Projected Climate Change and Impacts for the North Olympic Peninsula
A document prepared as part of the North Olympic Peninsula Resource Conservation
and Development Council’s project; Planning for Climate Change on the North Olympic
Peninsula
December 2014
1
The Planning for Climate Change in the North Olympic Peninsula project is funded by
a grant from the State of Washington Departments of Ecology and Commerce,
through a National Estuary Program Puget Sound Watershed Protection and
Restoration Grant.
2
Table of Contents
A.
1.
2.
3.
Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 4
The North Olympic Peninsula Context .........................................................................................4
The Need to Plan for Climate Change on the North Olympic Peninsula .........................5
Observed and Projected Climate Trends in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) ...................6
a)
b)
c)
B.
Climate Change on the North Olympic Peninsula ........................................................ 18
1. Existing planning and projection reports (state and regional level) ............................ 18
2. IPCC impact schematic: systems, drivers, impacts ............................................................... 19
3. Collaborative Scoping Process: Focus Areas........................................................................... 22
a)
b)
C.
Core Team Assembly, Interviews, Meetings, Solicitation .............................................................. 22
Four Focus Areas: Systems, Drivers, Impacts ..................................................................................... 22
Exploring North Olympic Peninsula Vulnerabilities .................................................. 28
a)
b)
2.
3.
4.
5.
Invitations, Organization, Process of the First Round of Workshops ....................................... 28
Vulnerability Exercise: Sensitivity and Adaptive Capacity ........................................................... 30
COMMUNITY VITALITY ................................................................................................................... 36
a)
b)
D.
Temperature; Trends and Extremes ......................................................................................................... 7
Precipitations; Trends, Extremes, Hydrology ....................................................................................... 9
Oceans: Sea-level Rise Scenarios, Sea-surface Temperature, Acidification, .......................... 10
(1) Base Sea Level Rise Projections ........................................................................................................ 10
(2) Local Estimates of Vertical Land Movement ............................................................................... 11
(3) Local Relative Sea Level Projections ............................................................................................... 13
(4) Incorporating an Estimate of Intermittent Storm Impacts ................................................... 14
(5) Limitations of This Approach ............................................................................................................. 15
(6) Sea Surface Temperature Increases and Ocean Acidification ............................................. 16
Relevant Climate Projections ..................................................................................................................... 36
Draft Vulnerabilities and Prioritization Matrix.................................................................................. 39
WATER RESOURCES ......................................................................................................................... 45
a)
b)
Relevant Climate Projections ..................................................................................................................... 45
Draft Vulnerabilities and Prioritization Matrix.................................................................................. 47
NATURAL AND MANAGED ECOSYSTEMS ................................................................................ 55
a)
b)
Relevant Climate Projections ..................................................................................................................... 55
Draft Vulnerabilities and Prioritization Matrix.................................................................................. 58
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ....................................................................................................... 66
a)
b)
Relevant Climate Projections ..................................................................................................................... 66
Draft Vulnerabilities and Prioritization Matrix.................................................................................. 73
Prioritizing Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Planning .............................................. 81
1. Workshop Participant Review; Ongoing Data Gathering .................................................. 81
E. Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... 82
1. Glossary .................................................................................................................................................. 82
2. GIS Mapping and Analysis .............................................................................................................. 83
F. References.................................................................................................................................. 91
3
A.
Introduction
1.
The North Olympic Peninsula Context
Climate change is occurring and shifting regional climate and weather patterns towards
an uncertain future. Despite the ongoing scientific consensus on the scope and scale of
climate change impacts at the global and national level, regional experiences have not
received a comparable degree of research attention1. The Pacific Northwest (PNW) of
the United States has historically experienced a climate founded in the interface of the
North Pacific Ocean, North American Continent, and the tectonic forces that maintain
that boundary. The Olympic Peninsula in Washington State is in many ways the epitome
of that interface, representing the first coastline, mountain range, and population
centers when travelling eastward from the ocean into the continent. Its historical
climate travelling from west to east reflects this unique setting, with wet outer western
coastlines, heavy precipitation in the coastal Olympic Mountains, more mild interior
waterways and lowlands, and drier areas sitting in the eastern rainshadow of the
Olympic Mountains. This report focuses on the North Olympic Peninsula (NOP), the
region defined by the flow of water from the Olympic Mountains north to the Strait of
Juan de Fuca and north eastward to Puget Sound.
Figure 1. The North Olympic Peninsula is defined for the purposes of this project as the region whose
terrestrial waters flow to the Stait of Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound
The North Olympic Peninsula is home to two counties, three major population centers,
and numerous unincorporated areas. The counties represented in the project area
include Clallam County and Jefferson County, except for their western edges along the
outer coast. The three major centers of commerce from west to east in the region are
Port Angeles (19,038 persons), Sequim (6,606 persons), and Port Townsend (9,113
persons)2. However, these numbers do not reflect the distribution of population in the
4
satellite areas around each of these hubs. These rural and unincorporated areas will be
considered through their own specific climate change vulnerabilities throughout this
report. Generally, population density in the region increases from west to east, with the
eastern edge of the region seeing the greatest settlement influence from the urban
centers of Seattle and Tacoma.
Ecosystems on the North Olympic Peninsula are rich and varied and include functional
alpine and sub alpine zones, coastal rainforest, river habitat spanning from the
mountains to the sea, broad floodplain influenced lowlands suitable for agriculture,
nearshore and ocean influenced marine habitat, estuaries, sandspits, and protected
bays. Humans have impacted these ecosystems, with the region seeing intensive fishing,
logging, dam and levee construction, and land conversion to agricultural, residential,
and industrial purposes. Specific aspects of these ecosystems, their human influence,
and ultimate impacts of climate change will be covered in this report.
Some fundamental climate change and extreme weather risks to the Pacific Northwest
have been increasingly detailed by researchers, mostly centering around: changes in the
timing of precipitation and streamflow; coastal impacts from ongoing sea level rise,
erosion, and increasing ocean acidity; forest disease, insect outbreak and wildfire risk;
and agricultural impacts3. As a sub-region of the PNW, the North Olympic Peninsula
(NOP) has an opportunity to reduce its climate change risk through the detailed
assessment of climate related vulnerabilities and the creation of a Climate Preparedness
Plan, the central mission of this project. This plan will inform the comprehensive and
strategic planning processes of the cities, counties, tribes, Public Utility Districts, and
ports within the NOP. The plan will include:
● A compilation of detailed local observations and projections of climate change
using best available science;
● A prioritization of highly sensitive or vulnerable resources and locations;
● A prioritized set of adaptation strategies and actions based on both the science
and the knowledge of local stakeholders;
The information and strategies of this Climate Preparedness Plan, as well as the
discussions and information sharing that are part of the development of the plan, will
act as input to current and future comprehensive and strategic planning efforts of the
cities, counties, ports, and tribes.
2.
The Need to Plan for Climate Change on the North Olympic Peninsula
“Climate Change, once considered an issue for a distant future, has moved firmly into the
present” – (U.S. National Climate Assessment, 20144).
The Pacific Northwest is already experiencing drier summers, reduction in glacial mass,
higher spring and lower summer river flows, and a more acidic ocean. These are not
5
isolated incidents, but part of a larger regional and global trend of changing
environmental conditions.
There is no longer a scientific debate about whether the climate is changing. The
observed changes are part of a global pattern of change that is driven primarily by
human activity5.
“Evidence for climate change abounds, from the top of the atmosphere to the
depths of the oceans. Scientists and engineers from around the world have
meticulously collected this evidence, using satellites and networks of weather
balloons, thermometers, buoys, and other observing systems. Evidence of climate
change is also visible in the observed and measured changes in location and
behavior of species and functioning of ecosystems. Taken together, this evidence
tells an unambiguous story: the planet is warming, and over the last half century,
this warming has been driven primarily by human activity” (NCA6).
This current climate change is in contrast to slower, smaller scale, climate changes in the
Earth’s history that have been driven by complex non-human events such as solar
output, distance of the Earth from the sun, ocean circulation, and composition of the
atmosphere. The burning of fossil fuels releases greenhouse gasses (primarily carbon
dioxide, CO2) into the atmosphere. These gasses act like a blanket around the earth
trapping in heat and warming the planet. The more greenhouse gasses present in the
atmosphere, the thicker the “blanket” and higher the overall temperature.
Greenhouse gasses (GHGs), such as Carbon Dioxide, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide, have
increased 40% since the industrial revolution, due primarily to human activities such as
burning coal, oil, and natural gas. Based on the current concentrations of these gasses in
the atmosphere, the planet is already committed to a certain amount of overall
warming. Alongside efforts to reduce (‘mitigate’) human emissions of GHGs, planning
efforts have been initiated to respond (‘adapt) to the expected impacts that are already
being seen and are likely to come along with the current trajectory of GHG emissions.
Climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts are complex and require coordination
among a broad range of stakeholders. Combining the current knowledge base of climate
change science with the regional expertise in relevant sectors provides a foundation for
action that will reduce the magnitude of impacts and costs of climate change over the
long term, and ensure best possible outcomes for the natural, economic, social, and
cultural assets of the North Olympic Peninsula.
3.
Observed and Projected Climate Trends in the Pacific Northwest (PNW)
Farmers, fishermen, natural resource managers, public health practitioners, utility
managers, emergency responders, coastal residents, businesses and others, have
6
already noticed changes in the climate and extreme weather conditions on the North
Olympic Peninsula. These changes are part of a larger trend of changes occurring at the
regional, national, and global scale. This section provides an overview of those observed
and projected changes in the Pacific Northwest (PNW), a resolution commonly used by
climate scientists. More detailed and specific climate impacts or exposures for the North
Olympic Peninsula will be covered in the four collaboratively scoped focus areas in
section XX.
a)
Temperature; Trends and Extremes
Over the last century, average annual air temperature in the Pacific Northwest has
increased by 1.3°Farenheit (F)7. Average annual temperature for the 2050s is projected
to increase 4.5°F to 5.8°F (relative to 1950-1999) depending on future greenhouse gas
emissions scenarios8.
Figure 29: Observed and projected changes in temperature for the Pacific Northwest. Observed (19502011) regional mean annual temperature increases are shown in gray, and projected increases in blue and
red (blue for a lower greenhouse gas emission scenario - RCP 4.5, and red for a higher greenhouse gas
emissions scenario – RCP 8.5). Average annual temperature for the 2050s is projected to increase 4.5°F
(RCP 4.5 - range 2.0°F to 6.7°F) to 5.8°F (RCP 8.5 -range 3.1°F to 8.5°F relative to 1950-19992.
Due to the large annual variation in seasonal temperature in the Pacific Northwest, an
average annual increase of 4.5°F – 5.8°F by mid century may appear to hold minimal
impact, but that is the same difference in average annual temperatures between recent
historical temperatures and the last ice age. More than the annual average
temperature, the intra-annual (seasonal) changes and extreme weather events display a
7
more accurate representation of the potential for climate change impact to the region.
Figures XX below show the intra-annual projections for temperature maximums and
minimums for Clallam County over the next century. The project area for this report
includes most of Clallam county (excluding the outer coast) and a portion of East
Jefferson County. These Clallam county level projections are assumed to be more
representative of the project area then the similar projections for the entirety of
Jefferson County. Generally, Figure 3 below shows greatest magnitude increase in
temperatures in the summer and winter months.
Figure 310: Projected changes to maximum temperatures in Clallam County. Monthly averages of
maximum 2-m air temperature for four time periods for the RCP4.5 future emission scenario (reduced
future GHG emissions) and RCP8.5 scenario (continued current levels of GHG emissions) simulations. The
average of 30 climate models is indicated by the solid lines and their standard deviations are indicated by
the respective shaded envelopes.
Figure 411: Projected changes to minimum temperatures in Clallam County. Monthly averages of
minimum 2-m air temperature for four time periods for the RCP4.5 future emission scenario (reduced
future GHG emissions) and RCP8.5 scenario (continued current levels of GHG emissions) simulations. The
average of 30 climate models is indicated by the solid lines and their standard deviations are indicated by
the respective shaded envelopes.
The North Olympic Peninsula may be generally protected from extreme temperatures
over the next century due to its location in the Pacific Northwest and close proximity to
the ocean. Summer high temperatures could increase substantially, over 10 degrees
8
Fahrenheit or more, however no significant trend has yet to be observed in daytime
heat events (over the period 1895-2011)12. Changes in minimum temperatures are
already being observed. The frost-free season has lengthened by 35 days relative to the
historical period 1895-2011, and nighttime heat events have become more frequent in
Western Washington State13.
b)
Precipitations; Trends, Extremes, Hydrology
Year to year variability in precipitation (rain and snow) is historically quite large for the
PNW, with some wet years (or decades) and other dry years (or decades). There is no
long-term trend to drier or wetter conditions across the Pacific Northwest14.
However, changes in precipitation type have been observed. Throughout the Cascades,
snowpack has decreased by about 25% from the middle of the 1900s 15 and spring
snowmelt is occurring earlier. Most climate projections for the PNW are in agreement
regarding inter-seasonal changes, projecting a decrease in summer precipitation and an
increase in fall and winter precipitation (see Figure 5 below)16.
Figure 517: Monthly average precipitation in Clallam County. Monthly averages of precipitation for four
time periods for the RCP4.5 future emission scenario (reduced future GHG emissions) and RCP8.5 scenario
(continued current levels of GHG emissions) simulations. The average of 30 climate models is indicated by
the solid lines and their standard deviations are indicated by the respective shaded envelopes.
These changing precipitation patterns along with earlier snow melt and more
precipitation falling as rain rather than snow due to higher temperatures will result in
increased winter and spring runoff for many of the region’s rivers (see Figure XX below).
Mixed rain and snow (‘transient’) watersheds will be the most affected. The North
Olympic Peninsula region holds both rain dominated and ‘transient’ watersheds, this
labeling represents a suite of characteristics of the watershed and not necessarily a
single definitive aspect; ‘transient’ watersheds see rain and snow fall (less than 40% of
winter precipitation is snow) 18 in their tributaries throughout the year and will
experience peak flows in mid summer as the snow melts into its tributaries, while rain
dominated watersheds will experience mostly rainfall in their tributaries throughout the
year and see peak flows during heavy rain events (commonly fall and winter).
9
Figure 6: Monthly average runoff in Clallam County. Monthly averages of runoff for four time periods for
the RCP4.5 future emission scenario (reduced future GHG emissions) and RCP8.5 scenario (continued
current levels of GHG emissions) simulations. The average of 30 climate models is indicated by the solid
lines and their standard deviations are indicated by the respective shaded envelopes.
Runoff will also be directly impacted by projected changes in heavy precipitation,
particularly for a continued high emissions scenario, events with more than 1 inch of
rain in 24 hours in Washington are project to increase 13% by the 2050s 19.
c)
Oceans: Sea-level Rise Scenarios, Sea-surface Temperature,
Acidification,
Global sea levels are rising. Oceans currently absorb more than 90% of the heat trapped
by the increasing greenhouse gasses in the Earth’s atmosphere. As the oceans warm,
their water’s expand. Warmer temperatures have also driven the melting of glaciers and
ice sheets that continue to add fresh water to the oceans. About 40% of the observed
sea level rise is due to the warming of the oceans and 60% is due to the freshwater
additions to the oceans20. These global changes are important, but they don’t tell the
entire story for sea level rise on the North Olympic Peninsula. The full experience of sea
level rise is born out by the global and regional rates of sea level rise combined with the
rates of local vertical land movement (which either increase or decrease the local
relative rate of sea level rise). If the land is subsiding, that adds to the global rate of sea
level rise, and conversely if the land is rising, that lowers the relative rate of sea level
rise.
(1)
Base Sea Level Rise Projections
For this project, regional sea level rise projections were paired with real rates of vertical
land movement to create “local” community-scale projections along the Strait of Juan
de Fuca. The regional estimates were derived from Table 5.3 in the National Academies
2012 report on sea level rise on the west coast of the United States21 (hereafter referred
to as the “NAS projections”). First, for the purposes of this assessment the regional
10
Sea Level Change (cm)
projection provided by the NAS was modified by removing the gross estimates of
vertical land movement utilized in that report to yield Figure 7 below.
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
PNW Regional Sea Level Projections w/o VLM
A1B
A1F1
Lower Uncertainty Bound
Upper Uncertainty Bound
0
20
40
60
Years from 2000
80
100
Figure 7. The "regional" SLR projection from the National Academies 2012 report on sea level rise along
the west coast of the United States, with their gross estimates of VLM removed. Only the upper and
lower confidence intervals, representing 1 standard deviation of the results from an ensemble of models,
is shown.
The NAS projections were based on three emissions scenarios from the IPCC’s 4 th
Assessment Report, A1B, A1F1 and B1. Grossly speaking, these three emissions
scenarios can be characterized as being high, medium and low intensity scenarios in
terms of global carbon emissions22. Rahmstorf et al. (2012) argues that global sea level
rise as measured by satellite altimetry is currently most closely tracking sea level rise
projections associated with the A1F1 emissions scenario. As a result, the B1 scenario
ranges, representing a sharp global turn towards lower carbon emissions, were excluded
from this analysis.
(2)
Local Estimates of Vertical Land Movement
Vertical land movement along the Strait of Juan de Fuca was estimated by “doubledifferencing” monthly sea level data from NOAA water level monitoring stations in Neah
Bay, Port Angeles, Port Townsend and Seattle against water level measured at a
reference station (see Santa-Maria Gomez, 2013). For this analysis, Friday Harbor was
used as the reference station. Assuming that this relative movement is due to variations
in the vertical motion of the land (versus unaccounted for settling of the dock or
structure that the water level station sits on), this technique provides a fairly precise
estimate of the relative vertical land movement (RVLM) at each station against the
reference station. The estimate of relative vertical movement at each station is given
below:
11
Table 1. Relative vertical land movement estimates for tide stations in coastal Washington. The relative
estimates are tied into an absolute reference frame using a continuous GPS station (SC02) near the tide
station in Friday Harbor
Station
Relative VLM (mm/yr)
Friday Harbor
Seattle
Port Townsend
Port Angeles
Neah Bay
0
-1.04 ± 0.04
-0.68 ± 0.09
1.06 ± 0.13
2.76 ± 0.07
Absolute
(mm/yr)
-0.16 ± 0.15*
-1.20 ± 0.16
-0.84 ± 0.18
0.90 ± 0.20
2.60 ± 0.17
VLM
The relative vertical land movements are then adjusted to an absolute, or geocentric,
reference frame using the vertical land movement estimate from a continuous GPS
station adjacent to the Friday Harbor water level monitoring station23. The estimated
vertical velocity at station SC02 is marked with an asterisk in the table above.
The absolute vertical land movement estimates for each tide gauge, based on the
method described above, are shown in Figure 8 below, along with vertical velocity
estimates for a series of continuous GPS stations scattered throughout the region of
interest. The GPS derived vertical land velocity estimates used in this analysis were
provided by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory24.
12
Figure 8. Estimates of vertical land movement along a east-west trending transect through the Strait of
Juan de Fuca.
(3)
Local Relative Sea Level Projections
To derive sea level projections that incorporate local rates of vertical land movement,
the vertical land movement is applied uniformly to the NAS projections. For this
preliminary assessment, the range of the best estimates associated with each emission
scenario is used as an estimate of the range of possible future sea level scenarios. The
resulting sea level rise projections for Neah Bay, Port Angeles and Port Townsend are
given in Table XX below.
For this analysis, we use the Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) tidal datum for mapping,
since it represents the average daily highest water level. For each community MHHW is
related to NAVD88 (North American Vertical Datum of 1988, a geodetic survey
13
establishing vertical land movement rates between benchmarks), which is most often
used as the vertical datum for LiDAR-derived DEMs, using the data in the table below.
Table 2. Vertical correction between NAVD88 and MHHW for three communities on the Strait of Juan de
Fuca, as well as an estimated 10-year return frequency storm surge (above MHHW)
Port Townsend
Port Angeles
Neah Bay
MHHW relative to 10 year return frequency
NAVD88
water level (m; MHHW)
2.466 m*
0.85 ± 0.10
2.024 m
0.90 ± 0.05
2.169 m
1.10 ± 0.05
(4)
Incorporating an Estimate of Intermittent Storm Impacts
Much like it is with temperature and precipitation, it is not the changes in averages that
will impacts the communities, ecosystems, and resources of the North Olympic
Peninsula, it is the changes in extremes. There is currently no consensus on whether
climate change will affect the storminess (magnitude or frequency) along the Pacific
Northwest Coast25. Annual storms frequently bring with them water levels almost three
feet higher than the average sea level (Mean Higher High Water). Wave heights along
the outer coast of the Olympic Peninsula may be increasing26, but the certainty of this
finding is low due to the short term data records used in the studies27.
The visualization of the migration of the MHHW contour across the landscape due to
sea level rise is a useful tool for estimating possible impacts. However, it is important to
take into consideration the probability that water levels will exceed MHHW, resulting in
intermittent flooding in the coastal zone. For the purposes of this preliminary
assessment an evaluation of the return frequency of water levels exceeding MHHW can
be applied (Figure 9 below)28. A 10-year return interval water level provides a useful
sense for the likely near-worst-case storm impacts for the project time period. An
estimate of the 10 year return interval water level above MHHW is given in the table
above for Neah Bay, Port Angeles and Port Townsend.
Figure 9. Return frequency curve for water levels exceeding MHHW, based on water level data from
Neah Bay, WA
14
For this project, we have assumed no change in the storminess along the coasts of the
North Olympic Peninsula and selected an elevation above Mean Higher High Water that
represented a 10% chance of being reached on any given year, for the mapping of
potential coastal flood risk across the Peninsula.
(5)
Limitations of This Approach
The Sea level rise approach described in this document does not take into account:
 Geomorphic adjustment of the shoreline due to sea level change, wave energy
changes or other climate-related shoreline impacts
 Potential changes to the return frequency of water levels exceeding MHHW due
to changes in storm patterns
 Adjustments to MHHW due to changes in the tidal prism in Puget Sound
 Uncertainties in the estimates of VLM or in the sea level rise projections
 Seismic activity, which could dramatically change the observed patterns of
vertical land movement
15
Figure 10. Relative sea level rise projections for three communities on the Strait of Juan de Fuca, based on
regional SLR projections (NAS, 2012) and local estimates of vertical land movement. Two “mapping
scenarios” for each location of interest are proposed for mapping purposes of this project.
(6)
Sea Surface Temperature Increases and Ocean
Acidification
Warming atmospheric temperatures will also likely increase ocean temperatures. Due to
the high variability of ocean temperatures due to seasonal and decadal changes it is
difficult to determine a long-term trend in warming ocean temperatures. Some warming
has been detected for the Strait of Georgia and off the coast of Vancouver Island, but no
long-term warming trend has been detected along the Pacific Coast of North America29
16
Figure 11: Current and projected sea surface temperature. This figure depicts the annual cycle of sea
surface temperature for the coastal waters of the Pacific Northwest for 1970-1999 (black line is the
average and gray shading is the range). The months are shown along the horizontal axis (x-axis) and the
average sea surface temperature is shown along the vertical axis (y-axis in °C). The projected 2.2°F (1.2°C)
increase in sea surface temperature by the middle of the century (2030-2059) is shown by the red line30.
The approximately 2.2°F (1.2°C) increase in sea surface temperatures in Pacific
Northwest coastal waters projected by mid-century is expected to directly and indirectly
impact the growth and survival of many marine and anadromous species.
An observed and very likely continuing climate change impact to the marine and coastal
waters of the North Olympic Peninsula is the increasing acidity of ocean waters. Oceans
have absorbed about one quarter of human produced CO2 emissions in the last two
centuries31, a process that drives ocean acidification. This acidification has a variety of
chemical consequences that lead ultimately to a reduced availability of carbonate ions
(CO3-) in seawater, one of the structural building blocks for organisms that utilize
calcium carbonate (CaCO3) to build and maintain their shells.
17
Figure 12: Increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO 2) in the atmosphere and the ocean and the
correlated decrease in pH (increasing acidity) in the ocean. As concentrations of CO2 in the Ocean
increase so does the acidity of the water32.
The small marine species that are most likely to be affected by ocean acidification form
the foundation of many food webs of salmon and other marine species important to the
life, culture, and economy of the North Olympic Peninsula.
B.
Climate Change on the North Olympic Peninsula
1.
Existing planning and projection reports (state and regional level)
The Pacific Northwest, in general, and Washington State in particular are fortunate in
that they enjoy a long history of observing and recording climate and weather. There
has been a substantial amount of effort to investigate, research, and study how the
observed changes in climate have affected the natural and human system in the region
and to project how those changes will affect that variety of systems in the future. For
example, the Climate Impacts Group at the University of Washington was formed in
1995 and has been working on climate change issues across the state since that time.
There are also a number of federal agencies, communities, Tribal nations, non-profit and
private sector organizations that have been working together to contribute to the local
and regional knowledge base about the impacts of climate change.
18
Recently, there has been an excellent body of research synthesizing climate related
information at the regional scale. The 2014 National Climate Assessment33 chapters on
the Pacific Northwest34, Coasts35, and supporting technical documents3637, combine to
provide a comprehensive look at the state of climate science and the key issues facing
the region as a whole. They highlight how changing streamflow patterns, sea level rise,
ocean acidification, increased stress on forests and challenges to agriculture, will each
substantially affect the region over the course of the coming decades.
Attention has also been paid to the critical natural resources of the region and the
Olympic Peninsula in particular. A compilation of literature on the Climate Change
Effects and Adaptation Approaches for Ecosystems, Habitats, and Species38completed in
2013 for the North Pacific Landscape Cooperative analyzed more than 250 documents
and conducted more than 100 interviews to assess how climate change is already
affecting and projected to affect the species and habitat of the region. A study by the
Olympic National Park and the Olympic National Forest looked at how climate change
will affect the natural resources in the lands they manage39. A report by the State of
Washington’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification40 provides a summary of the
current state of knowledge on ocean acidification in the region, why it matters, how it
will affect the marine species and economy of the State, and actions that can be taken
to reduce those impacts and better monitor and prepare for future changes. The
Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary completed a study last year considering how
climate change will affect their specific geographic area and the species and habitats
within that area41.
As it is applicable to this project, the findings from this diverse body of work are being
incorporated into the analysis, ranking, and prioritization of potentially vulnerable
sectors, resources, and assets on the North Olympic Peninsula.
This project does not aim to recreate or even summarize all of these existing PNW
climate change efforts. Instead, it seeks to leverage this information as a foundation to
work collaboratively with a diverse group of stakeholders from a variety of different
sectors across the North Olympic Peninsula to develop a shared understanding of what
those projected climate changes and impacts will mean to the people, ecosystems, and
resources of the North Olympic Peninsula. This effort necessarily includes the
organization of broad ‘focus areas’, specific to the NOP, that will be both directly and
indirectly impacted by climate change. This foundational exploration of specific climate
change impacts to the NOP will be used to advance the discussion of what adaptation
strategies could be used to reduce these vulnerabilities and build overall climate
resilience for the region.
2.
IPCC impact schematic: systems, drivers, impacts
19
Climate is an overarching influence to all life on earth, constantly driving and responding
to changes in inorganic and organic cycles. For the purposes of humanity’s efforts to
assess and plan for the impacts of climate change, researchers have begun to delineate
aspects of climate change to better organize and understand the scale, magnitude, and
complexity of potential impacts. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
in their most recent Assessment report (AR5) published in 2014 defines three
overlapping dimensions of climate change: the Climate System, Human System, and
Natural Systems. Further definitions of these systems by the IPCC are provided in the
Glossary. Considering these three systems allows for assessment of potential changes to
the climate system and the subsequent impacts of those changes to both human and
natural systems, as well as these systems’ feedback and influence on the climate
system. The interactions between these systems are considered “drivers” of climate
change, which can include: warming temperatures, drought, extreme temperatures,
extreme precipitation events, shifts in seasonal precipitation patterns, increasing or
decreasing snow cover, cyclone/ hurricane activity, sea level rise, and ocean
acidification.
Figure 13 below from the IPCC illustrates the drivers of influence between the three
systems and provides a few informative examples42.
20
Figure 13: Earth Systems Schematic for Assessing Climate Change: “The earth system consists of three
coupled and overlapping systems. Direct drivers of the human system on the climate system are denoted
with a red arrow; some of these drivers may also directly affect natural systems. These effects can in turn
influence other systems (dashed red arrows). Further influence on each of the systems on each other
(confounding factors) that do not involve climate drivers are represented by blue arrows. Examples of
drivers and their impacts are given in the table.”43
During this project, the IPCC defined Climate System, Natural System, and Human
System were utilized in scoping and organizing climate change vulnerabilities specific to
the North Olympic Peninsula.
21
3.
Collaborative Scoping Process: Focus Areas
a)
Core Team Assembly, Interviews, Meetings, Solicitation
This project is managed under the North Olympic Peninsula Resource Conservation &
Development Council (NOPRC&D), and all members of the council are partners in this
effort. That includes Jefferson County, Clallam County, the cities of Port Angeles, Sequim
and Port Townsend, Clallam Economic Development Council, Ports of Port Townsend
and Port Angeles, Clallam Conservation District, the Clallam PUD, Jamestown S’Klallam
Tribe, Makah tribe, Lower and Elwha Klallam Tribe and Team Jefferson Economic
Development Council. These groups were solicited for a representative to act as a
member of the project “Core Team” who would meet monthly with the project team to
discuss project progress and direct the project through scoping, outreach, and data
review.
The first step in collaboratively involving the Core Team was initiated with structured
interviews between core team members and the project team. This occurred over early
August with project team members investigating each core team member’s familiarity
with climate change projections, and exploration of each core team member’s key
climate concerns. The results of these interviews were organized into Draft Key
Concerns for the project, which included: Water Supplies; Critical Infrastructure;
Agriculture and Forest Health; Economic Viability/Resilienc;, Shorelines;and Marine
Species. These Key Concerns were presented alongside region-specific climate change
projections to the core team during an in-person meeting on August 21st, 2014 in
Sequim, WA. During this meeting, core team members were asked to consider how Key
Concerns could either be collated or expanded to develop central “Focus Areas” that
best represented the experience of climate change in the North Olympic Peninsula, with
attention to the regions specific socio-economic structure, ecosystem, and culture. At
the end of the meeting the core team voted on which three Key Concerns they would
prioritize as most valuable for the objectives of this project, and which could be
assessed further in a workshop alongside project partners. The result was four Focus
Areas of: Community Vitality, Water Resources, Natural and Managed Ecosystems,
and Critical Infrastructure. These Focus Areas were reviewed and refined a second time
with the core team and a wider group of project partners during a webinar on
September 12th, 2014.
b)
Four Focus Areas: Systems, Drivers, Impacts
The four Focus Areas for this project: Community Vitality, Water Resources, Natural and
Managed Ecosystems, and Critical Infrastructure, serve to organize and also prioritize
climate change issues as they relate to the North Olympic Peninsula. They are the
functional structure for the participatory process undertaken in this project in both
22
vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning. Following agreement on the Focus
Areas themselves, the core team, project team, and project partners began to compile
tables (building off the IPCC schematic described on page 21) detailing vulnerabilities
under each Focus Area as they relate to the Human, Natural, and Climate Systems, as
well as the drivers of climate change impacts between these systems.
“Vulnerabilities” is a broadly encompassing term, defined by the IPCC as “The propensity
or predisposition to be adversely affected. ‘Vulnerability’ encompasses a variety of
concepts including sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of capacity to cope and
adapt.”44 The comprehensive list of potential vulnerabilities developed for each focus
area was meant to act as a foundation for investigation into more specific vulnerabilities
at the participatory “Climate Vulnerability Assessment Workshops” held on the NOP
November 10th-14th, 2014. For many aspects of each Focus Area, changing climate and
weather conditions will add additional stress to systems already affected by extreme
weather events.
Below are the vulnerability tables as they were finalized and utilized at the November
Workshops:
Table 3. Community Vitality Vulnerability Table
Drivers
of Temperature and precipitation projections
Climate Change Extreme events (flood, heat wave, wildfire)
Impacts
Sea level rise and storm surge
Precipitation regimes and watershed health
Regional climate regime compared to national climate outlook
Demographic trends by community
Human System
Critical InfrastructurePotential Vulnerabilities
High-value Sites
- Cultural/ historic/ recreation/tourist sites
-Traditional/ecological cultural resources
Land-use planning
-Floodplains, Sea Level Rise, and vulnerable neighborhoods
-Un-modelled streams (no flood forecast -Duckabush
especially)
- Current and projected values of affected real estate and
ecosystem services; cost to compensation for this loss
Human health threats: heat waves, extreme events, emerging
zoonotic/ vector born disease
-Aging populations
-Low-income populations
-Current health system capacity
-Growth capacity (environmental migrants)
23
Natural System
Wildfire health impacts (ear, nose, throat, destruction of
property, injury)
Ecosystem services
Ecosystem, habitat and species impacts
-Current Shoreline erosion
-Environmental rehabilitation/ conservation
- Encroachment on plant and animals due to increasing
population
- Wildfire Risk
Table 4. Water Resources Vulnerability Table
Drivers
of Timing and form of precipitation (snow vs. rain)
Impacts
Extreme temperature events; evaporation
Wildfires (erosion, sedimentation)
Sea Level Rise and storm surge
Low soil moisture/crop failure
Greater intensity of fall/winter precipitation events, longer
summer dry periods
Aquifer storage levels and recharge/discharge rates
Human
System
Water Resources- Potential Vulnerabilities
Water Supplies: Pt. Townsend, Pt. Angeles, Sequim, Neah Bay,
Clallam Bay, Seiku, Tri-area, Quilcene, Jefferson County, Clallam
County, Storage capacity, System accommodation of
population growth
Surface water: (cities, Elwha, Morse Creek, Dungeness,
Quilcene); public water systems on groundwater (PUD, etc);
Private permit exempt wells (Marrowstone Island, Toandos
Peninsula. Areas along Oak Bay Road to Mats Mats, Dungeness
Valley). Flood protection for water supply infrastructure
Drought response by managers and water conservation
Shoreline (i.e., marine, estuarine, and freshwater shorelines)
planning scenarios
Irrigated lands: agricultural, urban, rural residential
Water Quality:
Permitted point source waste water dischargers: city
wastewater treatment plants and industrial sources
Stormwater dischargers: cities, roads, and highways
Non-point sources of pollutions: rural residential, agriculture,
forestry
Non attainment of ambient water quality standards/loss of
beneficial uses
Point sources limit production due to discharge limitations
24
Natural
System
Stormwater treatment or Best Management Practices needed
Ecosystem:
Watersheds & Habitats
- uplands
- riparian zones and wetlands
- estuarine and marine
Extreme Events: Rain on snow events
King tides + rain on snow/extreme rain
Groundwater: Increase in annual water deficit period =
precipitation is evaporated or runs off before it can recharge
water table (e.g. Chimacum)
Higher intensity rainfall events running off before infiltrating
and recharging groundwater
Form of Precipitation at various Elevations (snow or rain; rainon-snow events)
Saltwater intrusion
Surface water availability in drought (groundwater potentially
more available)
Water Supply: How changes impact plants and animals:
- Low baseflows in streams
- summer drought impact on plant and animal species
- reduction of snowpack impact on plant and animal species
Watersheds and Habitats:
- upland and channel erosion, sedimentation
-native vegetation loss to changing site capability
-Worsening water quality, bacterial proliferation, sediment
loading
-Fish toxicity; algal blooms, temperature, sediment
-water and habitat quality doesn’t meet species life cycle needs
- Plant and animal disease susceptibility
Hydrology:
higher winter runoff & streamflows, lower summer
streamflows, reduced snowpack
Table 5. Natural and Managed Ecosystems Vulnerability Table
Drivers
of Air temperature trend increases plant &
Impacts
evapotranspiration
Growing season, Phenology
Drought and heat wave frequency, duration, intensity
Hydrologic cycle shift
Ecosystem Shifts
Sea-level rise
Ocean Acidification
25
soil
Human System
Natural System
Agriculture, Forestry, FisheriesPotential Vulnerabilities
Agricultural and forest
- Zoned lands in Clallam and Jefferson Counties
- Rural residential and urban land in agricultural and forest
production
-Irrigation demands/ water allocation
- Areas in flood plains
- Ability to manage resilience to pests, weeds, and plant
diseases
- Temperature impacts on growing season, crop stress, crop
selection, forest seedling selection (i.e., commercial, small
forest, restoration)
- Availability of sufficient best management practices to meet
sustainability and conservation goals
Urban-wildland interface
Fishery and aquaculture in adjacent and regional waters
-Shellfish and finfish farms (oyster, geoduck, etc.)
-Hatcheries (salmonids and shellfish)
-High value wild fisheries and hatchery to wild supplement
programs
Economic connections
-Employment related to or dependent on natural resourcebased industries
-Population dependent on primary and secondary natural
resource-based industries
- Strength of local markets, acute and long-term
Water Quality:
- forest and agricultural Best Management Practices increase
cost of production
- saltwater intrusion impacts on agricultural, forestry or
freshwater fishery water supplies
Air Quality:
Wildfire; non attainment of ambient air quality standards
Forest and Ag. Management practices, controlled burning,
tillage
Human health impacts (ear, nose, throat, destruction of
property, injury)
Adaptive capacity of existing plant and animal species
Temperature Stress
Natural Water balance availability, including changes in water
supply for plants and animals
Water quality impact on fish and animals (due to increased
runoff from agricultural lands due to climate change, etc.)
26
Wildfire impact on plants and animals
Natural sensitivity to pests, weeds, and plant diseases
-Invasive species, abundance of pests and pollinators
Availability of ecosystem services, e.g. carbon, wetlands,
habitat
Erosion - Current marine and watershed shoreline erosion,
uplands and stream channel
Ocean acidification
Table 6. Critical Infrastructure Vulnerability Table
Drivers
of Temperature and precipitation projections
Climate Change Extreme events (precipitation)
Impacts
Sea Level Rise and storm surge
Drought events
Human System
Natural System
Critical InfrastructurePotential Vulnerabilities
Ports (Port of Port Angeles & Port of Port Townsend, Port of
Neah Bay)
Transportation Corridors: Hood Canal Bridge, RT 101, 104,
Hwy 20/19/Water St., Hwy 112, select critical rural roads
Energy production/ delivery systems
Solid waste treatment (eg. PA landfill) & Sea Level Rise/Storm
surge
Stormwater collection, conveyance, and storage/treatment
facilities (PA stormwater treatment near Ennis Creek)
Water and Wastewater
- reservoir storage, fresh water monitoring & treatment
- wastewater treatment, discharge limits
Shipyards/ Paper Mills
Coastal point source pollution sites
Emergency Response facilities
- Hospitals (eg. PA Hospital)
- Fire Stations
- Police Stations
- EMS stations
Schools & community centers
shoreline protection Natural & Engineered
Current growth/shoreline planning scenarios
Ecosystem Services viability
- Degradation of natural shorelines/watershed/forests for
protection to extreme events (flooding/ wildfire)
- Plant & animal habitat dependent on functional natural
27
systems
Wildfire risk
C.
Exploring North Olympic Peninsula Vulnerabilities
a)
Invitations, Organization, Process of the First Round of
Workshops
The identification of climate change drivers of impact and comprehensive listing of
vulnerabilities through the four focus areas was a participatory scoping process that set
the stage for a wider group of engagement in the project. This wider input aimed to
advance the identification of specific NOP geographic locations, systems, and
ecosystems that may be impacted by climate change. This collaborative data gathering
occurred over the week of November 10th – 14th in the North Olympic Peninsula, with
each Focus Area receiving its own full day workshop. The core team reviewed the
subject matter described by the listed vulnerabilities under each Focus Area and helped
identify which stakeholders might hold expertise. These stakeholders were invited to
attend the workshop(s) most appropriate to their expertise.
Representatives from the following organizations were invited to attend each workshop:
Community Vitality Workshop
Clallam County Planning Department
EDC Team Jefferson
Jefferson County Planning Department
Ft. Worden Marine Science Center
Port Townsend Development Services
Feiro Marine Life Center
Port Angeles Planning, CED, Parks
Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce
Sequim Community Development
Clallam Bay-Sekiu Chamber Commerce
Ft Worden-State parks
Sequim-Dungeness Chamber Commerce
Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge
Port Angeles Regional Chamber
Friends of Dungeness National Wildlife
Refuge
Jefferson Co. Environmental Health
FEMA
Walk and Livable Communities Institute
Olympic Climate Action
Clallam Co. Environmental Health
Makah Tribe
Lower Elwah Klallam Tribe
Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe
28
Clallam County EDC
Water Resources Workshop
Washington Dept. of Ecology
Clallam County Public Works
East Jefferson Watershed Council
Jefferson County Public Utilities District
Dungeness River Management Team
Clallam County Public Utilities District
Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA)
17, 18, 19
North Olympic Salmon Coalition
Olympic Climate Action
Washington Water Trust
Local 20/20 Climate Action
Clallam Conservation District
Jefferson Conservation District
WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
Olympic Environmental Council
WSU Extensions – Jefferson and Clallam
Counties
Puget Sound Partnership
City of Port Angeles Public Works
Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe
City of Sequim Public Works
Makah Tribe
City of Port Townsend Public Works
Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe
Jefferson County Public Works
Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe
Natural and Managed Ecosystem Workshop
Jefferson Land Trust
Taylor Shellfish
North Olympic Land Trust
Icicle Seafoods Aquaculture
Jefferson County Planning
North Olympic Salmon Coalition
Clallam County Planning
Olympic National Park
WSU Extension
WA Dept. Natural Resources
WA Department of Ecology
US Forest Service
Jefferson County Environmental Health
Port Angeles Business Association
Clallam County of Environmental Health
North Olympic Timber Action Committee
Jefferson Conservation Districts
Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe
29
Clallam Conservation Districts
Makah Tribe
Cooperative Extension
Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe
Critical Infrastructure Workshop
Port of Port Townsend
Jefferson County Public Utility District
Port of Port Angeles
Clallam County Public Utility District
Port of Neah Bay
Regional Transportation Planning
Organization
Jefferson County Planning, Public Works
Jefferson County Emergency Management
Clallam County Planning, Public Works
Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe
Clallam County Emergency Management
WSU extension
Makah Tribe
Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe
City of Port Angeles Public Works
City of Port Townsend Public Works
WA Department Of Transportation
Port Townsend Paper Mill
Nippon, Port Angeles Mill
U.S. Coast Guard
City of Sequim Public Works
Bonneville Power Administration
Port Angeles Utilities
b)
U.S. Navy
Port Townsend & Port Angeles Hospitals
Vulnerability Exercise: Sensitivity and Adaptive Capacity
The four Focus Area workshops held over the week of November 10 th-14th involved two
central sessions: in the morning a review of regional climate change projections most
pertinent to the focus area was presented, followed after lunch by a vulnerability
ranking exercise involving three breakout sessions within each workshop, where each
session identified a range of specific vulnerabilities and then ranked these vulnerabilities
on their sensitivity to the impacts of climate change and their ability to adapt to these
impacts - “adaptive capacity”. The three breakout sessions for each workshop were as
follows;
Community Vitality Water
Resources Natural
Workshop
Workshop
Managed
Ecosystem
30
and Critical
Infrastructure
Workshop
High value
community sites
Water supplies
Workshop
Agriculture &
Forestry
Low-lying
infrastructure
Water quality
Land-use planning
and population
growth
Watersheds
Fisheries &
aquaculture
Wildlife
Current and future
demographics
Transportation
corridors and
emergency
management
Utilities, sewer, and
solid waste
Within each breakout session, participants grouped vulnerability issues into categories
suitable for ranking on subjective measures of sensitivity and adaptive capacity. Climate
vulnerability depends on exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity (as shown in Figure
14 below). Climate exposure is the extent and magnitude of a climate or weather event.
Sensitivity is the degree to which sector, resource, or asset, is susceptible to a climate
impact. Adaptive capacity is the ability of that system to adjust to or respond to the
changing climate conditions. Through the consideration of both climate impact variables
and related environmental stressors, working group members identified the sensitivity
and adaptive capacity of each potential area of concern during the breakout sessions.
Figure 14. Climate Vulnerability. Climate vulnerability depends on climate exposure, sensitivity, and
adaptive capacity.
Within each breakout session, vulnerabilities were assigned a sensitivity ranking and an
adaptive capacity ranking (Table XX below). The sensitivity rankings range from S0System will not be affected by the climate impact to S4-System will be greatly affected
by the climate impacts. The adaptive capacity rankings range from AC0-System is not
able to accommodate or adjust to the climate impact to AC4-System is able to
accommodate or adjust to the impact in a beneficial way.
Table 7. Sensitivity and Adaptive Capacity Levels
Sensitivity Levels
Adaptive Capacity Levels
31
S0
S1
S2
S3
S4
System will not be affected by the
impact
System will be minimally affected by
the impact
System will be somewhat affected
by the impact
System will be largely affected by
the impact
System will be greatly affected by
the impact
AC0 System is not able to accommodate
or adjust to impact
AC1 System is minimally able to
accommodate or adjust to impact
AC2 System is somewhat able to
accommodate or adjust to impact
AC3 System
is
mostly
able
to
accommodate or adjust to impact
AC4 System is able to accommodate or
adjust to impact in a beneficial way
The areas of concern under each breakout session were then placed in a vulnerability
matrix (with adaptive capacity ranking on one axis and sensitivity rankings on the other)
to determine the relative vulnerability rankings. Those issues that are the most
vulnerable have the highest sensitivity and the lowest adaptive capacity. Those issues
that are the least vulnerable have lower sensitivity and higher adaptive capacity. Draft
results of this vulnerability exercise are described under each Focus Area Workshop
section below. COMPLETE ranking results of ALL issues discussed in the workshop are
provided in Table XX below.
32
Table 8. Vulnerability Ranking for Climate Change Issues Explored
Resources, Natural and Managed Ecosystems, Critical Infrastructure
Sensitivity: Low  High
S0
S1
S2
Adapti AC
*Forest Water Quality
ve
0
*Clallam Bay/Seiku Sewage
Capacit
Treatment (Short-term)
y:
Low

High
AC
1
*Wet-lands
AC
2
*Coastal
Septic
Systems
in Four Focus Area Workshops: Community Vitality, Water
S3
*Open space forests
*Clallam
Bay/Seiku
Treatment (Long-term)
Sewage
*Young families
*Downtown Port Townsend
*Seiku/Clallam Bay/ Makah
*Urban Run-off
*Soil erosion
*Waterfowl
*Clallam low elevation forestsNatural regeneration
*Chimacum Agriculture
*3 Crabs Road
* Downtown Port Townsend, Kah
Tai Lagoon area
*Roads in Clallam Bay
*Health System monitoring *Low-income retirees
and response
*Development
on
*Port Angeles Ediz hook
shorelines
33
high-bank
S4
*Urban areas/Ports
*Wild Salmon
*Nearshore
environmentnatural context
* Port of Port Townsend Boat
Haven
*Port of Port Townsend Point
Hudson
*Water Supply
*Water supplies for wildlife
*Emerging
vegetation/
bacteria/ wildlife/ Algaes and
water quality
*Alpine and sub-alpine zones
*Wild/commercial shellfish
stocks
*Nearshore
environmenturban context
*Food chain base (fish,
insects, plankton)
*Amphibians
*Sea and shorebirds
*Low-Income Families
*Veterans/Homeless
*Development in low-bank
Water Quality
AC
3
*Coastal Wells Water Quality
*Clallam Bay/Seiku
Water
Supply
*Vacuum Sewer System at
Elwha Lowlands
*Highway 116
*Highway
19/20/Port
Townsend Ferry
*Dungeness Spit to John Wayne
marina
*Olympic National Park
*Jefferson/Clallam PUD Municipal
Groundwater systems
*Rural/Residential/
Agriculture Water Quality
*Wildlife
*Floodplains
*Marine mammals
*SouthEast Jefferson Co. Forests
*High elevation forests -natural
regeneration
*Shellfish hatchery
*Raptors
*Songbirds
*Septic Systems
*Highway 112
* Hoko/Ozette road
*Forest Roads for fighting fires
*Economically *Port Hadlock & Port Ludlow
*Open space/Ag. Land
advantaged
*Quilcene/Brinnon/Center Rd. *Stormwater management
citizens
Valley
*Salmon hatchery
*Electrical
*Ft Worden/Ft Townsend/ Ft *Small land mammals
Transmission Flagler
*Port Angeles Landfill
Infrastructure *Combined Sewer Overflow in *Highway 104/ Hood Canal Bridge
*Public
Port Angeles
*Morse Creek and Hot Springs
Warning
* Lake Crescent Water Supply Road
Systems (All *Dungeness Agriculture
* City of P.A. Industrial waterfront,
34
shorelines
* Surface Water Supplies of
City of Port Townsend,
Clallam PUD, City of Port
Angeles, Dry Creek, City of
Sequim
*Nearshore
environmentestuary context
*Marine and Freshwater Fish
*Clallam Bay/Seiku Sewer
System (overall)
*Stormwater
Outfall
Infrastructure
*Highway 101
*Ft Worden lighthouse
*Private Wells
*Sewer Outfall Infrastructure
Hazards)
AC
4
*Quilcene Agriculture
*Salmon aquaculture
*Large land mammals
*Energy management
* Clallam / Wheel / Ward /
Burlingame bridges
*Forest
Roads
to
communication towers
*South Jefferson County
35
Ediz Hook and Lower Elwha
*Low land river corridors
*Clallam low elevation forestsmanaged
*High elevation forests-managed
2.
COMMUNITY VITALITY
a)
Relevant Climate Projections
Community Vitality is a focus area aimed generally at topics of high value community
sites, land-use planning and population growth, and current and future demographics.
In addition to the general trends in temperature, precipitation, and ocean conditions
described earlier in this report, there are additional climate change impacts specifically
relevant to community vitality, including flooding and wildfire events, human health
impacts, and climate migrants.
Figure 15: Over view of the NOP region and some of communities, key facilities, and federally managed
lands as they relate to Community Vitality in the region.
Flooding and wildfire hold the potential to disrupt recreation, land use, and quality of
life across the region. Current climate projections for the PNW suggest increasing fall
and winter precipitation that falls in more extreme amounts45. This change paired with
warmer overall temperatures causing more precipitation to fall as rain instead of snow,
has resulted in projections of higher occurrences of flooding. Figure 16 below illustrates
projected increase in 20 year flood cycles for the region.
36
Figure 16.46 Ratio of the 20 year flood magnitudes for simulated future and historic streamflows at
select locations in the PNW. Size of dot shows relative change of occurrence of 20 year flood events (in
the historical period those flood magnitudes that occurred on average once every 20 years). The A1B
scenario represents a future where little attempt is made at greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions reductions,
B1 represents a future where reductions in GHG emissions are undertaken.
Climate modeling represented in Figure 16 above suggests that under current GHG
emission amounts, by the 2040s the Elwha River may see 20 year floods occurring every
17 years, and the Dungeness may see 20 year floods occurring every 14 years. Wildfire
risk could also increase in the region, although mediators of that risk include the
magnitude of future pest infestations, tree species survival, and forest management.47
Although not always a direct impact to health, climate change has influence on many
indirect impact pathways to human health. Figure 17 below illustrates some of these
pathways.
37
Figure 17.48 Climate Change health effects pathways
Figure 17 above demonstrates that climate can impact human health directly through
extreme weather and heat events and works through intermediate factors to hold
influence on other health outcomes. Looking at this range of health outcomes, the most
vulnerable populations to the health impacts of climate change are those over 65,
children, poor and socially isolated individuals, the mentally ill, outdoor laborers, and
those with cardiac or other underlying health problems49.
Of particular interest to health in the North Olympic Peninsula is the changing window
of opportunity in the proliferation of Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) and their associated
illnesses, including Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning (PSP). Figure 18 below shows the
increasing window of opportunity for the proliferation of temperature dependent HABs
by increasing Sea surface Temperatures (SSTs).
38
Figure 18.50 How sea surface temperature affects the annual window for HABs in Puget Sound. Graphic
shows potential increase in the number of days above the 55.4°F (13°C) threshold where HABs occur
more frequently. A 3.6°F (2°C) increase in sea surface temperature has the potential to double the
number of days annually when the waters of Puget Sound are above this threshold. The dark black line
and shaded region indicate current conditions. Dashed curves represent 2°C, 4°C, and 6°C increases in the
sea surface temperature and the associated increase in the number of days above the threshold.
Another wide-ranging impact to all aspects of community vitality is the size and speed of
development and population growth on the North Olympic Peninsula. If climate change
continues unabated at its current projected pace, the types and magnitude of impacts
across the United States may render the PNW as one of the more hospitable locations in
the country, mostly owing to its milder climate and availability of water. This rationale
remains speculation on future migration patterns, but it has been found previously that
migration has occurred to the PNW region in the past for environmental, and not simply
economic reasons51, and the discussion of the habitability of the PNW under climate
change has only continued to increase in the popular media52.
b)
Draft Vulnerabilities and Prioritization Matrix
On November 10th, 2014 a diverse range of stakeholders met in Sequim, WA to discuss
Climate Change impacts relevant to issues of Community Vitality on the North Olympic
Peninsula. This workshop included a review of climate change science, and identification
and ranking of regional vulnerabilities. Areas of concern were ranked on their
“sensitivity” to climate change impacts and their “adaptive capacity” or ability to
39
respond to this change. This ranking is a helpful method for prioritizing climate change
adaptation planning across a diverse range of vulnerabilities.
Below is the vulnerability table drafted collaboratively by three breakout sessions at the
workshop, covering issues of: High-value Community Sites; Land-use Planning and
Population Growth; Current and Future Demographics. Each of the ranked vulnerabilities
is described in more detail following the table in its given vulnerability category. This
detailed information was gathered during workshop discussions of the ranking of each
of the vulnerabilities, and includes aspects of both the sensitivity and adaptive capacity
discussions.
Table 9. Community Vitality Vulnerability Ranking Table
Sensitivity: Low  High
S S1
S2
S3
0
Adapti AC
*Open space forests
ve
0
Capacit AC
*Young families
y:
1
*Downtown
Port
Low
Townsend

*Seiku/Clallam
Bay/
High
Makah
AC
*Health
*Low-income retirees
2
System
*Development on highmonitoring
bank shorelines
and response *Dungeness Spit to John
*Port
Wayne marina
Angeles Ediz *Olympic National Park
hook
AC
*Econ *Port
*Open space/Ag. Land
3
omical Hadlock
& *Stormwater
ly
Port Ludlow
management
advan *Quilcene/Br
taged innon/Center
citizen Rd. Valley
s
*Ft
Worden/Ft
Townsend/
Ft Flagler
AC
*Energy
*Low land river corridors
4
management
Vulnerability Ranking Descriptions:
40
S4
*Urban
areas/Ports
*Water Supply
*Low-Income
Families
*Veterans/Hom
eless
*Development
in
low-bank
shorelines
*Ft
Worden
lighthouse
High Vulnerability
Urban Areas/Ports: Many urban areas of the North Olympic Peninsula are found on lowbank waterfront sites. Commercial districts are vulnerable to sea level rise, storm surge
and wind damage. Climate change therefore presents a threat to both economic
sustainability as well as the services provided in these urban and port districts. Some of
the region’s most important sectors are found in these regions: maritime industries,
tourism, banking, government and retail.
Water Supply: Water supply is vulnerable to the projected decrease in precipitation
during the warm and dry months of summer and current storage scenarios could be
insufficient under drying conditions. Additionally, water delivery systems (sometimes
piping for over 20 miles) are vulnerable to landslides and extreme weather events.
Because water is essential for all life on the Peninsula, sensitivity is perceived as very
high. (Note that this vulnerability was covered in more detail in the Water Resources
workshop.)
Open Space Forests: The group evaluated ecosystems of value to this community for the
quality of life they offer (ecosystem services were covered in another workshop). For
forestry, this included: recreation, views, foraging and spiritual values. Forests were
identified as sensitive to climate change due to increased likelihood of forest fire and
drought and their ability to adapt is low due to the long life cycles of dominant tree
species.
Medium-High Vulnerability
Young Families: This group is sensitive to utilities cost, recreational opportunities, cold
and flu seasons, subsistence opportunities, impacts from divorce, lack of family wage
jobs, drug and alcohol use, and has potentially very little resources for adaptation;
needs improved education, family wage jobs.
Low-income Families: This group often stretches budgets to cover utilities and resides in
aging households subject to extreme weather events (pests, wind, rain). Climate Change
could impact their ability to maintain a healthy environment and access to affordable,
healthy food (including subsistence). Group has existing support services helpful in
adaptation (Habitat for Humanity, Goodwill, public transport, foodbank), but they need
access to healthy foods, education, public health.
Veterans/Homeless: This group experiences exposure to outside environments (rainfall
and temperatures) which could become more moderate. However, they could see
continued exposure to increased extreme events, zoonotic disease and bacterial
exposure. Current challenges include access to housing, no VA hospital, depression,
drug and alcohol use, competition for limited resources, and personal transportation is
41
expensive and often unobtainable. There currently is have access to shelters, food bank,
public transport, but need housing, medical, and drug and alcohol counseling.
Downtown Port Townsend: Under climate change, the area could see sea-level rise and
an influx of climate refugees. The area has seen some flooding of basements and a high
water table, closures due to flooding, road issues, undermining of structures. There are
economic challenges for existing businesses in their ability to get insurance, financing,
and regulatory issues. Area does enjoy a strong tourism base and strong community
support and iconic value. Need investment in new, more flood tolerant infrastructure,
and roads and buildings along with public awareness/education. Currently, many
owners likely do not have money to invest in building improvements.
Seiku/Clallam Bay/Neah Bay: Currently experience severe weather storms, and droughts
have impacted water supply. Could expect climate change impacts to limit
transportation options; temperature/ocean acidification impacting fish and shellfish and
commercial impacts, water supply issues due to changes in snowpack, and runoff issues,
along with sea-level rise. Challenges to adaptation include general remoteness, ongoing
regulatory disputes, public awareness and education, and funding. Strengths in
adaptation include a resilient population with self-sufficiency including subsistence
gathering.
Development in low-bank shorelines: Three Crabs, Dungeness Spit, Hood Canal, Beckett
Point, Diamond Point: these three areas in particular were identified as vulnerable
communities due to high density of residences in areas with potential sea level rise,
storm surge and wind damage. They have very little adaptive capacity due to the
proximity of buildings to current high water mark. The group was in agreement that
future planning must prohibit building on parcels without significant set-back, and
acknowledged that many existing parcels may be unbuildable.
Medium Vulnerability
Low-income Retirees: Group often stretches budgets to cover utilities and resides in
aging households subject to extreme weather events (pests, wind, rain). Climate Change
could impact ability to maintain a healthy environment and access to affordable, healthy
food (including subsistence). Group has existing support services helpful in adaptation
(Habitat for Humanity, Goodwill, public transport, foodbank), but they need access to
healthy foods, education, public health.
Development on High Bank shorelines: Bluffs are popular for the building of view
homes. But these are extremely vulnerable to increased erosion due to landslides, sea
level rise, storm surge and high impact weather events. Feeder bluffs are particularly
vulnerable. Recent Shoreline Management Plans address this concern better than
previous planning efforts, but this group felt that greater set backs would be required to
protect bluffs and homes from anticipated impacts.
42
Dungeness Spit to John Wayne Marina: Under climate change, this area could see more
runoff, higher water temperatures, sea level rise, bluff and beach erosion affecting
wildlife preserves, salt water intrusion to groundwater, flooding and inundation,
fish/shellfish impacts with resulting impacts on cultural and recreational values.
Currently the system experiences pollution and agricultural runoff. Adaptation
resources include highly resilient and resourceful communities with climate change
awareness, need political awareness of communities at risk; elevating or relocation of
infrastructure (limited roads); but continued access to tidelands is important.
Olympic National Park: Under climate change, the park could see more forest fires, road
damage due to flooding, forest impact by pests, invasive species. Influential to
adaptation options is the size of the park, constant oversight and federal funding,
national significance/visibility, diversity of species. (See Adapting to climate change at
Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park53 for more detail.) Could continue to
see challenges in channels of communication with local municipalities, along with
continued shortfalls in federal funding.
Ft. Worden Lighthouse: Under climate change, could experience sea level rise worsening
of existing beach erosion, erosion of historic structures. There is some state funding
available as well as historic preservation funding for adaptation response, but existing
structures are old and fragile. Long term preservation of the lighthouse may not be
feasible.
Medium-Low Vulnerability
Health System Monitoring and Response: System currently mostly deals with care for
retirees/elderly, but need tools to predict emergent climate change issues along with
better infrastructure, strong emergency response, infectious disease monitoring, and
the ability to attract high quality medical professionals.
Port Angeles Ediz Hook: Hook is susceptible to Sea Level Rise. Currently Hook protects
inner area except for East/SouthEast storms, no current flooding, but sea level rise could
surpass flooding thresholds. There are adaptation challenges in the form of regulations
and financing, though the removal of dams may help long term reinforcement and
stabilization of sediment. Prevailing winds are in favor of continued sediment building,
would need more financing for additional armoring.
Open Space/Aggricultural Land: The group evaluated ecosystems of value to this
community for the quality of life they offer (ecosystem services were covered in another
workshop). For agricultural lands, this included: the growing of food locally, the
importance of agriculture to the region historically, recreation and views. Agricultural
43
lands are seen as being relatively adaptable due to their ability to respond to extreme
weather events, though flooding is a risk.
Stormwater Management: With increased precipitation during extreme weather events,
stormwater systems are more likely to be overwhelmed by volume as grasses and other
pervious surfaces absorb less runoff and contaminants. This, in turn, results in poor
treatment.
Low Vulnerability
Economically advantaged citizens: This group enjoys recreational opportunities, often
live in view lots (potentially higher hazard), subject to climate changes related to air
quality (pollen) and ability to recreate. Group does have access to development
strategies that are sustainable and support adaptation, need education and perhaps
changes to regulation/enforcement.
Port Hadlock and Port Ludlow: These areas could see climate change impacts of sea
level rise and summer drought. Piers and waterfront homes are particularly vulnerable,
the changing precipitation intensity could impact the aquifer (covered further in Water
Resources). Areas face ongoing issues in economic development and regulation, but
benefit from central location, location on some higher ground, strong communities.
Existing infrastructure includes sewage treatment plant, the Northwest School of
Wooden Boat Building, septic infrastructure.
Quilcene/Brinnon/Center Rd. Valley: Area may see more intense rainfall, sea level rise,
flooding in heavy rains from climate change. More intense rainfall could impact septic’s
drainage. Ocean acidification could have impacts on businesses, area already includes
low-income population, limited sewage systems. Current population is used to
waterfront access, need flood control for road structures, septic systems. Might be
funding if roads are involved.
Fort Worden/Fort Townsend/Fort Flagler: Under climate change, could experience sea
level rise worsening of existing beach erosion, erosion of historic structures. There is
some state funding available as well as historic preservation funding for adaptation
response, but existing structures are old and fragile. May need to be flexible in the
management of other fort amenities.
Low-land River corridors: The group evaluated ecosystems of value to this community
for the quality of life they offer (ecosystem services were covered in another workshop).
For low-land river corridors and flooding estuaries, this included: birding and other
wildlife habitat, views, open space, recreation. These areas are, by nature, adaptable to
weather conditions and therefore rank low in vulnerability.
Potential Opportunity
44
Energy Management; ?
3.
WATER RESOURCES
a)
Relevant Climate Projections
Water Resources is a focus area aimed generally at topics of water supply, water quality,
and watersheds. In addition to the general trends in temperature, precipitation, and
ocean conditions described earlier in this report, there are additional climate change
impacts specifically relevant to water resources, including shifting hydrologic basin types
and timing of seasonal streamflows.
Figure 19: Overview of the Water Resources focus area with key rivers and watershed boundaries as well
as other water infrastructure.
Warmer overall temperatures will drive historical snow events towards the thaw
threshold, leading to more precipitation throughout the fall-winter-and spring falling as
rain instead of snow. This shifting freezing threshold will be particularly pronounced in
those high elevation zones such as the Olympic Mountains where snowfall has
historically maintained glaciers and influenced entire ecosystems as a partial-snow
hydrologic basin. Figure 20 below shows projected shifts in hydrologic basin types for
the PNW region.
45
Figure 20.54 Shifting hydrologic basin types in the PNW under climate change. This projection shows the
shifting of hydrologic basins on the North Olympic Peninsula away from a transition (rain & snow)
watershed to rain dominant by the end of the century under climate change. With global temperature rise
showing little sign of future abatement, this future may vary in timing but not in ultimate outcome.
Shifts in hydrologic basin types necessarily influence the way that the precipitation is
stored and the timing of its release and flow from high elevation sources to downstream
lowlands. The general projection of increased fall and winter precipitation and
decreased summer precipitation in the region, paired with the shift towards a more rain
dominant watershed, suggests long-term changes to watershed flow on the North
Olympic Peninsula. In Figure 21 below, projected hydrographs for both the Elwha and
Dungeness rivers are displayed.
46
Dungeness River Hydrograph
(near river outlet)
Elwha River Hydrograph (near McDonald
bridge near Port Angeles)
Figure 21.55 Hydrograph projections for the Dungeness and Elwha rivers. The blue line is the historical
flow, while the red line is the projected average flow with the red shading showing variability. Flow
amount is shown with monthly values, starting in October and ending in September. The A1B scenario
represents a future where little attempt is made at greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions reductions, B1
represents a future where reductions in current amounts of GHGs are undertaken.
In Figure 21 above, it can be seen that a shift away from a transition hydrologic basin
towards more rain dominant for the Dungeness means increased winter flows and
reduced summer flows. For the Elwha, which was historically a more rain dominant
watershed, there is less of a shift in timing of flow, but instead a projected simple
increase in amount of winter flow and reduction in summer flow.
b)
Draft Vulnerabilities and Prioritization Matrix
On November 12th, 2014 a diverse range of stakeholders met in Sequim, WA to discuss
Climate Change and issues of Water Resources on the North Olympic Peninsula. This
workshop included a review of climate change science, and identification and ranking of
regional vulnerabilities. Areas of concern were ranked on their “sensitivity” to climate
change impacts and their “adaptive capacity” or ability to respond to this change. This
ranking is a helpful method for prioritizing climate change adaptation planning across a
diverse range of vulnerabilities.
47
Below is the vulnerability ranking table drafted collaboratively by three breakout
sessions at the workshop, covering issues of: Water Supplies; Water Quality;
Watersheds. Each of the ranked vulnerabilities is described in more detail following the
table in its given vulnerability category. This detailed information was gathered during
workshop discussions of the ranking of each of the vulnerabilities, and includes aspects
of both the sensitivity and adaptive capacity discussions.
Table 10. Water Resources Vulnerability Ranking Table
Sensitivity: Low  High
S0 S1
S2
S3
S4
Adap AC0
*Forest
tive
Water
Capa
Quality
city: AC1
*Urban Run- *Water
supplies
for
Low
off
wildlife

*Soil erosion
*Emerging
vegetation/
High
bacteria/ wildlife/ Algaes
and water quality
*Alpine and sub-alpine
zones
AC2
*Coas *Coastal *Jefferson/Cla * Surface Water Supplies
tal
Wells
llam
PUD of City of Port Townsend,
Septic Water
Municipal
Clallam PUD, City of Port
Syste Quality
Groundwater Angeles, Dry Creek, City of
ms
*Clallam systems
Sequim
Wate Bay/Seik *Rural/Reside
r
u Water ntial/
Qualit Supply
Agriculture
y
Water Quality
*Wildlife
*Floodplains
AC3
*Combin
ed Sewer
Overflow
in Port
Angeles
*
Lake
Crescent
Water
Supply
*Private Wells
AC4
48
Vulnerability Ranking Descriptions:
High Vulnerability
Water Supplies for Wildlife: Climate change could: decrease snow pack; change
precipitation timing and intensity; reduce stream flow; cause rain on snow event / high
water events; increase forest fires; change stream morphology; raise stream
temperatures, and increase competition with the human population. Impacts will be
influenced by ongoing restoration projects, development, road decommissioning,
regulations, water discharge, extensive monitoring for fish populations and stream flow
levels. For adaptation, some of the potential approaches include: protection of existing
habitat; less development; maintaining existing watershed functions; active monitoring
for stream blockages; possible additional allocation of water to maintain stream levels in
late summer. Better data on how much water really is needed for fish would be useful.
Another adaptation strategy could be to use multipurpose storage that could be used
for humans or fish. All suggested adaptation strategies appear to be quite difficult to
implement.
Emerging vegetation/ bacteria/ wildlife/ algaes & water quality: Existing issues include
fecal coliform reproducing in rivers, Harmful Algae Blooms (emerging Diarrhetic Shellfish
Poisoning), Algae blooms in Anderson Lake (highly eutrophic), altered biodiversity,
increased Macro algae blooms (anthropogenic nitrogen is a direct influence). Leland
Lake, Lake Sutherland currently see freshwater plants. Climate change could influence
windows of opportunity and strength of proliferation of these organisms. Confounding
issues include nutrient loading, human introduction of species.
Alpine and sub-alpine zones: Under climate change, the area could see declining
snowpack and glaciers, increase of spring/winter/fall precipitation, declining summer
precipitation, more frequent extreme events, and more warming events. Currently, the
area is seeing a historical warming of temperatures and changes in precipitation
patterns, there also already appears to be stress on vegetation and forests, and a
proclivity towards more nonnative/invasive species. Climate changes may include drier
summers and less rainfall, whichincreases forest fire risk, more groundwater and
flooding = greater soil moisture content? Could see greater threat to disease and
beetles, stress and erosion. Adaptation success may depend on existence of glaciers,
protection status. The systems will likely adapt/change because it is protected space,
but what it changes into will not be the same.
Medium-High Vulnerability
Forest Water Quality: The area has already seen impacts from pine bark beetle and high
temperatures in water (lack of canopy) leading to high dissolved oxygen influenced by
49
logging and agricultural/residential conversion of forest lands. Impacts and adaptation
will be influenced by success of mandated buffers around streams.
Urban Run-off: The area is already seeing extreme precipitation lead to increased
turbidity and bacteria, metals run off from roads, leading to dissolved oxygen and fecal
coliform outbreaks. First large fall rain event washes summer accumulation into creeks
such as manure from agriculture sources. Lighter rain can drive contaminants into the
groundwater. Climate change could increase the dry season with contaminant loading
that is liberated during more intense fall rain events, may be large enough events to
liberate contaminants that previously were too heavy for transport (eg. metals on
roads). Relevant to adaptation, there are existing state laws for septics and wells and
Dept. of Ecology flow control. Currently have stormwater systems in place but may need
additional capacity and treatment, which are available but high cost.
Soil Erosion: Already see increased erosion and resulting turbidity during extreme
events (Johnson Creek), see erosion at Matriotti Creek due to agriculture influence. The
Elwha River is largely incised because of peak flows, Chimacum Creek has been plugged
up with overflows. There is concern about logging in steep terrain and erosion or
landslides. There is potential future alteration to bank stability species (due to pine
beetles, for example), also influence of increased peak flows and landslides. Other
influences to impacts include dam removal (Elwha), flood plain control (Dungeness) and
agriculture influence (livestock eroding bank). Erosion is in some ways a natural process
that can assist in adaptation (e.g. floodplains).
Surface Water Supplies of City of Port Townsend, Clallam PUD, City of Port Angeles, Dry
creek, City of Sequim: Supplies could see climate change influence on: recharge rate
which may differ due to changes in precipitation intensity and timing (impact is not
known currently, additional modelling or monitoring would be beneficial); lower stream
flow which may drive less stream diversion to meet fish regulations;, high water events
which can cause turbidity issues; increased water demand due to water needed to fight
an increased number of fires; increased demand due to warmer temperatures; earlier
and longer growing season could increase demand for irrigation water; increased
climate refugees could increase demand; fires in a watershed could cause turbidity (so
have to rely on stored water); and could see increased evaporation due to increased
temperatures. For historical reference: in Port Townsend low snowpack has caused
issues in past; Clallam PUD has seen low flow due to snowpack and timing of rains;
Makah have had water supply issues; Beaver Creek and Lake Pleasant have had issues.
Warming temperature have had impacts on algal/water quality issue in Port Townsend.
Generally, reduced snowpack impacts refilling of reservoirs though this doesn’t impact
areas further west that are rain-dominant watersheds. Adaptation options could be tied
to storage capacity, conservation programs and water use efficiency laws, accurate data
on how much water fish actually need, county infrastructure planning, interties with
other systems, conservation and education. These actions could be challenging due to
50
implement due to the range of interested stakeholders with divergent interests and
needs.
Medium Vulnerability
Jefferson/Clallam PUD groundwater Water Supplies: System could see recharge rates
and amounts altered by snow pack decrease (as noted above, more data is needed);
changes in precipitation timing and intensity; low stream flow; rain on snow event / high
water events; increased forest fires; higher temperatures and evaporation; increased
competition for resources (irrigation, population, fires). Jefferson PUD has seen drought
followed by rain, where the overall recharge rate was less than expected, perhaps due
to rain coming when plants were actively growing. Historically, drought events correlate
with drops in static water levels tied to timing and quantity of precipitation. Ongoing
influences include potential for pollution from septics or fertilizers. Adaptation
opportunities could include conservation methods and rate structures, alteration of
storage methods, interties between systems, and regulatory changes that support
these actions.
Rural/Residential/Agriculture Water Quality: Currently, some manure lagoons
occasionally see overflow during extreme precipitation events, not known if this also
sees seepage to groundwater; other pollutants include pesticides, herbicides, fertilizer,
contaminants on hardscape (Marrowstone has cisterns). Capacity of manure lagoons
may not be adequate under climate change, and shoreline and natural buffers could
diminish. Existing processes relevant to adaptation include enforcement and education.
Private Wells: Wells can be influenced by climate change where sea level rise can cause
salt water intrusion; there is some impact of lower snowpack on wells; shallow wells are
highly sensitive for infiltration; recharge rate may differ due to changes in precipitation
intensity and timing; there could be increased demand due to warmer temperatures;
earlier and longer growing season could increase demand for irrigation water; could see
increased demand from climate refugees. Other factors can influence the water table in the past, irrigation ditches were leaking, and when those were piped, that reduced
the water table and wells dried up. In Elwha - 5 or 6 people have lost their wells (could
be from dams but not sure, Laird’s Corner and Lower valley); Clallam PUD has previously
had some shortages due to low stream flow and regulatory constraints - needed to
implement conservation measures. There has already been saltwater intrusion in
Marrowstone and other Jefferson County areas. Confounding issues includes behavior
(Marrowstone increased usage when PUD water was brought in), water pricing, zoning
and regulation. There is the potential that sea level rise may cause the groundwater
table to rise in coastal areas. Adaptation strategies include the potential for interties
with existing water systems, reuse of greywater, or reclamation system for irrigation;
can influence personal behavior with metering; put in cisterns; rainwater catchment;
education on conservation; native plant education; regulatory refinement to affect
usage rate; comprehensive planning; ; agreements with irrigation companies. The
51
approach may vary across different systems. These actions may not be that monetarily
expensive but the challenge is the need to communicate to and influence the actionsof
many individuals.
Wildlife: A changing climate could impact wildlife through extreme weather, drought
and wildfires. Currently the region has a moderate climate with diverse wildlife
populations; elk populations are staying low. Under climate change could see limited
food at higher elevations, lack of snowpack, increased stress, and more interactions
with humans if animals are driven from higher elevations and do not have food. Could
see more human interaction, more hunting, more fencing, more management, more
diseases (pine beetle). Current confounding issues include development, harvesting,
hunting, forestry. For adaptation success, need to identify key species, indicator species
to monitor to help guide response. Habitat management can involve: hunting/harvest,
access to habitat/connectivity, population/habitat monitoring, corridors, open space,
and access to water.
Floodplains: Under climate change, could see increased frequency of storm events, rain
events. Increased frequency/severity of drought events; changes in hydrograph, pulse.
Currently see impact from levees, bridges, diversions, upland land use practices, storm
water discharge. Could see increased erosion, scouring, more big cobbles, uplands
sediment sources, increased flooding, changes in side channel habitat, property
damage, increased storm flashiness of floods, impacts on estuaries, intrusion issues for
groundwater. Adaptation opportunities vary from place to place – sometimes
unrestricted, sometimes protected; there is an improving political/funding climate – i.e.
work on Dungeness; issues are knownwhich makes it easier to map and manage. For
adaptation, need space, access to floodplain, regulatory – enforcement and
improvement of regulations, management input – time, funding, public outreach.
Political climate can be difficult as there are many private owners on floodplain.
Medium-Low Vulnerability
Coastal Wells Water Quality: Sensitivity of the wells depends on groundwater flow and
recharge and irrigation methods. Climate change could bring diminished opportunity for
groundwater recharge, along with impacts from sea level rise and coastal storms.
Currently, diminishment of water table through use drops water table and allows
saltwater intrusion, coastal development also has influence.
Clallam Bay / Seiku Water Supply: groundwater-based system; currently not as much
snowpack-driven as for systems further east, so impact is a bit less.
Low Vulnerability
Coastal Septic System Water Quality: Systems are already compromised at Golden
Sands, Three Crabs, Beckett Pt. Climate change could influence evaporation rate (for
52
mound systems), and sea level rise could inundate septic fields. Related issues are
enforcement and corrective actions (supposed to be inspected each year), also differing
quality in maintenance and management. Many individual responsibilities would play
into adaptation strategies.
Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) in Port Angeles: Extreme precipitation events cause
CSO, currently 100 overflow events a year (tracking started in 2000) but with new
system (designed and funded) should have 1 event a year by 2016. Climate change could
increase the frequency of CSO, impact is mostly to Port Angeles harbor. System is seeing
upgrade to conveyance of west Port Angeles to treatment plant, will also have a storage
tank to hold overflow.
Lake Crescent Water Supply: Currently not as much snowpack-driven as for systems
further east, so impact is a bit less; supply does not currently have issues, adaptive
capacity is good.
Vulnerability Issues Needing “Adaptive Capacity” Ranking
The following issues received a Sensitivity Ranking but no ranking of Adaptive Capacity
during the workshop (due to time limitations). The descriptions of their Sensitivity
follow the table below. If you would like to provide input on these issues please add
your own Adaptive Capacity ranking for each vulnerability (using the criteria outlined on
page 1), as well as providing a brief description on your rationale for the ranking.
Vulnerability
Issue
Shorelines/
Estuaries
Wetland function
Native and nonnative
vegetationupland
and
riparian
Development
from
climate
refugees
Homeowners
Sensitivity Adaptive
Ranking
Capacity
Ranking:?
S3
Rationale for Adaptive Capacity Ranking
S3
S3
S2
S3
Vulnerability Description for Sensitivity Rankings
53
Shorelines/ Estuaries: Under climate change these areas could experience increased
frequency and severity of severe storms, sea level rise, warmer waters, alteration to
erosion patterns, and altered algal bloom events. These areas already see increased
periodic flooding and salt water intrusion. Warming water trends stress the ecosystem,
increase flora/fauna susceptibility to parasites, bacteria, and disease. Sea level rise could
promote a higher incidence of salt water intrusion in marshes/estuaries and stress the
plant community. Could also see changes in estuary freshwater lens, thermocline due to
changes in temperature and freshwater inputs. There is potential for increased estuary
turbidity due to increased sediment load, more intense stream pulse, and potentially
scouring. Other confounding issues are the management difficulties of these areas (e.g.
property owner-driven protection measures), as well as the development pressure,
existing armoring, nutrient runoff (stormwater, agriculture sources), and current large
scale restoration (such as the Elwha estuary, Dungeness floodplain, Pysht).
Wetland Function: Relevant climate change issues include water availability, drought,
rates of inflow and outflow (changing precipitation patterns, snowmelt), flooding
(potential increased heavy nutrient load), increased sediment deposits could fill up
wetlands. Biggest current impact to this system comes from human society, and some
animal alterations (e.g. beavers). Climate change could lead to an overall disturbance of
ecological balance – changing condition, changing hydrology – shift in plants
communities, nutrient load, algae bloom, low oxygen levels, changing invertebrate
population. Wetlands are complex and affected in different ways – or if inundated, they
become flooded. Wetlands dry up if not fed by snow pack, wetlands can disappear.
Would nutrient discharge from wetlands spike with extreme events?
Native and non-native vegetation - upland and riparian: Relevant climate change
impacts include: high stream flow, low stream flow, drought, wildfire, air temperature
increases, and reduction in snowpack. Historically have seen a moderate climate,
precipitation and hydrology extremes do not support same vegetation complex in same
places, can stress species, encourage non-natives. Climate change could cause a loss of
streamside vegetation (shade and wood), streams may become wider and shallower,
bug infestations (driving catastrophic fire, disease susceptibility). Future confounding
factors include higher management costs, more sedimentation, the use of more
pesticides, surface and stream bank erosion, and a potential decline in forestry (which
could remove roads and limit ability to access areas during fires)
Development from Climate Refugees: Climate change could result in higher
temperatures and reduced snow pack, building on the existing sunny Sequim effect – it’s
going to get even nicer – regionally Sequim is attractive and may become more so.
However, existing national perception is this is gray, rainy place. If the region becomes
more attractive due to climate change, that equals more people, more development,
more impervious surface (stormwater increase), more warming (from urban heat island
effect), more habitat lost, increased demand for water, and the potential for
fragmented habitat.
54
Homeowners: Main climate change impact could come from sea level rise. Group
already experiences extreme precipitation, increased flooding, increased bluff failure of
high bank. Confounding issues include the existing coastal armoring, regulatory
environment; having people want to build exposed homes – view homes have higher
value.
4.
NATURAL AND MANAGED ECOSYSTEMS
a)
Relevant Climate Projections
Natural and Managed Ecosystems is a focus area aimed generally at topics of Fisheries
and Aquaculture; Agriculture and Forestry; Wildlife. In addition to the general trends in
temperature, precipitation, and ocean conditions described earlier in this report, there
are additional climate change impacts, specifically air and river water temperatures
impact to ecosystems and water availability in soils.
Figure 22: Natural and Managed Ecosystem overview for the Focus Area. Data layers include primary
crop, shellfish harvest sites, sensitive aquatic sites, and rare plant locations.
General increases in air temperatures will also drive increases in sea surface
temperatures and river warming. Ecosystems have developed to thrive and tolerate
certain temperature thresholds that may be altered or exceeded under climate change.
55
Figure 23 below shows changes to air and river temperatures and their relevance to the
overall vitality of salmon species.
Figure 2356. Current and projected air and river water temperatures. Average weekly August air temp
(shading) and river water temperatures (dots) for historic conditions, 1970-1999 (left panel) and future
projections, 2040s (high emissions scenario – right panel). The Dungeness River (upper right quadrant) will
likely remain cool (see blue dot in right panel) into mid century, even as land temperatures increase,
owing to steep gradient and snowmelt that supplies water to the river over the summer.
The shifts in timing and amounts of precipitation in the fall-winter months, and the
reduction in summer precipitation and river flows will hold direct impact to the amount
of water stored in soils and available for forests, agriculture, and wildlife. Figure 24
below shows projected soil water storage from now until the end of the century for
Clallam County.
56
Figure 24.57 Projected changes to soil water storage in Clallam County. Monthly averages of soil water
storage for four time periods for the RCP4.5 future emission scenario (reduced future GHG emissions) and
RCP8.5 scenario (continued levels of current GHG emissions) simulations. The average of 30 climate
models is indicated by the solid lines and their standard deviations are indicated by the respective shaded
envelopes.
Climate change impacts to agriculture in the NOP region will vary greatly by type of
agricultural commodity and ultimate severity of climate change. The overarching
relevant impacts of concern to all agricultural sector sin the PNW include; increases in
mean summer temperatures, increases in mean cool-season temperatures, increases in
length of growing season, increases in length of growing season, increase in mean
evapotranspiration, decrease in summer soil moisture, decrease in mean summer
precipitation, and increase in mean winter precipitation58. Figure 25 illustrates the
connection between these impacts and particular portions of the agricultural sector.
57
Figure 2559. PNW portions of the agricultural sector by market value ($billion) in 2007, alongside their
sector specific potential climate change impacts.
Much like the plants and animals that make up the agricultural sector, those natural and
managed forest ecosystems will be vulnerable to the same suite of climate change
impacts. These impact are expected in a magnitude to substantially affect PNW forest’s
“distribution, growth, and functioning”60. Generally, impacts include limited future subalpine forests, water availability changes and tree growth, increasing annual and
extreme temperatures, altered carbon cycling, changing windows of opportunity for
bark beetles and defioliating insects, and altered wildfire regimes61.
b)
Draft Vulnerabilities and Prioritization Matrix
On November 13th, 2014 a diverse range of stakeholders met in Blyn, WA to discuss
Climate Change impacts relevant to issues of Natural and Managed Ecosystems on the
North Olympic Peninsula. This workshop included a review of climate change science,
and identification and ranking of regional vulnerabilities. Areas of concern were ranked
on their “sensitivity” to climate change impacts and their “adaptive capacity” or ability
to respond to this change. This ranking is a helpful method for prioritizing climate
change adaptation planning across a diverse range of vulnerabilities.
Below is the vulnerability ranking table drafted collaboratively by three breakout
sessions at the workshop, covering issues of: Fisheries and Aquaculture; Agriculture and
58
Forestry; and Wildlife. Each of the ranked vulnerabilities is described in more detail
following the table in its given vulnerability category. This detailed information was
gathered during workshop discussions of the ranking of each of the vulnerabilities, and
includes aspects of both the sensitivity and adaptive capacity discussions.
Table 11. Natural and Managed Ecosystems Vulnerability Ranking Table
Sensitivity: Low  High
S0 S1
S2
S3
S4
Adap AC
*Wild Salmon
tive 0
*Nearshore
Capa
environment-natural
city:
context
Low AC
*Wet
*Waterfowl
*Wild/commercial

1
-lands
*Clallam
low shellfish stocks
High
elevation
forests- *Nearshore
Natural regeneration environment-urban
*Chimacum
context
Agriculture
*Food chain base (fish,
insects, plankton)
*Amphibians
*Sea and shorebirds
AC
*Marine mammals
*Nearshore
2
*SouthEast Jefferson environment-estuary
Co. Forests
context
*High
elevation *Marine
and
forests
-natural Freshwater Fish
regeneration
*Shellfish hatchery
*Raptors
*Songbirds
AC
*Dungeness *Salmon hatchery
3
Agriculture *Small
land
*Quilcene
mammals
Agriculture
*Salmon
aquaculture
*Large land
mammals
AC
*Clallam
low
4
elevation
forestsmanaged
*High
elevation
forests-managed
59
Vulnerability Ranking Descriptions:
High Vulnerability
Wild Salmon: Juvenile salmon have a critical 2-3 month survival period in nearshore
habitat, during which they can be impacted by elevated water temperature, low oxygen
and predation. Under climate change, salmon may have to face: low water levels and
and changes in run timing. Hatcheries may face depleted oxygen and may need to move
to higher flow sites or artificially oxygenate their water supply. There is also potential for
increased plankton blooms and challenges to wild salmon food sources. Existing
compacting issues include the mining of sand and gravel deposits near streams (which
allow recharge.) At a hatchery at Low Creek (need to confirm location) they are already
pumping ground water and filtering for use in their facility instead of using streamflow,
owing to poor seasonal water quality. For adaptation, Hatchery and Wild stocks have a
certain degree of innate plasticity as colonizer fish but are also already meeting existing
critical thresholds in some areas.
Nearshore Environment-natural context: Historically these areas have been affected by
ocean chemistry, temperatures, dissolved oxygen, dinoflaggelate blooms, and
alterationto Strait of Juan de Fuca circulation. Could be impacted under climate change
by amount and timing of freshwater inputs, erosion, sediment transport, improving
environments for invasives gaining footholds. Other influential factors include runoff
from non-point pollution sources, armoring, lack of riparian habitat. Conservation
practices can help with adaptation in this environment, it is also influenced by sediment
transport, and organisms in tidal zones have some adaptive capacity with shifting
tidelines.
Wild/commercial shellfish stocks: In wild/seeded beds seeing a lack of recruitment for
pacific oyster (non-native), native hood canal oysters doing a little better in their habitat
niche, Geoducks are also showing some resiliency to the current changing climate
conditions but all are facing high temperatures and algae blooms. Failures at
hatcheries=failure of seed stocks. It is expected that for the foreseeable future failures
at hatcheries will continue. Hood canal oysters can deal with anoxic, high freshwater
input environments, hatcheries are already facing the continuous treatment of water
inputs and outputs to their plants. For adaptation, wild/seeded stock may have some
plasticity, and ability to select species for survival, non-native types seem to have more
efficient metabolism, but takes many years to acquire strains. Olympia oysters in
estuary may have historically seen high pHs but have a narrow preference for habitat
and pacific oysters (non-native) are already highly dominant. Geoduck are all from
native stock and have more efficient metabolism
Nearshore environment-urban context: Historically, these areas have been affected by
ocean chemistry, temperatures, dissolved oxygen, dinoflaggelate blooms, and alteration
60
to strait mixing zones. Could be impacted under climate change by amount and timing
of freshwater inputs, erosion, sediment transport, and improving environments for
invasives gaining foothold. Other influential factors include runoff from non-point
source pollution, armoring, lack of riparian habitat. Conservation practices can help with
adaptation in this environment, it is also influenced by sediment transport, organisms in
tidal zones have some adaptive capacity with shifting tidelines.
Food chain base (fish, insects, plankton): Relevant changing climate conditions include
warmer air and water, changing chemical composition of water, flow regimes, increased
turbidity scouring, erosion issues, population/development, water usage, herbicides,
fertilizers, sea level rise, summer droughts, declining snow pack. Currently, upwelling
brings nutrients and changes PH (plankton vulnerable to higher acidity), drought has
impacted fish die off of salmon and migrators in the past; flooding, scouring of Redds;
turbidity can impact forage fish and salmon; erosion; debris flow – scours system, which
impacts insects, freshwater plankton, forage fish; insects – have been impacts on
snowfly; sea level rise may impact range; timing for salmon runs and waterflow regime –
can also impact forage fish; temperature impact on insects; acidification; plankton; algal
and fungus blooms impact O2 which kill juveniles and forage fish.
Pesticides/herbicides/fertilizers; water demand; microplastics impact on forage fish and
plankton. Relevant to adaptation there is quick evolution for insects; some are
migratory/mobile; some flexibility in what they eat (plankton types for forage fish);
some salmonids evolve fast; near shore restoration/protection can help adaptation;
could introduce calcium or nutrients; create conditions that allow us to have functional
foodweb.
Amphibians: Climate change could introduce issues of droughts and high flows of water;
humidity or moisture levels; microclimate changes; overall air and water temp; pH;
changing water chemistry such as dissolved O2; habitat migration. Droughts have
already been harmful, habitat loss due to floods and erosion; predatory/prey abundance
or loss; temperature and water chemistry fluctuations in the past. Climate change could
also increase invasive species which could displace or increase predators or
competition; loss of food web species; loss or increase of habitat; drought /
reproductive issues; susceptibility to diseases. Confounding issues include development
that displaces habitat; toxins from pollution, herbicides, etc; invasive species; plastics.
Adaptation will depend on evolution or genetic diversity, mobility, humans, but need
education and political policy and will to drive action; could also consider assisted
migration.
Sea and shorebirds; Potential climate change issues include: changing water
temperature (which impacts food sources, and can cause algae bloom which killed off
surf scoters previously) and quality and storm intensity and frequency, seasonal shift.
These bird move and feed with the ocean’s and shoreline’s climate and food sources. As
climate changes & ocean acidity increases the birds are pressured to adjust their feeding
patterns and migration routes. Relocation of feeding flyways will cause reduced success
61
in finding food and increase competition with resident species. Climate change shifts
and disrupts a natural timetable for migration and feeding patterns. Changing sea levels
will modify and in some instances eradicate breeding grounds that are at, or near, sea
level. Flooding of nesting areas can destroy nests and/or increase exposure to
predators. Other relevant issues include over fishing, which traps fish-eating birds and
also reduces their access to forage fish. Increased development of shorelines for
business, industry, and homebuilding reduces the space available for the birds to feed,
rest, and nest. Forage fish declines due to over harvest, plus water contamination also
adversely impact birds. In adaptation, these birds can fly and adapt diets, but more
bound to flyways that are water related; they will always need food and safe nesting
areas.
Medium-High Vulnerability
Waterfowl: Climate change influence to this group could include: water flow volume,
temperature, storms and storm surge. Storm intensity and frequency disrupt nesting.
Waterfowl are habituated to specific nesting locations and earlier more intense weather
shifts under climate change could devastate breeding if young are in nests or unable to
swim and feed themselves. Storm and rising water can disrupt migration, and feeding
between wintering site and breeding/nesting grounds. For adaptation, this group can fly
and swim, but need adequate safe water, marshlands to feed and nest as well as open
flyways and air quality.
Clallam low elevation forests-Natural regeneration; The group differentiated between
naturally regenerated forests and managed forests since impacts such as drought and
fire are more severe in wilderness versus managed, working forests. No forests are
highly adaptable due to the slow life cycle of dominant tree species. The Clallam low
elevation forests are susceptible to drought, fire and heat stress.
Chimacum Agriculture: The Chimacum valley has very little water available for
agriculture during the growing season, making it sensitive to drought and heat stress.
There are adaptive measures that could mitigate some of this risk, but currently the
basin has extremely limited restrictions to new water use by Dept. of Ecology, making it
poorly adaptable at this time. The region is vulnerable to flooding, but has a historical
precedence of seasonal flooding that is tolerated by current agricultural soils and
cropping systems, reducing the vulnerability. This is Jefferson County’s most productive
farmland and highly valued for the community benefits it provides.
Nearshore environment-estuary context: Historically, these areas have been affected by
ocean chemistry, temperatures, dissolved oxygen, dinoflaggelate blooms, alteration to
strait mixing zones. Could be impacted under climate change by amount and timing of
freshwater inputs, erosion, sediment transport, and improving environments for
invasives gaining foothold. Other influential factors include runoff from non-point
pollution sources, armoring, and lack of riparian habitat. Conservation practices can help
62
with adaptation in this environment, it is also influenced by sediment transport, and
organisms in tidal zones have some adaptive capacity with shifting tidelines.
Marine and Freshwater Fish: Relevant changing climate conditions include ocean
acidification; sea level rise; amount of cover available; flow regimes and timing;
temperature and sediment changes. Currently, drought periods cause die offs of
freshwater fish, in high water get die off of freshwater fish; warmer temperatures
causelow dissolved O2, high stress and food web impacts; sedimentation causeschanges
in vision/breathing (impacted salmon in the past). With ocean acidification, marine and
anadronomous fish like salmon will see changes to food supply. The estuary availability
with change with sea level rise. Other climate change impacts include: the ability to go
upstream due to low flows, availability of cover, food and 02; and floodingcausing
changes to cover (if wood leaves the system), scouring of beds and redds and impacts to
food. Confounding issues includes marine debris and microplastics, multiple pollutant
pathways, stormwater, pesticides, insecticides, habitat loss, shoreline armoring, channel
simplification, habitat structures. For adaptation, there is mobility within the aquatic
system, some memory of adaptability, some ability to change food source; need some
habitat diversity and refuge (food, cover, etc.) for the transition.
Medium Vulnerability
Marine mammals: Climate change can influence water temperature and clarity; ocean
acidification; extreme precipitation; drought. Food sources like salmon could be
impacted due to climate factors and reduced food supply. Also could see increased
runoff w/ pollutants. Food chain decreases due to climate change. Currently, toxins in
food chain impact immune system; sonar issues and boats, have seen food chain
impacts; water temperature and clarity. For adaptation, can move to new areas;
endangered species protections; existing restoration projects; fishing regulations. Need
to maintain good conditions for food chains; control toxics (sea debris and runoff); and
ensure food chain preservation.
SouthEast Jefferson Co. Forests: The forests in this area are vulnerable to many of the
same threats as in other areas (drought, heat stress, fire, pest pressure) and are equally
slow in adapting due to the long life of dominant species. However, this region receives
more rain than the more northern rain shadow regions, likely providing it more
buffering to stressors. Managed forests will also be able to replant with species that are
better adapted to expected increases in temperatures and develop/ use other
management techniques to help mitigate climate change.
High elevation forests - natural regeneration: These forests are susceptible to increased
risk of drought, heat stress, pest pressure and fire in an already inhospitable
environment. Thin soils and slow growth make these forests especially vulnerable, and
species are slow to adapt due to their long life cycles. However, these ecosystems are
63
somewhat acclimated to harsh conditions and experience cooler temperatures in the
heat of summer, providing them some potential resilience.
Shellfish hatchery: Hatchery closest to ocean and upwelling is the highest hit by Ocean
Acidification, and seeing extreme variation in water chemistry. Source water can be
extremely hypoxic. When shellfish are moving from eggs to larva 80-90% of their weight
is shell. In wild/seeded beds seeing a lack of recruitment for pacific oyster (non-native),
native hood canal oysters doing a little better in their habitat niche, Geoducks are also
showing some resiliency but all are facing high temperatures and algae blooms. Failures
at hatcheries=failure of seed stocks. It is expected that for the foreseeable future
failures at hatcheries will continue. Hood canal oysters can deal with anoxic, high
freshwater input environments, hatcheries are already facing the continuous treatment
of water inputs and outputs to their plants. For adaptation, hatcheries can treat water,
hang matrixes of algae and shellfish to improve water quality, with enough money lots
of technology to access. Wild/Seeded stock may have some plasticity, and ability to
select species for survival, non-native types seem to have more efficient metabolism,
but takes many years to acquire strains. Olympia oysters in estuaries may have
historically seen high pHs but have a narrow preference for habitat and pacific oysters
(non-native) are already highly dominant. Geoduck are all from native stock and have
more efficient metabolism.
Raptors: Under climate change could see change in nesting location, territorial range,
migration routes and migration food sources. They could also see alteration of seasonal
timing of nesting, and reduced food sources for feeding young. This could mean
increased stress on adult birds to find food and feed young. Also, currently seeing
habitat shrinkage, decline in some food source species of birds, animals, and fish.
Changing food sources are a concern, migratory pressures change. For adaptation, they
do have ability to fly and hunt, and can change prey base. Need to ensure stability to
habitat and food source and migratory routes.
Songbirds: Climate change could influence seasonal shifts, changes to food sources,
migratory pressures change; change to water flow volume, temperature, storms and
storm surge. Could see adjusted migration and breeding schedules and migration
routes. Warmer climates produce greater varieties of insects and food grains/berries.
Birds depend on climate conditions and temperatures to produce vegetation, which
feeds them or shelters the insects they eat. Trees leafing out too early or too late for
migrating birds could expose nests to predators, both aerial and terrestrial. As birds are
forced to fly further north to find right breeding conditions territorial competitions
could develop between resident and migratory species. Confounding issues include tall
buildings/structures built in migratory flyways, many with lights that disorientate birds.
Migratory songbirds fly at night to avoid heat and predators. As humans light the night,
the birds are threatened. In adaptation, these birds can fly and adapt diets. Need safe
areas to fly and appropriate habitat and food sources.
64
Medium-Low Vulnerability
Salmon hatchery: Juvenile salmon have a critical 2-3 month survival period in nearshore
habitat, which can be depleted by temperatures, hypoxia, low oxygen and is extremely
predatory. Under climate change salmon may have to face low water levels and the
stress of staging, run timing could change, hatcheries may face depleted oxygen and
need to move to higher flow sites. There is also potential for increased plankton blooms
and challenges to wild salmon feed source. Existing compacting impacts include water
quality issues (see Wild salmon). For adaptation, Hatchery and Wild stocks have a
certain degree of innate plasticity as colonizer fish but are also already meeting existing
critical thresholds in some areas.
Small land mammals: Relevant climate change conditions include temperature,
snowpack, wildfire and drought. Less snowpack can mean less insulation for marmots,
more rain can flood burrows, the subalpine may dry out without snowpack, and wildfire
can displacesmall mammals. Other impacts could include: less vegetation with drought,
or maybe new vegetation; emerging other animal migrants; predators like coyotes may
get into the high country quicker and can kill off young; availability of food may change
due to drought; migration patterns may change; and wildfire. Currently impacted by
humans/forest harvesting/invasive species. In adaptation, large mammals have more
flexibility in their food source and more mobility than small mammals. Need to preserve
and maintain wildlife corridors and healthy ecosystem in general.
Wetlands: Natural wetlands are subject to change with the climate due to changes in
precipitation patterns, which could potentially dry up wetlands seasonally or year-round
in conditions of drought and increased evaporation during dry summer months.
Conversely, they could expand due to increased precipitation during wet months. The
function and nature of wetlands is to absorb and hold water, providing them some
resilience by design.
Low Vulnerability
Dungeness Agriculture: The Dungeness region has some of the finest agricultural soils
on the Olympic Peninsula and water rights that support vibrant agriculture. These
conditions also make the area attractive to development, and with the potential for
increased development pressure due to climate migration, land conversion puts
agriculture in the Dungeness at risk. The area is also low-lying and subject to increased
flood risk and potential sea level rise or storm surge. As there is much open space and
farmland is well suited to absorbing seasonal fluctuations in precipitation, and since
agriculture is highly adaptable due to annual cropping cycles, this region is considered at
a low risk.
Quilcene Agriculture: Similar to the Dungeness above, the Quilcene agricultural area,
located primarily around the Little Quilcene fork, is fairly adaptable to expected impacts
65
of climate change. Agriculture is able to adjust better than many industrial sectors due
to annual cropping cycles and having open space to act as a sponge for erratic and
increased precipitation. This region also has strong water rights and volume that will
buffer it from the impacts of drought and heat stress. A dramatic drop in volume in the
river would impact water availability over time.
Salmon aquaculture: Under climate change, hatcheries may face depleted oxygen and
need to move to higher flow sites. Also potential for increased plankton blooms and
challenge to wild salmon feed source. In adaptation, aquaculture has capacity for
selection of species strain, changing dissolved oxygen (though both may have difficulty
with rate of change). Feed technologies are improving, feed conversion ratios are
generally improving, and Australia is able to farm in warmer waters.
Large land mammals: Relevant climate change conditions and impacts are the same as
for small land mammals, see above. In adaptation, large mammals have more flexibility
in their food source and more mobility than small mammals. Need to preserve and
maintain wildlife corridors and healthy ecosystems in general.
Clallam low elevation managed forests: These forests are somewhat buffered from risks
of drought, fire, pest pressure and heat stress due to greater rainfall and temperatures
moderated by proximity to the Strait and coast. Managed systems also allow for
practices to mitigate risks, such as planting varieties better suited to heat and drought.
High elevation managed forests: Managed forests offer more resilience as the tools for
mitigation increase, though the costliness of employing intensive management may
make it impractical. These forests will be sensitive to the same risks as others on the
Peninsula: drought, heat stress, risk of fire, pest pressure. And the thin soils and
extreme conditions make this ecosystem less resilient than low elevation forests,
though adaptive capacity may be increased due to acclimation to harsh conditions.
Potential Opportunity
None identified.
5.
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
a)
Relevant Climate Projections
Critical Infrastructure is a focus area aimed generally at topics of: Low-lying
Infrastructure; Transportation Corridors and Emergency Management; and Utilities,
Sewer & Solid Waste. In addition to the general trends in temperature, precipitation,
and ocean conditions described earlier in this report, there are additional climate
66
change impacts specifically relevant to critical infrastructure, including sea level rise and
long-term viability of transportation corridors.
Figure 26. Overview for Critical Infrastructure Focus Area including slope stability, transportation
corridors, and critical infrastructure buildings such as hospitals, EMS, and Fire stations.
This project involves the creation of region-specific sea level rise projections that take
into account vertical land movement from tectonic forces and include mapping of 10year storm surge maximums. More information on this modeling is located in the
Appendix The figures below show sea level rise maps created from two different
emissions scenarios and for three locations: Port Townsend, Port Angeles, and Neah
Bay.
67
Figure 27: Low Severity Sea Level rise and coastal flood risk map for Port Townsend.
68
Figure 28: High-Severity Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flood Risk map for Port Townsend
69
Figure 29: Low-Severity Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flood Risk map for Port Angeles
70
Figure 30: High-Severity Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flood Risk map for Port Angeles
Figure 31: Low-Severity Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flood Risk map for Neah Bay
71
Figure 32: High-Severity Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flood Risk map for Neah Bay
The North Olympic Peninsula is connected to the population centers of Seattle and
Tacoma by a small network of highways and the marine ferry system. The Washington
Department of Transportation has explored potential climate change impacts to these
networks and ranked transportation corridors based on their perceived vulnerability.
Figure 33 below displays Olympic Peninsula transportation vulnerabilities to sea level
rise and extreme events.
72
Figure 3362. Olympic Peninsula climate change transportation vulnerabilities identified by WA DOT.
Vulnerability findings from Figure 35 above include:
“SR 101 between mileposts 165 and 185 is subjected to impacts from creeks and
rivers that are aggrading due to increased sedimentation. This is likely to increase as
the glaciers and snow fields melt in the mountains. This area is also likely to
experience more extreme weather events. SR 101 near Discovery Bay is susceptible to
impacts from higher sea levels at 4 and 6 feet. SR 105 would be affected by a 4- and
6-foot sea level rise and flood the road. SR 112 between mileposts 29 and 40 is
affected by unstable soils. This would be made worse by more extreme precipitation
events that would saturate the soils. SR 116 currently has only a few feet of
freeboard. The road is an earthen causeway with culverts at the susceptible points,
and sea level increases will flood the road. Flooding the road could lead to roadway
instability in addition to closure during high tide events.”63
b)
Draft Vulnerabilities and Prioritization Matrix
On November 14th, 2014 a diverse range of stakeholders met in Port Angeles, WA to
discuss Climate Change impacts relevant to issues of Critical Infrastructure on the North
Olympic Peninsula. This workshop included a review of climate change science, and
identification and ranking of regional vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities were ranked on
their “sensitivity” to climate change impacts and their “adaptive capacity” or ability to
respond to this change. This ranking is a helpful method for prioritizing climate change
adaptation planning across a diverse range of vulnerabilities.
73
Below is the vulnerability ranking table drafted collaboratively by three breakout
sessions at the workshop, covering issues of: Low-lying Infrastructure; Transportation
Corridors and Emergency Management; Utilities, Sewer & Solid Waste. Each of the
ranked vulnerabilities is described in more detail following the table in its given
vulnerability category. This detailed information was gathered during workshop
discussions of the ranking of each of the vulnerabilities, and includes aspects of both the
sensitivity and adaptive capacity discussions.
Table 12. Critical Infrastructure Vulnerability Ranking Table
Sensitivity: Low  High
S0 S1
S2
S3
Adap AC0
*Clallam
*Clallam
Bay/Seiku
tive
Bay/Seiku
Sewage
Treatment
Capa
Sewage
(Long-term)
city:
Treatment
Low
(Short-term)

High AC1
*3 Crabs Road
* Downtown Port
Townsend, Kah Tai
Lagoon area
*Roads in Clallam Bay
AC2
*Vacuum Sewer *Septic Systems
System
at *Highway 112
Elwha Lowlands * Hoko/Ozette road
*Highway 116
*Forest Roads for
*Highway
fighting fires
19/20/Port
Townsend Ferry
AC3
S4
*Port of Port
Townsend
Boat Haven
*Port of Port
Townsend
Point Hudson
*Clallam
Bay/Seiku
Sewer System
(overall)
*Stormwater
Outfall
Infrastructure
*Highway 101
*Electric * Clallam
/ *Port Angeles Landfill
*Sewer
al
Wheel / Ward / *Highway 104/ Hood Outfall
Transmi Burlingame
Canal Bridge
Infrastructure
ssion
bridges
*Morse Creek and Hot
Infrastru *Forest Roads Springs Road
cture
to
* City of P.A. Industrial
*Public
communication waterfront, Ediz Hook
Warning towers
and Lower Elwha
Systems *South
(All
Jefferson
Hazards) County
AC4
74
Vulnerability Ranking Descriptions:
High Vulnerability
Clallam Bay, Seiku sewage treatment (Long-term): Relevant climate change impacts are
sea level rise and river flooding. Currently there is existing nuisance flooding during high
flow events. Could see erosion or nuisance flooding in sewage treatment infrastructure.
Possibly some impact to Clallam Bay sewage treatment plant if river flooding magnitude
increases. System is quite old. Currently do have a good manager. Prison nearby may
present opportunities for sharing wastewater treatment resources. System could be
moved or protected. Protection of surrounding vegetation (forestland) might also
protect infrastructure. All of these adaptation options are potentially quite expensive.
Port of Port Townsend Boat Haven: The port is susceptible to climate change’s influence
on sea level rise and storm events/ surge. Currently, its stormwater outfall is near
maximum water level during storm events. If impact was large enough to cause failure
of the tide gate, it could lead to damage to stormwater filter medium and would put the
system out of operation. The follow-on impacts could mean the yard permit is
threatened (currently supports > 500 jobs). Regarding adaptation, the Port does have
some financial capacity, and is a compact and localized system. It also has resourceful
tenants and maintenance staff with the skills to address engineering problems. Yet the
Port funding base is inadequate for a total system re-build. Need political will to
increase port funding. A cost analysis tool that could help the port guide investment
decisions would be useful.
Port of Port Townsend Point Hudson: The port is susceptible to climate change’s
influence on sea level rise and storm events/surge. The old Coast Guard station
buildings on sand spit are not well built and there is currently nuisance flooding during
large rainfall events. Additional flooding could be expected due to sea level rise which
could compromise buildings even more. Thecurrent jetty is old and failing, and no
money is available for upgrades. It is the anchor and protection for downtown (east
end) and is failing today. Adaptation capability and options are the same as for Port of
Port Townsend Boat Haven above.
Medium-High Vulnerability
Clallam Bay/Seiku Sewage Treatment (short-term): Relevant climate change impacts
could come from sea level rise and river flooding. Currently there is existing nuisance
flooding during high flow events. Could see erosion or nuisance flooding in sewage
treatment infrastructure. Possibly some impact to Clallam Bay sewage treatment plant
if river flooding magnitude increases. System is quite old. Currently do have a good
75
manager. Prison nearby may present opportunities for sharing wastewater treatment
resources? System could be moved or protected. Protection of surrounding vegetation
(forestland) might also protect infrastructure. All of these adaptation options are
potentially quite expensive.
3 Crabs Road: Could see impact from sea level rise. Road has been there since 1970, was
wetlands or shoreline before; has seen localized flooding, about 50 houses located
there. Land-use policiesfor the area are also a relevant factor.. For adaptation, could
open up historic ponds, make drainage improvements; some work is being done by
North Olympic Salmon Coalition, but only at the very end of the road. May not be many
adaptation options as surrounding area is all low lying.
Downtown Port Townsend, Kah Tai lagoon area: Could see climate change influence of
sea level rise, bluff and beach erosion. Currently seeing erosion of the bluff and beach.
Could see potential impacts to existing waste water treatment plant of wastewater
outfall. There is a general lack of money for wastewater infrastructure upgrades, only
have a small income/tax stream. Kah Tai lagoon is largely an undeveloped park. In the
short-term, downtown Port Townsend probably would need some money for a new
water removal system, for when the underground is flooded. In the long-term
adaptation the underground would likely need to be filled in to protect existing
buildings. Also, utilities might need to be elevated.
Roads in Clallam Bay: Under climate change, could see increased flood magnitude in the
Clallam River. Currently see minor flooding of homes. Flooding could block road that
leads to sheriff headquarters at Slip Point. There are potential impacts to two bridges
that cross the river, the river mouth position influences how the river floods, if the river
mouth is unobstructed the river doesn’t flood. Relevant to adaptation, Wheel bridge
could be raised or modified to clear log jams. Two other bridges could be possibly
raised. Maybe modification of the river mouth? Generally, river mouth modifications
are frowned upon. Wheel bridge is part of the DNR bridge upgrade plan, which might
present opportunities. (Wheel bridge and other bridges were also covered below as part
of a different breakout group.)
Clallam Bay/Seiku Sewer System (overall): Clallam system has existing exposure in its
outflow pipe (river flooding risk) and the plant itself, existing leaky pipes have inputs
from ground water causing treatment levels at capacity. Seiku has a middle point pump
station that is low-lying and has been previously overloaded (serves 100 people). For
adaptation, Clallam Bay could pump sewage up to the prison treatment plant. Around
1000-1200 people are served by this system. Need to either: rebuild two plants,
interconnect two plants, or build a pump station to the prison. System serves
economically distressed community so may have adaptation funds available, half of
funding is potentially available but need 10 million total for construction (feeling
hopeful within 5 years will get money).
76
Stormwater Outfall Infrastructure: Stormwater system has diversified inputs and
outputs, historically outfalls were not below high tide line but that could shift, causing
pushback up the pipe depending on head pressure, in Port Angeles it is near Coho ferry
terminal. Currently the pump stations in Port Townsend are at flooding risk as they are 1
to 2 ft above sea level, if stations at the 3ft level were compromised would impact 1/3
of Port Townsend. For adaptation, choices are: increase pipe diameters, segment
system, use upland storage (Port Angeles is building this), or pump outflow. There is
existing flooding of streets when storms occur with high tides. Could pump sewer
outflow, would be cheaper than building a plant. Wastewater pumping would be much
more difficult because of the diverse inputs/outputs of the system. Large scale
precipitation events are currently not treated, the water is assumed to be clean enough.
Rain gardens are not a permanent fix, they also take rebuilding after they are used up.
Highway 101: Under climate change the highway could see sea level rise, landslides,
river flooding, landslides and culverts. Could see increased flooding during storm surge
with sea level rise; increased river flooding, increased landslides due to heavy
precipitation; road physically moved due to landslides; section by Discovery Bay is
defined by WSDOT as susceptible to impacts at sea level rise of 4’ and 6’ (sections of 101
are moderate or high impact in WSDOT study). This corridor is a critical access to large
parts of the North Olympic Peninsula, with no transportation backups. Adaptation could
center around culvert alteration or replacement, slope stabilization efforts, funding is a
high priority; one supporting factor is the fact that the highway is identified as
moderate/high vulnerability in WSDOT assessment. Likely need a feasibility study
conducted for Discovery Bay in the longer term, implementation could still be quite
difficult.
Medium Vulnerability
Septic Systems: Currently, groundwater table can rise and flood out drain fields, need
mounding when you do not have adequately draining soil. There are permanently high
water tables close to beaches, existing issues at Brinnon-Quilcene, Golden Sands.
Beckett Point got neighborhood together to grind and pump waste up to a community
drain field. Adaptation options include: re-engineering individual septics, re-engineering
neighborhood septics (easy with enough money). Political climate is tough for managing
individual’s rights when it comes to their systems. Regulators can use dye tests to show
homeowners when a system is failing, have a program for homeowners to conduct their
own inspections.
Highway 112: Climate change could impact the highway through sea level rise,
landslides, river flooding, culvert damage. Could see increased flooding during storm
surge with Sea Level Rise (SLR); increased river flooding, increased landslides due to
heavy precipitation; road could physically move due to landslides; treefalls could restrict
access; road is used for correction center access; 112 is ranked as moderate to high
impact in WSDOT study. Confounding existing issues include the funding available for
77
maintenance and land use planning policies. Relevant to adaptation, there currently
exists a management process for short term closures and repairs; also there is a current
work policy for replacing culverts; identified as moderate/high vulnerability in WSDOT
assessment. Could move the highway; replace the culverts; riprap shoreline edge;
prevent future landslides by diverting water.
Hoko/Ozette road: Climate change influence would center around changes to river
flows, as road is already affected by scour and there have been road failure issues in the
past. Confounding existing issues include logging and land use policies; it is only one
road in for 50 homes plus the park. For adaptation, could continue maintenance, seek
out money to move road if needed. Would likely need a lot of advanced planning; there
may be limited options to move, finding funding could be challenging.
Forest Roads for fighting fires: Roads could be impacted under climate change by
temperature increase, drought, wind and insects. Higher temperatures, longer dry
periods, wind potential (impacts helicopters usage for fighting fires). There is fuel
already on the ground and will likely get worse; also seeing decommissioning of forest
roads; lack of culvert replacement. For adaptation to fire risk, could make sure fire
fighters have access via keys, etc.; roads need to be maintained; policy changes by
Olympic National Park to fight fires.
Sewer Outfall Infrastructure: Sewer treatment is concentrated at one source. In Port
Angeles, Hill Street/Marine Drive serving west Port Angeles is currently inundated at
high water. Stormwater system has more diversified inputs and outputs. Currently the
pump stations in Port Townsend are at flooding risk as they are 1 to 2 ft above sea level,
if stations at the 3ft level were compromised would impact 1/3 of Port Townsend. For
adaptation, choices are: increase pipe diameters, segment system, use upland storage
(Port Angeles is building this), or pump outflow. Could pump sewer outflow, would be
cheaper than building a plant.
Medium-Low Vulnerability
Vacuum Sewer System at Elwha Lowlands: Exposure to climate change could center
around questions of if the groundwater table may rise (owing to dam removal) or if
flood plain may change, could be inundation of low lying vacuum chambers/ pump
stations, may be currently engineered for 100 year events. For adaptation, location in
lowlands means moving system uphill is probably central option, tribe has upland
options.
Highway 116: Under climate change, could experience sea level rise for 1 mile section.
Culverts have been identified as moderate vulnerability in WSDOT assessment. Could
replace with bridge or higher causeway, which would not be horribly expensive but
priority may be less. Could see increased flooding during storm surge with sea level rise
78
(moderate impact in WSDOT study – “SR 116 currently has only a few feet of
freeboard.”). It impacts access to Marrowstone Island.
Highway 19/20/Port Townsend Ferry: Under climate change could see landslide and sea
level rise. It was identified as a moderate impact in WSDOT study. While ferry dock itself
is less vulnerable, one can’t leave the ferry without getting on Hwy 20 which may be
impacted by sea level rise; ferry is also a backup for the Hood Canal Bridge. Relevant to
adaptation, have culverts and drainage and existing maintenance process; connection to
ferry gives higher priority; plus access to Port Townsend Water St retail; identified as
moderate vulnerability in WSDOT assessment. Could conduct a feasibility study; may
need to relocate ferry terminal; implementation could be difficult.
Port Angeles Landfill: Landfill is seeing ongoing remediation (relocation of waste 100200yds past erosion zone) and is engineered for 50-100 years. Bank directly west was
armored and may be creating embayment at erosion site, eroded at 1ft/yr historically
and now eroding at 2-3ft/yr. Regarding adaptation, there is ongoing remediation efforts,
if embayment is created by erosion in area the wave energy could be diminished. The
armoring to the west is protecting that bluff but may cause erosion in other areas.
Highway 104/ Hood Canal Bridge: Climate change impact could come with Sea level rise.
Currently see short term closures. Per WSDOT study, a 6’ SLR results in high impact
scenario. Have existing process for short term closures; bridge designed to
accommodate certain level of floods; existing WSDOT study ranks it as a high priority.
Could redesign for higher sea level rise; depends on life cycle; takes advanced planning;
toll option for funding. Critical access to the North Olympic Peninsula; life of bridge is 75
years so may be replaced then anyway.
Morse Creek and Hot Springs Road: Changing river flows would be the central impact of
climate change, already sees scouring from river. Bridges can fail due to river flows. It is
currently old bridge technology; very limited number of houses; except Morse Creek
provides critical access from Port Angeles to the west; Hot Springs Rd is also critical
access. Regarding adaptation, there is a scour program to inspect annually; existing
processes include deflectors, etc.; identified as moderate vulnerability in WSDOT
assessment. Need planning and investment and studies.
City of Port Angeles Industrial waterfront, Ediz Hook and Lower Elwha: Would see
climate change impact from coastal flooding, sea level rise, changing wind patterns or
storm magnitude. Currently see landfill bluff erosion, damage and flooding on trail east
of Port Angeles, Tumwater Creek flooding, levee erosion on the Elwha, Ediz Hook
armoring. Could see increased frequency and duration of coastal flooding, potential
storm impacts due to change in wind DIRECTION, utility impacts (i.e. exposed power
poles on Ediz Hook), wastewater treatment at the Nippon mill and possibly the City of
Port Angeles site? Impacts to fuel storage near Nippon mill? Need funding for
infrastructure upgrades. Existing infrastructure tends to be old and in poor condition,
79
earthquake/tsunami hazard is recognized but generally not adapted to. For adaptation,
local government policies and practices can potentially address some issues. Ediz Hook
is managed in part at the federal level, so some local state and federal money resources.
There is space for relocation of some infrastructure. Need money, updates to policies
and practices, plans and regulations, along with education and outreach to local
population to build political will.
Low Vulnerability
Clallam / Wheel / Ward / Burlingame bridges: Changing riverflows would be the central
impact of climate change, already sees scouring from river. Bridges can fail due to river
flows. It is currently old bridge technology; very limited number of houses. Regarding
adaptation, there is a scour program to inspect annually; existing processes include
deflectors, etc.; identified as moderate vulnerability in WSDOT assessment. Need
planning and investment and studies.
Forest Roads to communication towers: Under climate change could see fire and
extreme events causing washout. Currently have roads there but often blocked and not
maintained, downed trees and erosion. There is Illegal dumping blocking roads; fuel
already on ground and will get worse; decommissioning of forest roads; lack of culvert
replacement. Need to complete inventory of all towers and roads that access them,
along with commitment to road maintenance and funding.
South Jefferson County: Under climate change could see increasing flood risk due to
precipitation. Storm surge and winds knocked out Hood Canal Bridge (see Hood Canal
Bridge summary above). Currently, flooding leads to contamination of wastewater
systems. Also see seawater intrusion into residential and community wells. Need better
land planning and management.
Electrical Transmission Infrastructure: Some vaults are currently inundated,
transformers in neighborhoods are sometimes in standing water, Port Townsend
downtown deals with this. Potential risk to transmission lines in wildfire risk zones. For
adaptation, can mitigate wildfire risk by brush control (fuel management), not known
how dangerous water in vaults is? Need to pump out?
Public Warning Systems (for tsunamis and otherhazards): System could see impact from
sea level rise. Currently see some saltwater intrusion into electronics (AHAB tsunami
sys), could expect more of same. Adaptation could include armoring for systems and/or
a move to higher ground.
Potential Opportunity
80
D.
Prioritizing Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Planning
1.
Workshop Participant Review; Ongoing Data Gathering
At the end of each workshop the week of November 10 th-14th, notes were collected
from the project team leaders concerning each breakout session vulnerability discussion
and sensitivity and adaptive capacity rankings. These notes were collated and
vulnerability issues were placed on a vulnerability matrix for each workshop. These
summaries were sent electronically to workshop participants, who were asked to review
the information with two questions in mind:
1. Do you feel the vulnerabilities and their rankings in the matrix adequately
address issues of Water Resources and climate change in the region? And if not,
how would you amend and/or rank vulnerabilities differently and what would be
the outcome of that change?
2. In the detailed descriptions of each vulnerability, were the main points from
your discussion group captured? What other information needs to be amended or
altered, or what are relevant outstanding questions that require resolution?
Participants were also given an opportunity to provide feedback on other Climate
Change issues potentially not covered in the workshops.
The project team will follow up on this commenting with additional data gathering from
workshop participants and other subject matter experts. This information will be used
to decide which vulnerabilities will be treated in the project’s next steps, which include:
 A prioritization of highly vulnerable resources, locations, or systems;
 A prioritized set of adaptation strategies and actions based on climate science
and the knowledge of local stakeholders;
81
E.
Appendix
1.
Glossary
Climate system
The climate system is the highly complex system consisting of five major components:
the atmosphere, the hydrosphere, the cryosphere, the lithosphere, and the biosphere,
and the interactions among them. The climate system evolves in time under the
influence of its own internal dynamics and because of external forcings such as volcanic
eruptions, solar variations, and anthropogenic forcings such as the changing
composition of the atmosphere and land use changes.
Human system
Any system in which human organizations and institutions play a major role. Often, but
not always, the term is synonymous with society or social system. Systems such as
agricultural systems, political systems, technological systems, and economic systems are
all considered human systems for the purposes of this project.
Natural system
A natural system is a stable interacting compilation of non-man-made biological and/or
physical entities. Examples of natural systems at risk to climate change include:
dominant biomes (plants and wildlife), glaciers, coral reefs and atolls, mangroves, boreal
and tropical forests, polar and alpine ecosystems, prairie wetlands, and remnant native
grasslands.
Vulnerability
The propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected. Vulnerability encompasses a
variety of concepts including sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of capacity to
cope and adapt.64
82
2.
GIS Mapping and Analysis
This section summarizes the data sources, processes, and methods used to develop GIS
mapping and analysis for the NOPRCD Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and
Adaptation Plan. All GIS data and maps developed as part of this project will be
provided to NOPRCD and its governmental and tribal partners for future reference and
use.
Data Sources
The GIS data used in this project was acquired from a number of federal, state, and local
sources. Only published and verified data sources were selected. An abbreviated list of
the most essential GIS data layers, as well as their sources, are provided in Table X.X.
For a complete list, refer to Appendix X.X.
Table A. GIS Layers and Sources
GIS Layers
Critical Infrastructure, Clallum County
Source
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP)
2013 (1 meter resolution),
http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=ho
me&subject=prog&topic=nai
United States Geological Survey (USGS) 2009
(1 foot resolution), http://nationalmap.gov/
USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD),
http://nhd.usgs.gov/; Clallum County GIS,
http://www.clallam.net/maps/mapdata.html
USGS NHD; Washington State Geospatial Portal
(WSGP), http://geography.wa.gov/
Clallum County GIS,
http://www.clallam.net/maps/mapdata.html
Jefferson County GIS,
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/idms/shapefiles.s
html
Clallum County GIS; WSGP
Critical Infrastructure, Jefferson County
Jefferson County GIS; WSGP
Aerial Orthoimagery (Overview Maps)
Aerial Orthoimagery
(Sea Level Rise Scenarios)
Hydrography, Clallum County
Hydrography, Jefferson County
Transportation, Clallum County
Transportation, Jefferson County
LIDAR DEM, Port Townsend
LIDAR DEM, Port Angeles
LIDAR DEM, Neah Bay
Puget Sound LIDAR Consortium (PSLC),
http://pugetsoundlidar.ess.washington.edu/
PSLC
United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE),
http://coast.noaa.gov/
83
Data Processing and Mapping
Once obtained, procedures to assure quality and comparability were applied to all GIS
data. This included an assessment of overall alignment of spatial data and existence and
accuracy of metadata by Adaptation International staff, as well as the use of a standard
horizontal (NAD 1983 HARN, US Feet) and vertical datum (NAVD 88, US Feet). For this
project, all data were projected using NAD 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North
FIPS 4601 in US feet. For all data not in this projection upon receipt, a transformation
was applied.
Map layout and design are the product of Adaptation International staff, and were
created using ArcGIS 10.2 software.
Sea Level Rise Scenarios
Adaptation International staff developed locally specific relative sea level rise
projections, based on the best available climate change science, for use in this project.
These projections were mapped for the three focus areas (Neah Bay, Port Angeles, and
Port Townsend) using LIDAR derived digital elevation models (DEMs).
LIDAR (LIght Distance And Ranging, also known as Airborne Laser Swath Mapping or
ALSM) is a technology that employs an airborne scanning laser rangefinder to produce
high-resolution topographic surveys of unparalleled detail. LIDAR data for Neah Bay was
collected by the United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) and made available
through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Digital Coast
web portal http://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/. LIDAR data for Port Angeles and Port
Townsend were collected by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-specifically data from the 2012 Jefferson-Clallum LIDAR Project--and made available
through the Puget Sound Lidar Consortium (PSLC). Note that registration is required to
access PSLC data (http://pugetsoundlidar.ess.washington.edu/).
Aerial orthoimagery, used as base for the sea level rise projections, was obtained
through the United States Geological Survey (USGS) via the http://nationalmap.gov/
web portal. The analysis used the most recently available imagery with 1-foot
resolution, which was recorded in 2009. The metadata for the aerial imagery is
available.
Additionally, key resources, landmarks, and infrastructure within the three focus areas
were mapped using a combination of obtained GIS data, information provided by the
consultant team, and through review of the orthoimagery. The precise location of
community resources was confirmed by project staff and stakeholders during the
engagement workshops.
84
Complete List of Maps
A total of 10 maps were developed for this project and are provided as part of this
report.
Representing the entirety of the study area, four overview maps were created from GIS
data classified into one or more of the following categories:
Water Resources,
Critical Infrastructure,
Natural and Managed Ecosystems,
And Community Vitality.
Each of these categories is consistent with the distinct classifications used during the
engagement workshops, and also found within this report.
Furthermore, for each of the three focus areas (Neah Bay, Port Angeles, and Port
Townsend), both a low sea level rise scenario and a high sea level rise scenario were
mapped. As a result, a total of six sea level rise projection maps were created.
A complete list of maps created for this project is provided in Table X.X.
Table B. Complete List of Maps
Overview Maps
Water Resources
Critical Infrastructure
Natural and Managed Ecosystems
Community Vitality
Sea Level Rise Scenarios
Port Angeles
Low Scenario
High Scenario
Port Townsend
Low Scenario
High Scenario
Detailed list of GIS Data layers used
85
Neah Bay
Low Scenario
High Scenario
Projection: NAD 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 (US Feet)
Critical Infrastructure Geospatial Data
Available
Clallum County
Available
Jefferson County
Roads
Yes
Yes
Railways
Yes
Yes
Bridges
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Culverts
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Hospitals
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Clinics
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Nursing Homes
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Assisted Living
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Adult Family Homes
Yes
Yes
WSGP
EMS
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Police/Guard
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Fire Station
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Radio
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Electric
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Electric/Water
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Water
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Waste Water
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Waste Water Treatment
Plant
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Slope Stability
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Shoreline Slope Stability
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Seismogenic Features
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Data Layer
Source
Transportation
Clallum and Jefferson County
GIS
Washington State Geospatial
Portal (WSGP)
Health Care
Emergency Response
Education
Schools
Historic
Historic Registry
Utilities
Hazard Areas
86
Erosion Hazard
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Levee Inventory
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Floodplains
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Wildland Urban Interface
(Fire Risk)
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Projection: NAD 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 (US Feet)
Water Resources Geospatial Data
Available
Clallum County
Available
Jefferson County
Source
Watersheds (HUC 8, 10,
and 12)
Yes
Yes
National Hydrography Database
(NHD)
Water Bodies
Yes
Yes
NHD
Yes
Yes
NHD
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Data Layer
Hydrography
Flow Lines (Rivers and
Streams)
Wetlands Inventory
2011
Floodplains
Washington State Geospatial
Portal (WSGP)
Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA)
Water Quality
Non-attainment Areas
(TMDLs)
Point-source Pollution
(Dairies)
Monitoring Stations
Water Supply
Lakes and Reservoirs
Fish Passage Barrier Inventory
Culverts
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Misc Barriers
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Dams
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Shoreline Stability
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Levee Inventory
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Shoreline
87
Projection: NAD 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 (US Feet)
Natural and Managed Ecosystems Geospatial Data
Available
Clallum County
Available
Jefferson County
Source
Land Use and Land Cover
Yes
Yes
Washington State Geospatial
Portal (WSGP)
Primary Crop Group
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Soils / Prime Farmland
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Dairies
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Active Applications
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Applications (All)
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Endangered Species
Yes
Yes
US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS)
Habitat Conservation
Plan Parcels
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Sensitive Aquatic Areas
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Rare Plants and High
Quality Ecosystems
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Invasive Species
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Slope Stability
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Shoreline Slope Stability
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Seismogenic Features
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Erosion Hazard
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Levee Inventory
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Floodplains
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Wildland Urban Interface
(Fire Risk)
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Data Layer
Agriculture
Fisheries
Aquatic Parcels
Shellfish Harvest
Locations
Fish Passage Barriers
Inventory
Forestry
Biodiversity
Hazard Areas
88
Projection: NAD 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 (US Feet)
Community Vitality Geospatial Data
Available
Clallum County
Available
Jefferson County
Source
Counties
Yes
Yes
Washington State Geospatial
Portal (WSGP)
City Limits (polygon)
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Populated Places
(Points)
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Urban Growth Areas
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Public Lands (Federal,
State, Municipal, and
Tribal)
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Cadastral
Yes
Yes
Clallum and Jefferson County
GIS
Yes
Yes
Clallum and Jefferson County
GIS
2010 Census
Yes
Yes
Projected Population
Yes
Yes
Hospitals
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Clinics
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Nursing Homes
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Assisted Living
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Adult Family Homes
Yes
Yes
WSGP
EMS
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Police/Guard
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Fire Station
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Unknown
Clallum County GIS
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Data Layer
Boundaries
Zoning
Zoning (by County)
Population
US Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS)
US Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)
Health Care
Emergency Response
Education
Schools
Historic
Historic Registry
Air and Water Quality
Total Maximum Daily
89
Loads (TMDL)
Water
Assessment
Quality
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Ozone
Yes
Yes
WSGP
Particulate Matter
Yes
Yes
WSGP
90
F.
References
1
Hewitson, B., A.C. Janetos, T.R. Carter, F. Giorgi, R.G. Jones,W.-T. Kwon, L.O. Mearns, E.L.F. Schipper, and
M. van Aalst, 2014: Regional context. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability.
Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Barros, V.R., C.B. Field, D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J.
Mach, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi,Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S.
MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L.White (eds.)].Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1133-1197.
2
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population Estimates Program (PEP). Updated
annually. http://www.census.gov/popest/index.html. Census Bureau, 2010 Census of Population, Public
Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File. Updated every 10 years. http://factfinder2.census.gov.
3
Mote, P., A. K. Snover, S. Capalbo, S. D. Eigenbrode, P. Glick, J. Littell, R. Raymondi, and S. Reeder, 2014:
Ch. 21: North- west. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment,
J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Rich- mond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 487513.
4
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/overview/overview
U.S. Global Change Research Program. National Climate Assessment, 2014.
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/
6
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/overview/overview
7
Dalton, M., Mote, P., Snover, A. 2013. Climate Change in the Northwest: Implications for our
Landscapes, Waters and Communities. Island Press.
http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf
8
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
5
9
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
10
National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV), U.S. Geological Survey
http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/nex-dcp30.asp
11
National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV), U.S. Geological Survey
http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/nex-dcp30.asp
12
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
13
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
14
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
1515
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
16
National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV), U.S. Geological Survey
http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/nex-dcp30.asp
17
National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV), U.S. Geological Survey
http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/nex-dcp30.asp
91
18
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
19
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
20
U.S. Global Change Research Program. National Climate Assessment, 2014.
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/
21
BESR (Board on Earth Sciences and Resources) & OSB (Ocean Studies Board), 2012. Sea-Level Rise for
the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future. The National Academies
Press.
22
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, 2007
Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Available;
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html
23
(Station SC02; http://sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov/post/links/SC02.html).
24
(http://sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov/post/series.html).
25
BESR (Board on Earth Sciences and Resources) & OSB (Ocean Studies Board), 2012. Sea-Level Rise for
the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future. The National Academies
Press.
26
North Pacific Landscape Conservation Cooperative, 2013. Climate Change Effects and Adaptation
Approaches for Terrestrial Ecosystems, Habitats, and Species; A Compilation of the Scientific Literature for
the North Pacific Landscape Conservation Cooperative Region.
http://www.nwf.org/~/media/PDFs/Global-Warming/2014/Executive-Summaries-of-all-three-NPLCCreports.pdf
27
BESR (Board on Earth Sciences and Resources) & OSB (Ocean Studies Board), 2012. Sea-Level Rise for
the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future. The National Academies
Press.
28
data from http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov
29
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
30
Mote, P.W., & Salathé, E.P., 2010. Future climate in the Pacific Northwest. Climatic Change, 102(1-2):
29-50.
31
Feely, R.A., Klinger, T., Newton, J.A., Chadsey, M., 2012. Scientific Summary of Ocean Acidification in
Washington State Marine Waters. Washington State Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification.
Technical summary available at:
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1201016.html
32
U.S. Global Change Research Program. National Climate Assessment, 2014.
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/
33
U.S. Global Change Research Program. National Climate Assessment, 2014.
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/
34
U.S. Global Change Research Program. National Climate Assessment, 2014. Northwest Region.
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/regions/northwest
35
U.S. Global Change Research Program. National Climate Assessment, 2014. Northwest Region. Coasts.
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/regions/coasts
92
36
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
37
Dalton, M.M., P.W. Mote, and A.K. Snover [Eds.]. 2013. Climate Change
in the Northwest: Implications for Our Landscapes, Waters, and Communities. Washington, DC:
Island Press.
38
Tillmann, P., D. Siemann, & P. Glick. Executive Summaries for Marine & Coastal, Freshwater, and
Terrestrial Ecosystems. Climate Change Effects & Adaptation Approaches in Ecosystems, Habitats, and
Species: A Compilation of Scientific Literature for the North Pacific Landscape Conservation Cooperative
Region. 2013. http://www.nwf.org/~/media/PDFs/Global-Warming/2014/Executive-Summaries-of-allthree-NPLCC-reports.pdf
39
Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-844. Portland, OR: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 130 p.
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr844.pdf
40
Washington State Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification. Ocean Acidification; From Knowledge to
Action, Washington’s Strategic Response, 2012.
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/publications/1201015.pdf
41
Miller, I.M, Shishido, C., Antrim, L., Bowlby, C.E. (Eds.), 2013. Climate Change and the Olympic Coast
National Marine Sanctuary: Interpreting Potential Futures. U.S. Department of Commerce.
http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/science/conservation/cc_ocnms.html
42
From IPCC-WGII-AR5-Earth Systems-Chap 18
43
From IPCC-WGII-AR5-Earth Systems-Chap 18, pg. 90
44
AR5, Annex II, Glossary
45
Dalton, M., Mote, P., Snover, A. 2013. Climate Change in the Northwest: Implications for our
Landscapes, Waters and Communities. Island Press.
http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf
46
Mantua et al. Climatic Change (2010) 102:187–223
http://www.hydro.washington.edu/pub/leesy/water_temp/Mantu_etal_2010.pdf
47
Halofsky, Jessica E.; Peterson, David L.; O’Halloran, Kathy A.; Hawkins Hoffman, Catherine, eds. 2011.
Adapting to climate change at Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-844. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research
Station. 130 p. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr844.pdf
48
Dalton, M., Mote, P., Snover, A. 2013. Climate Change in the Northwest: Implications for our
Landscapes, Waters and Communities. Island Press.
http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf
Dalton, M., Mote, P., Snover, A. 2013. Climate Change in the Northwest: Implications for our Landscapes,
Waters and Communities. Island Press.
http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf
49
University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, 2013. Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in
Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers.
http://cses.washington.edu/cig/reports.shtml
50
Moore et al., 2008. Impacts of Climate Variability and Future Climate Change on Harmful Algal Blooms
and Human Health. Environmental Health 7 (Suppl 2): S4
51
Portland State University, College of Urban and Public Affairs, 2011. Environment Migrants and the
Future of the Willamette Valley.
http://www.pdx.edu/usp/sites/www.pdx.edu.usp/files/Environmental_Migrants.pdf
52
http://www.adn.com/article/20141120/should-canada-have-plan-climate-refugees;
http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/blog/sbo/2014/07/uw-professor-northwest-is-a-potentialclimate.html
93
54
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), 2011. Climate Impacts Vulnerability
Assessment. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/B290651B-24FD-40EC-BEC3EE5097ED0618/0/WSDOTClimateImpactsVulnerabilityAssessmentforFHWAFinal.pdf
55
Climate Impacts Group, Pacific Northwest (PNW) Hydroclimate Scenarios Project.
http://warm.atmos.washington.edu/2860/
56
Halofsky, Jessica E.; Peterson, David L.; O’Halloran, Kathy A.; Hawkins Hoffman, Catherine, eds. 2011.
Adapting to climate change at Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-844. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research
Station. 130 p. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr844.pdf [see 42 above]
57
National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV), U.S. Geological Survey
http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/nex-dcp30.asp
58
Dalton, M., Mote, P., Snover, A. 2013. Climate Change in the Northwest: Implications for our
Landscapes, Waters and Communities. Island Press.
http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf
59
Dalton, M., Mote, P., Snover, A. 2013. Climate Change in the Northwest: Implications for our
Landscapes, Waters and Communities. Island Press.
http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf
60
Dalton, M., Mote, P., Snover, A. 2013. Climate Change in the Northwest: Implications for our
Landscapes, Waters and Communities. Island Press.
http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf
61
Dalton, M., Mote, P., Snover, A. 2013. Climate Change in the Northwest: Implications for our
Landscapes, Waters and Communities. Island Press.
http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/ClimateChangeInTheNorthwest.pdf
62
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), 2011. Climate Impacts Vulnerability
Assessment. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/B290651B-24FD-40EC-BEC3EE5097ED0618/0/WSDOTClimateImpactsVulnerabilityAssessmentforFHWAFinal.pdf
63
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), 2011. Climate Impacts Vulnerability
Assessment. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/B290651B-24FD-40EC-BEC3EE5097ED0618/0/WSDOTClimateImpactsVulnerabilityAssessmentforFHWAFinal.pdf
64
AR5, Annex II, Glossary
94