Facing the Future

The coast holds a natural draw for many of us, who make homes, livelihoods, and memories on its shores. An incredible 40% of the nation’s population live on the coast, in areas that account for less than 10% of the total land in the contiguous United States [CIT. 39]. In the state of Massachusetts, half of the 10 largest cities by population are coastal, including two featured in this report — New Bedford and Fall River [CIT. 39]. Protecting and adapting these areas is critical — the impacts of climate change are expected to significantly affect access, habitat, infrastructure, and economy, as detailed throughout this report.

In many communities, planning is already underway. Projects like Resilient Woods Hole are using the best available science to prepare and adapt. Nature-based solutions used in projects like the Great Marsh restoration are healing landscapes to better enable our natural spaces to keep pace with sea level rise and buffer storm surge and rising seas. And interdisciplinary collaborations like the Envision Resilience Narragansett Bay Challenge are pushing the boundaries of what exists as adaptive solutions now, to reimagine what can be possible to confront tomorrow.

There is a common factor in many of the most compelling resilience solutions — collaboration. The Trustees encourages partners in the region to work together to achieve the following forward-thinking actions.

EXPAND COASTAL PROTECTIONS

Beaches, dunes, marsh, shrublands, and forests span the shores of the South Coast, providing a buffer against storms, a habitat for wildlife, carbon storage, cultural connections, and enjoyment for local communities and seasonal visitors. Yet only 23% of coastal habitat in Buzzards Bay and 10% in the Narragansett Bay region of this study are permanently protected, making the remaining areas vulnerable to loss [CIT. 19].

Protecting and restoring critical areas will be vital to ensure resilience in the face of rising seas and increased storm surge. For salt marsh in particular, proactively protecting adjacent areas where salt marsh habitat is projected to migrate is key.

A coordinated approach between local nonprofits and larger regional organizations such as the Buzzards Bay Coalition, Mass Audubon, and The Trustees will be critical to protect our coasts. This region benefits from the organizing and financial resources of the Southeast New England Program (SNEP), a collaborative hosted by the Environmental Protection Agency bringing together partners in preservation, restoration, and monitoring of coastal watersheds in the region (including Buzzards Bay, Narragansett Bay and coastlines of Nantucket Sound). Utilizing resources the SNEP program brings and the findings of this State of the Coast Report, local organizations can work together to advocate for, and achieve, high priority resilience goals.

Several local, state, and federal sources of public funding are available to acquire, protect, and restore critical natural resources. Public funds can be used to leverage additional investments from other sources, including nonprofit contributions and philanthropic donations from individuals and institutional funders such as foundations and corporations.

RESTORE SALT MARSHES

The legacy of agricultural and mosquito control ditching on New England salt marshes has lowered the water table and led to land subsidence (sinking). A healthy marsh would naturally accrete and build in elevation over time allowing the landscape to keep up with rising seas. Low-impact naturebased techniques such as the method being utilized by The Trustees and multiple partners to restore the Great Marsh on the North Shore, can harness the power of nature to heal ditches and open natural drainage pathways. A healthy marsh is a resilient marsh. In addition to restoring the health of these beneficial landscapes, steps must be taken to prepare for inland migration of marshes as seas rise by proactively protecting these migration corridors and removing barriers created by roadways and infrastructure.

A study of Plum Island salt marshes in northern Massachusetts indicates that accretion rates of these marshes have been keeping up with sea level rise through deposition of sediment from both rivers and the ocean, as well as organic material from grasses [CIT. 24]. With the rate of sea level rise projected to increase, however, it is unclear whether our marshes can keep pace. A coordinated approach between municipalities, local land trusts, and regional non-profit organizations could help advance protection and restoration of existing marsh, as well as migration areas.

In addition to healing the hydrology of our marshes, innovative techniques may also be needed to help the marsh build elevation. Thin layer deposition or mud motors are both techniques that have been used in other states to bring additional sediment into the system. As neither of these techniques are allowed under current regulations in Massachusetts, we encourage our agency partners to consider allowing carefully monitored trials on some of our most at-risk habitat.

Continued research into the effectiveness of these restoration techniques will be critical to ensuring the resilience of our marshes. The Salt Marsh Working Group, a network of state, federal and nonprofit partners in New England, promotes this continued research and helps share this information regionally so we can all continue to adapt and improve our work to protect this critical resource.

IMPROVE WATER QUALITY

The Buzzards Bay Coalition identifies the major sources of nitrogen pollution in the bay to be septic systems, insufficient wastewater treatment, and pollutant-laden stormwater runoff. Higher intensity and more frequent storm events due to climate change are expected to exacerbate these problems. Recommended actions include improving septic system design to reduce nitrogen, expanding residential connections to sewer and improving water treatment. Reducing pollution from stormwater runoff is something homeowners and municipalities alike can address. Save the Bay encourages people to reduce polluted runoff from their properties by making their yard a sponge, planting native plants, scooping pet waste, and maintaining septic systems [CIT. 42].

ADAPT OR RELOCATE HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE

Communities across Massachusetts are already seeing the impact of rising seas and increasing storm intensity on critical infrastructure. These impacts are projected to get much worse, demanding that the region be proactive in planning for resilience now. The widespread projected threats to roads, bridges, culverts, buildings, and wastewater treatment infrastructure necessitates a balanced approach that includes both adaptation and retreat. It will be critical to identify and then elevate or adapt infrastructure such as key access roads, wastewater pump stations, buildings, and homes. In some areas, a longer-term and more cost-effective approach may be to retreat and relocate from vulnerable areas over time. Communities have hard choices to make, and values to balance.

Recently filed legislation proposing a Flood Risk Protection Program would create a statewide property buyout program enabling the state, cities, towns, and nonprofit partners to acquire flood-prone property from willing owners on a voluntary basis before disaster hits, while providing support for relocation. Under this legislation, filed by Representative Sarah Peake and Senator Marc Pacheco, properties would be restored to natural landscapes and permanently conserved — providing a buffer against future climate impacts, restoring critical habitat, protecting water supplies, and creating new recreational opportunities. Lawmakers involved in this effort are focused on making sure the majority of investments go to homeowners and tenants who lack remedies and resources, especially those who are members of Environmental Justice communities. With over 15,000 buildings at risk on the South Coast as soon as 2050, this program would make retreat more economically feasible while also creating natural areas along the coastline to further protect our communities. The Trustees is leading efforts to secure legislative support for this effort in close coordination with nonprofit partners at Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental League of Mass, Mass Audubon, Mass Association of Conservation Commissions, Mass Land Trust Coalition, Mass Rivers Alliance, Metropolitan Area Planning Council, The Nature Conservancy, and others.

DESIGN FOR THE FUTURE

Communities have an opportunity to design and implement creative approaches to living with water, from deployable barriers and absorptive landscapes to floating and elevated infrastructure. That means engaging multiple disciplines and thinking outside of the box.

ADOPT FORWARD-THINKING TOWN BYLAWS

We need to plan now to reduce impacts to our communities in the future. One of the considerations that can be made on a town-level basis is to consider restricting new development in areas projected to become salt marsh, or flood-prone, in the future.

Two regional planning agencies serve this part of the South Coast — the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District and the Cape Cod Commission. Both agencies provide recommended updates to town bylaws that encourage nature-based solutions to climate change. Recommended updates have a net-benefit for communities by improving water quality and open space protections that also reduce the costs of road and stormwater infrastructure maintenance. While many towns have not adopted recommended updates, all of the towns are participating in the Community Preservation Act, a smart growth program that provides funding to towns to preserve open space and historic sites, create affordable housing, and develop outdoor recreational facilities.

RETHINK HARD STRUCTURES

Coastal structures such as seawalls, revetments, and jetties are prevalent along this coastline and were constructed to protect against erosion and capture sediment to create beaches in an area with limited sediment supply. But too often these structures cause damage to our coastline — contributing to erosion, exacerbating property damage, and undermining resilience by preventing migration of habitat inland. These hardened structures were also not designed with climate change in mind. Due to increased storm surge and higher seas, these aging structures are now at risk. It’s time to rethink these hardened structures and implement nature-based solutions to erosion control such as living shorelines, artificial reefs, and land conservation. These longer-term solutions work with nature instead of against it and offer a win-win for both communities and habitat.

MOVE FROM PLANNING TO ACTION

All the towns in this region have completed Municipal Vulnerability Plans that assess climate change threats to their infrastructure and are poised to begin implementing projects, yet many cite lack of capacity and resources as barriers to action. Adopting a regional approach to infrastructure adaptation is part of the solution and can help towns work together. The Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District is the Regional Planning Agency for most of the towns in this South Coast region and recently started a two-year project to create a Regional Resilience Plan. The plan will identify environmental, economic, and social vulnerabilities. The District hopes this plan will provide a roadmap to improve resilience to climate change.

In order to move from planning to action, towns must both prioritize infrastructure adaptation work and reach out to partners for collaboration. Where resilience projects contribute to the goals of nonprofit organizations or local businesses (i.e. habitat protection, restoration, water quality improvements, or infrastructure protection), these partnerships can be an effective way to implement projects with dual benefits. Funding for regional staff capacity to support project implementation should be considered.

MODERNIZE PERMITTING PROCESSES

Climate change is already impacting built and natural resources today, and these impacts are projected to increase in intensity and frequency. State agencies need to modernize the permitting process to make it nimble and efficient for projects that align with the Commonwealth’s urgent goals to conserve and restore natural resources using nature-based solutions. We recommend that the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act Office facilitate coordination between regulatory agencies, nonprofit partners, municipalities, and property owners to achieve this important body of work.

Specifically, our coastal salt marshes are losing ground due to a legacy of ditching, and we need to act swiftly to restore their hydrology, allowing them to keep pace with sea level rise. Innovative techniques for healing ditches are proving successful but permitting barriers are delaying many projects. Rather than requiring long and often uncertain monitoring periods that delay other restoration projects using these techniques, we advocate for an adaptive approach that allows project managers to work together with regulators to adjust techniques as needed. We recommend streamlining the MEPA review process and adopting a programmatic Environmental Impact Report for projects or raising thresholds for naturebased solutions to allow for exemptions. In addition, we recommend updating the Chapter 91 regulations, overseen by the Department of Environmental Protection, by amending the definition of “fill” to exclude salt marsh hay for purposes of restoration.

FUND RESILIENCE PROJECTS

We need consistent, robust streams of dedicated local, state, and federal revenue for climate mitigation, adaptation, and resiliency. The American Rescue Plan Act resulted in $5.6 billion in funding for Massachusetts, and several hundred million is being allocated to restoration, land protection, and resilience work over the next 4 years. This funding provides an incredible, yet short-term, opportunity to advance climate change resilience and mitigation work in the Commonwealth. Longer-term funding needs to match the potential magnitude of the threat. Once past a tipping point, recovery and repair costs can far exceed mitigation costs, if recovery remains an option. The Federal Emergency Management Agency estimates that for every $1 spent to mitigate the impacts of riverine flooding, for example, we save $7 in avoided damage [CIT. 45]. The Trustees proposes that we look beyond our traditional community coffers and grants and develop new ways of funding and incentivizing resiliency and conservation. Lawmakers need to increase investments in land conservation and restoration through traditional bond bills and identify additional dedicated funding sources to implement coastal protection. Programs including emissions trading systems, green/blue/ resiliency bonds, real estate transfer fees, and climate funds and derivatives are just the tip of the iceberg. So are mechanisms such as insurance policies that offer lower premiums for steps to reduce climate risks and banks that focus on investing in risk management and sustainability (e.g. Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank and New Jersey’s Energy Resilience Bank). As important, we need to support social science research that will help us find ways to make the rapid, significant psychological shifts as a society that are required to adapt to climate change. We need to better understand what it is that holds us back from investing more in climate solutions now and conserving our coast for generations to come.

ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY

Advancing large-scale and sometimes costly resilience efforts across the region is a significant undertaking made more difficult without community buy-in. The public must understand the risks facing their coastal lands and communities and be part of the decision making. Many local organizations and municipalities have programs aimed at engaging residents in work to build climate change resilience and environmental stewardship. We can learn lessons from the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe, who have long taught the connection between humans and the natural environment to their children, growing a population of people who respect and care for the land as it provides for them in return.