaska coast.  The Rear Admiral pointed out the Coast Guard has no capacity to patrol or rescue in the area.  As reported in the Arctic Sounder:

“The Coast Guard doesn’t have any publicly assigned assets (in the Arctic). None. Zero,” Ostebo said.

There’s no air station. No facilities to house men. The Coast Guard owns a single, aging icebreaker that’s based in Seattle and now headed to Alaska, the Healy.

“How exactly would we mitigate the damage from the mishap? How would we rescue all those people? Where would we take them?”

“If you take 100 people in a mass casualty to Barrow, then what? They obviously don’t have the infrastructure to take care of that, so where would you take them for advanced medical care? How would you respond to the salvage of a vessel?”

Apparently, the 242 members of the House who voted for the Carter rider don’t think the Coast Guard should be guarding our most northern coast.

Or take FEMA.  FEMA has been awfully busy the last few months with tragic tornadoes, devastating floods and rampant wild fires.  The overall heating up of the planet is changing regional climate systems, making the climate, and subsequent weather, more variable and intense – intense storms and intense drought leading to worse floods, fires and other impacts.  The recent Mississippi flood was the worst on record.  Clearly, the agency charged with both insuring against flood risk and responding to natural disasters should prepare for events larger and more severe than recent history.  Better preparation would save money and lives in disaster response.

But the 242 members of the House who voted for the Carter rider only want FEMA to prepare for disasters like the ones we have already had and not plan for what might come. They also don’t want FEMA to coordinate with other agencies on this type of planning, since that was a central role of the DHS Climate Adaptation Task Force.

The Carter rider will cost us in dollars and lives.  The Senate should reject it outright.

Learn more about the importance of a broad, comprehensive strategy to preparing for the impacts of climate change.

Restored marsh at Blackwater NWR (area inside stakes used to be open water) Photo courtesy Noah Matson

Two years ago I had the opportunity to visit Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge on the eastern shore of Maryland with a few other Defenders colleagues.  The refuge, at over 27,000 acres, is one of the largest protected areas in the state, and is famous among birders and local residents for its large concentrations of migrating waterfowl and shorebirds, bald eagles, and is also home to the endangered Delmarva fox squirrel.  Since the 1930’s, however, Blackwater has lost over 8,000 acres of marsh from a combination of sea level rise, subsidence, and the impact of invasive nutria that eat marsh grass and contribute to erosion.

It isn’t the only coastal refuge attempting to stave off rising waters. Two hundred miles south from Blackwater lies the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge.  Made up of “pocosin,” a type of forested wetland found in the coastal plain of eastern North Carolina, the refuge is home to the only wild population of endangered red wolves in the world.  Most projections of sea level rise put a large portion of the refuge under water in the next 50 years.

As stewards of protected areas and wildlife populations, we have to ask – why does it matter if these places go under water? If they disappear, where will the wildlife that rely on these protected places go?

These situations have been met with drastic measures. At Alligator River, refuge staff, the Nature Conservancy and other partners are implementing measures to slow coastal erosion and salt water intrusion in order to protect forests and marshes. And the Blackwater refuge has restored 20 acres of marsh by experimenting with a dredger to spray mud onto former marsh to raise the marsh bed, followed by planting marsh grasses to stabilize the soil. A decade later that marsh remains. Unfortunately, the refuge continues to lose 300 acres per year. So the refuge staff has an audacious proposal: barge or pipe mud and soil from the dredging of the Baltimore harbor approach channel in the Chesapeake Bay to the refuge to repeat the marsh restoration on thousands of acres, a cost of over a billion dollars.

As stewards of protected areas and wildlife populations, we have to ask – why does it matter if these places go under water? If they disappear, where will the wildlife that rely on these protected places go? These are questions an individual refuge manager cannot answer alone.

With the loss of Alligator River, endangered red wolves may have nowhere to go.

In preparing wildlife and natural resources for the impacts of climate change, we must take a big-picture view. Before zeroing in on a particular place, we need new tools and institutions to help policy makers, managers and scientists work together to understand how wildlife and habitats will respond to the impacts of climate change regionally and across jurisdictional boundaries. The Obama administration has launched a number of initiatives that hold some promise for achieving this goal, creating the Landscape Conservation Cooperatives and crafting a National Fish, Wildlife, and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy. It isn’t everything we need, but it’s a start.

Keeping Blackwater and Alligator River from sinking into the sea – and protecting all of our refuges from the impacts of climate change – is critical. We need to do so in the context of addressing the much bigger task before us, figuring out how to help prepare entire systems of wildlife and habitat for the impacts of a not-so-slowly changing world.

Learn more:

Learn more about the threats facing Alligator River, and the measures being taken to save it, in the NPR piece, A Struggle to Fight Back the Sea.

Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge is the first national wildlife refuge in the nation to develop a comprehensive strategy to adapt to sea-level rise. Read more about the efforts the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are taking to rescue the refuge from rising seas.

See how Defenders is working to protect wildlife and protected lands from the threats of climate change.