Linking Wetland Alteration to Coastal Flooding: predictors, consequences, and policy implications



Similar documents
Tradeoffs of Ecosystem Services from Wetlands in the Houston Region

Ecosystem Services, Wetlands and Houston s Growth. Jim Lester

Association of State Flood Managers Annual Conference Wednesday, June 4, 2014

A. Flood Management in Nevada

NYSDEC Optional Additional Language Model Local Law for Flood Damage Prevention Optional Additional Language

Section 6 Benefit-Cost Analysis

Flood Emergency Response Planning: How to Protect Your Business from a Natural Disaster RIC005

Why should communities invest in resiliency? What are the steps communities can take to become more resilient?

Develop hazard mitigation policies and programs designed to reduce the impact of natural and human-caused hazards on people and property.

Saving Constituents Money on Flood Insurance Under FEMA s Community Rating System (CRS)

Flood Risk Management

Flood Risk Management

ROSE CREEK WATERSHED HYDROLOGIC, HYDRAULIC, SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, AND GEOMORPHIC ANALYSES TASK 1 EXISTING DATA AND INFORMATION SUMMARY REPORT BACKGROUND

SARASOTA COUNTY Dedicated to Quality Service

ANNEX P HAZARD MITIGATION

A Presentation to the Houston Hispanic Architects and Engineers

Liquid Capital. Cochran s Creek: A Case Study in Stream Mitigation Banking in Georgia

Lower Raritan Watershed Management Area Stormwater & Flooding Subcommittee Strategy Worksheet LRSW-S3C1

TROPICAL STORM ALLISON. Prepared by: John P. Ivey, PE, CFM Halff Associates, Inc. ASCE

Floodplain 8-Step Process in accordance with Executive Order 11988: Floodplain Management. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

ESRI_UC_2015_No843_Integrating Flood Risk Management and Salmon Habitat Restoration_CampbellSW

35 YEARS FLOOD INSURANCE CLAIMS

DECISION DOCUMENT NATIONWIDE PERMIT 27

Standardized Runoff Index (SRI)

The Changing Landscape of the National Flood Insurance Program: A Federal Perspective. Niki L. Pace *

Galveston County, TX. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) Elevation Grant Program

Flood Plain Reclamation to Enhance Resiliency Conserving Land in Urban New Jersey

SUSTAINABLE HOUSTON: DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS, IMPACTS, AND FUTURE PLANS

Tropical Storm Allison 2001

AN INITIATIVE TO IMPROVE

3. The submittal shall include a proposed scope of work to confirm the provided project description;

Guidance for Flood Risk Analysis and Mapping. Changes Since Last FIRM

Introduction to Natural Resource Damage Assessment

Section 19. Basin-wide Mitigation Action Plans

Urban Stream Restoration Defining the Full Benefits of a Project. Warren C. High MACTEC Engineering and Consulting

Climate Change. Lauma M. Jurkevics - DWR, Southern Region Senior Environmental Scientist

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and Preliminary Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for New York City

33 CFR PART 332 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION FOR LOSSES OF AQUATIC RESOURCES. Authority: 33 U.S.C. 401 et seq. ; 33 U.S.C. 1344; and Pub. L

Rhode Island NRCS received approximately $2.4 million in ARRA funds to implement four floodplain easement projects.

HAZARD VULNERABILITY & RISK ASSESSMENT

CRS State Profile: New Mexico

Flood Insurance Repetitive Loss Property

Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment

Challenges. Estimated Damages from 100-Year Flood

DEVELOPING FLOOD VULNERABILITY MAP FOR NORTH KOREA INTROUDUCTION

Effects of Land Cover, Flow, and Restoration on Stream Water Quality in the Portland, OR and Vancouver, WA Metro Area

Floodplain Connectivity in Restoration Design

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) 1. Why is the City of Tucson getting new flood hazard maps? 2. Who is responsible for modernizing the maps?

Flood Damage Prevention in Delaware County, NY

ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS 2008 to Assistant Professor, Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, present Texas A&M University

H 5478 S T A T E O F R H O D E I S L A N D

Norfolk Flooding Strategy Update. Presentation to Norfolk City Council March 27, 2012

URBAN DRAINAGE CRITERIA

MAP TYPES FLOOD HAZARD BOUNDARY MAP MAP READING & FLOOD INSURANCE STUDIES. FHBM Flood Hazard Boundary Map. FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map

Snapshots: Resilient Lands and Waters Initiative

Remaining Wetland Acreage 1,500, , ,040-39%

Vulnerability Assessment of New England Streams: Developing a Monitoring Network to Detect Climate Change Effects

Flood Zone Investigation by using Satellite and Aerial Imagery

1800 Washington Boulevard, Baltimore, MD TTY Users Larry Hogan, Governor Boyd

CLACKAMAS COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE

Pre Disaster Planning for Post Disaster Recovery: Case Studies

How To Amend A Stormwater Ordinance

CAPS Landscape Metrics November 2011

Prattsville Berm Removal Project. 1.0 Project Location

Structural Damage Due to Floods

A Research Paper by. Lessons for Wildfire from Federal Flood Risk Management Programs

COMMUNITY CERTIFICATIONS

MULTI-AGENCY COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN CHECKLIST 1

NAPA COUNTY WATERSHED SYMPOSIUM

Transcription:

Linking Wetland Alteration to Coastal Flooding: predictors, consequences, and policy implications Samuel D. Brody Sammy Zahran, Wesley Highfield, & Himanshu Grover Environmental Planning & Sustainability Research Unit Hazard Reduction & Recovery Center Department of Landscape Architecture & Urban Planning Texas A&M University, USA

Increasing Costs of Floods Remain the costliest of all hazards in U.S. Flood losses between 1975 and 1994 alone estimated at $67.5 billion (Peilke, 1996). $22 billion in flood losses from 1949-1988 in the U.S. compared to $80 billion in from 1989-1997 (Kunreuther and Roth, 1998). Presence of the built environment exacerbates losses.

Study Area: Why Texas? Consistently has the most deaths and damages from flooding of any state. Of the 42 flood events listed as causing more than $1 billion in damage between 1980 and 1998, 4 were in Texas. From 1978 to 2001, Texas suffered $2.25 billion dollars in property loss - more than California, New York and Florida combined.

Beaumont Houston Corpus Christi

Section 404 Permits: 1991-2003

Houston Area Wetland Alteration

WETLAND TYPE Texas Permit & Wetland Types PERMIT TYPE FIP LOP NWP GP TOTAL ESTUARINE SUBTIDAL 601 602 1230 755 3188 6.72% 6.73% 13.77% 8.45% 35.67% ESTUARINE INTERTIDAL 123 95 312 117 647 1.38% 1.06% 3.49% 1.31% 7.24% LACUSTRINE LINMETIC 44 7 134 125 310 0.49% 0.08% 1.50% 1.40% 3.47% LACUSTRINE LITTORAL 2 5 59 7 73 0.02% 0.06% 0.66% 0.08% 0.82% MARINE SUBTIDAL 5 2 6 2 15 0.06% 0.02% 0.07% 0.02% 0.17% MARINE INTERTIDAL 11 3 22 2 38 0.12% 0.03% 0.25% 0.02% 0.42% OUT 13 0 3 2 18 0.14% 0.00% 0.03% 0.02% 0.19% PALUSTRINE 328 118 2960 346 3752 3.67% 1.32% 33.11% 3.87% 41.97% RIVERINE TIDAL 15 59 108 151 333 0.17% 0.66% 1.21% 1.69% 3.73% RIVERINE LOWER PERENNIAL 35 48 266 206 555 0.39% 0.54% 2.98% 2.30% 6.21% RIVERINE INTERMITTENT 2 0 8 0 10 0.02% 0.00% 0.09% 0.00% 0.11% TOTAL 1179 939 5108 1713 8939 Percent of Total 13.18% 10.50% 57.16% 19.16% 100.00%

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 2003 Texas Permits Granted: 1991-2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 Nationwide Letter of Permission Individual General Denied Permits Total: 40 Percent: 0.03% 1997 1996 1995 1994 Nationwide Total: 5116 Percent: 47% General Total: 3512 Percent: 31% 1993 1992 1991 Letter of Permission Total: 1237 Percent: 11% Individual Total: 1284 Percent: 11%

Research Questions To what degree do features of the built environment affect flood damage in Texas? Do preparedness measures make a significant difference in reducing flood damage? What is the price of a wetland permit and what are the economic tradeoffs of various mitigation measures?

Research Methods Selected 37 counties in eastern Texas. 423 spatially repetitive damaging flood events. Time period: 1997-2001. Measure and map wetland alteration permits, changes in impervious surfaces, and dams for the study period. Analyzed data using multiple regression analysis using robust standard errors.

Cumulative Flood Damage from 1997-2001

Descriptive Results 423 flood events caused over $320 million in reported property damage among coastal counties. Average amount of damage per flood was $423,765.90. Majority of this damage occurred during a twoday tempest beginning October 17, 1998. Between 1997-2001, 5,922 persons were either killed or injured in a flood event.

Conceptual Model Biophysical Baseline Conditions Flood Property Damage Built Environment Variables -Wetland Alteration -Impervious Surfaces -Flood Control Structures Socioeconomic/ Policy Controls

Factors Influencing Flood Damage Natural environment variables Precipitation day of event Precipitation day before event Floodplain overlap Duration of flood Built environment variables Impervious surface Wetland alteration Number of dams Socioeconomic/Policy variables FEMA CRS rating Median household income

Factors Influencing Flood Damage Natural environment variables Precipitation day of event (+) Precipitation day before event (+) Floodplain overlap (+) Duration of flood (+) Built environment variables Impervious surface (+) Wetland alteration (+) Number of dams (-) Socioeconomic variables FEMA CRS rating (-) Median household income (+)

Conclusions: Factors influencing flooding Timing and duration of precipitation is important. Alteration of naturally occurring wetlands is the most important built environment indicator of flood damage: Large development projects (>.5 acres) Cumulative impacts from small scale wetland alteration Increased impervious surfaces

Change in Impervious Surfaces NOAA Coastal Change Analysis Program

Conclusions: Factors influencing flooding Structural solutions to flood mitigation significantly reduce flood damage, but Mitigation measures under FEMA s CRS program reduce property damage (both property and human life).

The Price of Permits 1 wetland permit = an average of $211.88 in added property damage per flood. $38,138 added damage per flood. 129 permits = flood reducing effect of dams. Real unit increase in CRS rating = $38,989 reduction in average cost per flood. Maximum premium discount reduces average flood cost to less than a quarter.

Social Vulnerability Analyzed 832 flood events at the county scale in Texas. 99 counties from 1997 to 2001. Do high percentages of socially vulnerable populations experience significantly more casualties from flood events? Analyzed data using Zero-Inflated Negative Binomial Model.

Social Vulnerability: Results Increase in composition of socially vulnerable populations increases the odds of casualty by 42.4 percent. For every real unit increase in FEMA premium discount, the odds of death and injury decrease by 36.05 percent. An increase in the number of dams decreases the odds of a flood casualty by 21.6 percent. Precipitation the day of a flood event increases the odds of a casualty by 24.7 percent.

http://epsru.tamu.edu Research supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation Grant No. CMS- 0346673

Flood Damage & Wetland Permits Galveston County April 1997: 0.10 inches = $5,000 damage 546 permits Sept. 2000: 0.10 inches = $100,000 damage 921 permits Brazoria County June 1997:1.5 inches = $5,000 damage 356 permits Aug. 2001:1.5 inches = $500,000 damage 615 permits Harris County April 1997: 3.6 inches = $131,000 damage 685 permits May 2000:1.3 inches = $200,000 damage 1217 permits

Examining the Relationship Between Wetland Alteration & Watershed Flooding: Coastal Texas & Florida Samuel D. Brody & Wesley E. Highfield Environmental Planning & Sustainability Research Unit Department of Landscape Architecture & Urban Planning Texas A&M University

Study Area

Research Questions What is the spatial pattern of wetland development in Florida and coastal Texas from 1991 to 2002? To what degree does wetland alteration exacerbate coastal watershed flooding?

Research Objectives Geo-reference and analyze federal wetland permits within watersheds between 1991 & 2002. Measure flooding across 85 watersheds using stream gauge data provided by the USGS. Describe the spatial & statistical pattern of wetland development. Measure the impact of wetland alteration on watershed flooding while controlling for other factors.

Permit Types Individual Permits Letter of Permission Nationwide Permits General Permits - 36,465 geocoded permits -

Wetland Permits by Type Nationwide Individual Letter of Permission General Total Permits Texas 0.51 0.09 0.09 0.30 0.30 Florida 0.62 0.13 0.06 0.19 0.70 Total 0.59 0.12 0.07 0.22 1.00

Factors Influencing Watershed Flooding Physical environmental Precipitation Topography Stream-length Watershed area Human-induced environmental change Wetland alteration permits Dams Land use change Socioeconomic & demographic Median household Income population density

Permit Types and Watershed Flooding Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-value Significance Nationwide Permits.0018.0062 0.29 0.769 Individual Permits.0598.0202 2.96 0.004 Letters of Permission -.1032.0415-2.49 0.015 General Permits.0204.0045 4.51 0.000 State -4.8607 3.0113-1.61 0.110 Constant 32.5597 2.7137 12.00 0.000 R 2 = 0.1142 n = 85 F(5, 79) = 7.10 p = 0.000

Permit Types and Watershed Flooding with Contextual Controls Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-value Significance Nationwide Permits -0.0047 0.0066-0.72 0.4720 Individual Permits 0.0826 0.0363 2.27 0.0260 Letter of Permission -0.1656 0.0509-3.25 0.0020 General Permits 0.0200 0.0075 2.66 0.0100 State -20.4130 3.7493-5.44 0.0000 Area 0.0008 0.0012 0.66 0.5150 Slope -1.8770 1.7153-1.09 0.2780 Stream Length 0.0000 0.0000 0.21 0.8340 Precipitation 0.4902 0.0728 6.73 0.0000 Median Household Income -0.0003 0.0002-1.42 0.1590 Population Density -0.0038 0.0106-0.35 0.7250 Impervious Surface Change 0.1801 0.1069 1.68 0.0960 Dams -0.0642 0.0816-0.79 0.4340 Constant -2.0757 10.0121-0.21 0.8360 n = 85 F(13, 71) = 5.26; p = 0.000

Conclusions: Factors influencing flooding Large development projects (>.5 acres) Cumulative impacts from small scale wetland alteration Minor disturbances (<.2 acres) or restoration projects Precipitation remains the greatest predictor Increased impervious surfaces Wealthy communities

Future Research Position of wetland alteration: Proximity to water segment Upstream/downstream In/out of floodplain Improved flooding measures Gauge height Reported damages