Facing the Future Together
It’s easy to feel overwhelmed by the extent of change that must occur for Martha’s Vineyard, Nantucket, and Gosnold (the Elizabeth Islands) to thrive, and for a sustainable balance to be struck between human activity and the natural environment. From the frontlines of coastal climate change, Islanders are truly in a unique position to innovate and model leadership at a time when President Biden has called for nearly $1 trillion in climate-related investments — but we must act now.
MOVING TOWARD INTELLIGENT ADAPTATION TOGETHER
Towns on Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket are taking individual actions and weighing options such as redesigning harbors, nourishing beaches, and raising roads, yet questions remain: How do these options fit together? And are they enough?
We applaud current efforts by the Islands to develop more comprehensive climate resiliency plans and collaborate on an increasing number of initiatives. And we want to underscore this message, shared by many Islanders: The first and foremost priority is to accept that we must live with the natural coast and its waters, allowing it to reorganize and evolve in ways that are far more resilient than we can construct ourselves. Adapting to a new normal may mean recalibrating the definition of normal. Having shifted our mindset, we can then collaborate to design and implement a grand strategy for each island — and even the Islands together — that considers a whole greater than the sum of its parts.
Perhaps one harbor can be redesigned to do the job of two, or restoration needs to be focused on two beaches instead of four. Adapt or nourish here and relocate or elevate there — joint coordination can help ensure that an action on one part of the coast does not adversely affect another and resources are used wisely and effectively where they are most likely to make a difference.
Toward that end, we’d like to propose as examples a series of potential actions that could be taken over time. They are listed under themes that reflect a variety of climate resiliency approaches, along with brief examples. Most of these concepts apply to most island communities, with some exceptions. They are:
ELEVATION AND PROTECTION
In areas where infrastructure is difficult to relocate or adapt, we may need to elevate or actively unbuild developed areas. For example, where rerouting is not possible, low-lying roadways will need to be raised to maintain connectivity or infrastructure may need to be elevated or otherwise shielded from climate impacts.
EXAMPLES The Edgartown Yacht Club and Vose boathouse were raised to respond to the threat of rising sea levels, and funding has been requested to raise Chappaquiddick ferry ramps six inches to stem current flooding issues. Nantucket has studied replacing the culverts at Madaket Road and elevating adjacent roadways to allow for increased tidal flushing and limit adverse flooding impacts.
RESILIENT CONNECTIONS AND CONTINGENCIES
It’s critical to lay the groundwork for emergency response: quick restoration of public and private road and ferry connectivity, access to medical centers and drinking water, relocation or replacement of damaged or flood-prone infrastructure, and the evacuation and protection of vulnerable or isolated Islanders.
EXAMPLES Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket jointly applied for an MVP action grant to study supply chain resilience for areas of vulnerability and improvement, and the new Nantucket Cottage Hospital was built with climate change impacts in mind, with all mechanical systems installed on the roof instead of the basement.
SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT
With limited material resources on islands, it will be critical to understand sediment supply and demand. For example, it will be increasingly necessary to develop long-term strategies and facilitated processes to allocate sediment (sand, etc.) island-wide for beach and salt marsh restoration.
EXAMPLE The Trustees has identified priority areas, sediment volumes, and costs for dune restoration and beach nourishment across the more than 17 miles of beach we manage on the Islands. Future beach restoration trials will be monitored by volunteers for effectiveness over time.
HARBOR MANAGEMENT AND RESILIENCY
Cross-island visualization and coordination is needed to optimize harbor planning and sustain each island’s constellation of access to working waterfronts and critical lifelines, not necessarily in today’s configurations. The ways we adapt adjacent areas can also help to mitigate inland flooding.
EXAMPLE The Oak Bluffs adaptation plan contains design alternatives for raising and protecting infrastructure at the harbor’s edge, including reconfiguring jetties and raising the harbor bulkhead.
NATURAL RESOURCE ENHANCEMENT
With island communities inextricably tied to their natural resources, we can make an environmental and economic case for investing in ecological preservation and restoration as a vehicle for climate adaptation and mitigation.
EXAMPLE At the Felix Neck Wildlife Sanctuary, a broad consortium of collaborators installed the largest living shoreline restoration project in New England to protect the marshes of Sengekontacket Pond and initiate the self-healing process for ecological restoration and wildlife benefits.
TRANSFORMATION
In some special places, projected changes will necessitate a pivot in how we live, work, and play at the water’s edge. This doesn’t always mean retreat, but it does mean that we need to be prepared to use crisis as an opportunity to change our relationship with rising waters.
EXAMPLE The Envision Resilience Nantucket Challenge presented inspired proposals that embraced climate change as an opportunity to leverage modularity, ecology, aquaculture, and public space in novel ways. It explored several possible futures for living with water in Brant Point, including controlling where water flows and building local resilience through a sustainable, circular (no waste) economy.
A TIMELINE FOR CHANGE
We understand the desire to maintain the integrity of the Islands and their Towns, and their distinct characters and landscapes, and we acknowledge the impossibility of achieving resiliency overnight. It would be impractical to suggest that sustainable solutions are just around the corner, and, having implemented them, we are done. Instead, we propose a multi-pronged, flexible approach that occurs in stages with island-wide collaboration.
For instance, we might decide on:
2021–2030 Bring policies and funding to scale. Complete island-wide planning and designs. Forge new partnerships to bring solutions to scale. Begin adaptations. Establish coastal corridors for land protection, sediment budgets for beach restoration and living shorelines, and strategies for beach interventions. Homeowners and businesses at-risk of flooding or erosion begin to plan for adaptation or relocation. Monitor local conditions.
2031–2040 Continue major adaptations of harborfront areas and conservation of waterfront open space for resilience and landward migrating coastline. Targeted beach resiliency and living shoreline projects are underway. At-risk business and homeowners have started adaptation or relocation. Continue monitoring local conditions and make design changes as needed.
2040–2050 First stages of adaptation are complete, allowing for flexibility and additional measures over time. Continue monitoring local conditions and make design changes as needed.
In its recently issued guidelines, “Resist, Accept, Direct,” the U.S. National Park Service made clear it can no longer safeguard all of its resources in the face of climate change. With this report, we are recommending collective triage for our Islands, too. We cannot afford to take a siloed approach to the future. It’s time to decide together what we’re willing to adapt and what we’re willing to sacrifice. Only then can we move forward intelligently, in step with each other and the natural world around us.