Tye Ferrell, Resilience Collaborative NW
Earlier this year, I joined a team from the William D. Ruckelshaus Center to assess resilience efforts on the Washington State coast.* We knew it would be important to ask assessment participants how they defined resilience. Because how people define resilience patterns the objectives they set for themselves and the actions they take to make their community more resilient.
The assessment team conducted 104 interviews with coastal tribes, residents, elected officials, federal, tribal, state, county, and city government staff, researchers, scientists, and other interested parties. What we found was that definitions varied widely around three areas: the type of change envisioned, how boundaries lines are drawn, and the hazards people were most concerned about.
By Nicole Faghin, Washington Sea Grant
When Island County staff recently evaluated where to spend public dollars for coastal restoration projects, they realized they needed more information on how each of the potential sites might be affected by future coastal flooding. City of Tacoma staff looked at monitoring reports for an existing habitat restoration site and similarly wondered, will those restored salt marshes exist in 50 years in the face of increased storms and inundation from sea level rise? And scaling up to the state level, how should sea level rise be incorporated into the Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program (ESRP) at Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife when evaluating state funding for restoration projects?
The contents of this website, including the blog, forum, and links to other sites, are provided for informational use and may not reflect the positions and priorities of all network members, including Washington Sea Grant and the Department of Ecology. Comments posted to this site do not constitute formal public comment. Ecology, Sea Grant and network members do not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of information contained on any linked websites.