If Marin is to adapt to rising tide levels--we need a sea change in attitude
5/11/11
Wetlands and marshes, once dismissed as the province of nature enthusiasts and environmentalists, can be a key to protecting residents, development and commercial interests along the shores of San Francisco Bay.
"I look at tidal wetlands as about as close to magic as you're ever going to get when you're dealing with sea-level rise," says Will Travis, executive director of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. "All wetlands are wonderful for flood protection. They soak up floodwater and they absorb wave energy. And they actually sequester carbon. I know of nothing else that fits both categories: reducing greenhouse gases and adapting to the impacts of climate change that we can't reduce or eliminate."
A spate of recent reports places an increased emphasis on the importance of wetlands in the Bay Area, including Marin. The San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association issued an assessment of the consequences of a rising sea level and concludes that elected officials, business leaders and residents should waste no time in hunkering down and to create concrete plans to meet the environmental, health and economic impacts of rising water levels and climate change. The report, titled "Climate Change Hits Home," emphasizes the critical need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Each time scientists assess the consequences of sea-level rise it seems to get increasingly dire, says Sam Schuchat, executive director of the California Coastal Conservancy and chair of the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority. Schuchat says implications of sea-level rise haven't hit home with most Bay Area residents--yet. "Flood control and sea-level rise are not things that (people) worry about, unless they live in a place like downtown Napa, where it floods." But, adds Schuchat, the consequences of sea-level rise, and recent reports that posit the levels may be rising higher than anticipated, are making a big impression on "people who think about this stuff all the time."
One of those recent reports comes from the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme, the science body of the eight-nation Arctic Council; it estimated that the ice in Greenland and the Arctic is melting faster than anticipated and could play a crucial role in increasing the sea level by as much as five feet by the end of this century. In this updated assessment, using the latest research techniques, scientists predict that melting ice, including the massive Greenland ice sheet, could contribute to a sea-level rise that tops 35 to 63 inches by 2100. Add to that some recently reported findings from scientists at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography who say that although California was spared from sea-level rise during recent decades stretching back to the 1970s, that reprieve may be finished.
Sea-level rise is far from uniform across the world's oceans. Wind patterns and ocean currents play a significant role in creating uneven sea levels. Wind affects upwelling in the ocean along the California coast, and that wind blows in cycles--called the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. When the wind blows stronger, which it has since the mid-1970s, it creates a condition that allows cooler water to rise from the deep Pacific, ocean upwelling. When the wind pattern abates, the upwelling also abates and allows the upper-level ocean to warm. Warm water takes up more space than cold water--and that means the sea-level rises. The Scripps scientists say wind patterns look as though they may be shifting. If that happens, it could exacerbate the effects for California of the sea-level rise that the Arctic scientists predict.
This confluence of consequences has prompted the Conservation and Development Commission to take a new look at its San Francisco Bay Plan, which delineates policies for development along the shoreline of San Francisco Bay--including San Pablo Bay. The new guidelines will "take sea-level rise into account," according to Travis. In addition, the Conservation and Development Commission is working with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission "on a regional strategy that integrates greenhouse gas reduction and adaption to those impacts that we can't reduce or eliminate." ABAG chooses the board of the Restoration Authority, which currently has a North Bay vacancy following the death of Supervisor Charles McGlashan.
Much of the hard work to implement strategies to combat greenhouse gas and prepare for sea-level rise will take place in Bay Area counties, cities and towns. The participation of dozens of area agencies, local governments, businesses and residents would create a paradigm of regional planning. Nothing less is needed to prevent the impacts of sea-level rise from cutting into the quality of live and commerce in the Bay Area, say officials in the forefront of the effort. The immense scope of the effort needed is clear when looking at a map of wetlands in the bay and the expected rise in sea level. Lacking action in the North Bay, the level of water now expected would create new shorelines moved inland from Sausalito all the way north to Novato and over to Sonoma and Solano counties. Anyone who's parked a car in the Manzanita park-and-ride lot on an especially high tide knows the consequences of a rising sea level. The historic flood in the 1980s was made much worse because of an especially high tide, which pushed water right up Miller Avenue. In San Rafael, water inundated the downtown area, leaving just the tops of street signs visible. In a rising sea-level scenario, that high-tide consequence has an obvious impact that requires protecting shorelines, including existing marshes in danger of inundation. In Marin, the wetlands restoration at Hamilton is a notable project in part because it illustrates thenecessity to add material when restoring some marshes. When a marsh is paved or left dry the land sinks and can no longer support wetlands. Material must be added to raise the level of the land to a sufficient height to promote a renewed marsh.
Travis says it's important to understand the new shorelines projected in recent reports "are not areas that [definitely will be areas that are under water. They are maps showing low-lying areas around the bay that are vulnerable to sea-level rise. Some of those areas may be protected already. Other areas can be protected to a 55-inch level (sea-level rise) with some protective devices." Travis says the maps show "not the future that we are predicting; that is the future we are trying to prevent."
One of the methods to prevent that scenario builds on the push to restore wetlands and marshes that once ringed San Francisco Bay. Today, only about 5 percent of the original wetlands remain, and that 5 percent is under constant threat of development and pollution. But the alarm over sea-level rise is giving new impetus to the call to protect wetlands and increase their acreage.
The effort to protect wetlands received a real boost when Save the Bay formed in 1961 after three East Bay women, Kay Kerr, Sylvia McLaughlin and Esther Gulick, mobilized to stop a plan in Berkeley to double its size by filling in the bay. Save the Bay was instrumental in the creation of the Conservation and Development Commission, "which we helped create in 1965 to prevent wholesale filling in of the bay," says Save the Bay's executive director David Lewis. In 2008, Save the Bay sponsored AB 2954, which created the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority. That legislation gave the governing board of the Restoration Authority the responsibility to explore, promote and coordinate methods and mechanisms to raise money on a local and regional scale that will go toward restoring wetlands on more than 36,000 acres already in public ownership.
Scientists estimate that to remain healthy, the bay needs 100,000 acres of tidal wetlands. In 1999, only about 40,000 acres remained. Another 36,000 acres already are owned by the public and can be restored--if sufficient funds are provided. Restoring those 36,000 acres will cost up to $1.43 billion over 50 years. Adding that to the current 40,000 acres of wetlands puts the 100,000-acre goal in sight, according to the Restoration Authority. Advocates hope to purchase additional acreage to put into the public trust to reach that ultimate goal.
State and federal money currently exists to help meet the goals of the Restoration Authoritybut considering budget climates, ongoing state and federal funding (and some private funding from foundations) is far from certain. "You can't count on any of this money from year to year," says Schuchat. "You're subject to whether the state is
selling bonds and (vicissitudes of the) federal budget, and so on."
That's where the idea of a regional property tax comes into the picture. The Restoration Authority is investigating whether Bay Area property owners are willing to pay about $20 a year to help restore wetlands along the bay. "If we could get some local money, we could count on it every year," says Schuchat. "It would be in addition to what's already available, and presumably it would be reliable. The amount would not be huge, but having money that is reliable is, I think, what makes it attractive. And, of course, it would serve as matching money."
Any move to raise tax money to restore wetlands would go to voters for approval. In a telephone poll conducted in the summer of 2010, 35 percent of respondents said they would definitely support a $25 parcel tax; 30 percent said they were leaning toward support. (Asked whether they would support a quarter-cent sales tax, 29 percent said they would definitely support it; 27 percent said they were leaning toward support.) The parcel tax proposal, the most realistic, came right up to the edge of a two-thirds approval margin.
Schuchat notes that the Restoration Authority has polled only up to a $25 parcel tax, which seems to be the limit of voter acceptance. "My guess is that if we do anything, it's going to be less than that, and we may not do anything in 2012. That's the earliest that the Restoration Authority could get something on a ballot. The Restoration Authority plans to conduct additional polling and by autumn decide whether to move forward in 2012. The state of the economy and the political temperature of the electorate will affect the decision."
The question about whether spending money on wetlands is a wise investment in a down economy is sure to enter the debate. In the poll, property owners seem to agree that if they know the facts about sea-level rise and how wetlands can protect shorelines--for flora, fauna, residential development and business--they may be willing to support a tax proposal.
Money raised will go toward projects already on a list "consistent with the selection criteria of the Coastal Conservancy and other organizations that protect the health and economy of the bay." Acting sooner rather than later has distinct environmental and economic advantages when it comes to combating sea-level rise, says Lewis. "Wetlands provide much less expensive and effective shoreline protection than sea walls or rock levees because wetlands can act as sponges during high tides and floods."
As Travis says, it's like magic.
