Louisiana’s Comprehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast: 2012 Update Steve Mathies, PhD- OCPR

Current and future protection and restoration projects should progress with the same sense of urgency and compressed timelines as was seen in the Greater New Orleans HSDRRS. Recommend adoption of the same timelines and level of detail used on the “LCA 6” for all feasibility studies. Acknowledge that Coastal Louisiana is in a catastrophic state of system collapse and that requiring individual projects to be sustainable in perpetuity is an untenable policy. Our Current Coastal Crisis 2

Overview of 2012 Master Plan 3

Builds on Other Efforts 4

Uses Original 2007 Master Plan Science- based Objectives as Foundation 1.Reduce economic losses from storm-based flooding 2.Promote a sustainable coastal ecosystem by harnessing natural system processes 3.Provide habitats suitable to support an array of commercial and recreational activities coast-wide 4.Sustain Louisiana’s unique heritage and culture

More than Concepts and Broad Strategies – An Implementation Plan with Expected Outcomes 6

Specific & Realistic Goals & Objectives Prioritized Project List Map showing the selected projects and what they provide: Levels of protection Levels of ecosystem services across the coast Extent and character of future landscape Detailed Implementation plan with: Schedule, Costs, Expected sources of funding An Adaptive Management plan to guide implementation Key Components of 2012 Update 7

Elements of 2012 Master Plan with Building Blocks for Other Efforts

Project Team & Collaborative Effort 9

Master Plan Delivery Team 10

Review and Coordination Project Effects Models Technical Advisory Committee Prioritization Tool Technical Advisory Committee Master Plan Delivery Team Cultural Heritage Technical Advisory Committee CPRA Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority

Project-Effects Models Steve Ashby, USACE Eng. Res. Dev. Center John Callaway, University of San Francisco Fred Sklar, South Florida Water Mgmt. District Si Simenstad, University of Washington Prioritization Tool TAC John Boland, John Hopkins Ben Hobbs, John Hopkins Len Shabman, Virginia Tech Cultural Heritage TAC Don Davis, Louisiana State University Carl Brasseaux, University of Louisiana Lafayette Maida Owens, LA Dept. of Cultural, Recreation, Tourism Technical Advisory Committee Members 12

Review and Coordination Project Effects Models Technical Advisory Committee Prioritization Tool Technical Advisory Committee Master Plan Delivery Team Cultural Heritage Technical Advisory Committee CPRA Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority Modeling Workgroups

Project - Effects ModelsTeam Leader Eco-hydrologyDr. Ehab Meselhe, ULL + 9 members VegetationDr. Jenneke Visser, ULL + 8 members Wetland MorphologyDr. Greg Steyer, USGS + 6 members Barrier Island MorphologyDr. Mark Kulp, UNO + 6 members Upper Trophic LevelDr. Andy Nyman, LSU + 8 members Storm SurgeDr. Joe Suhayda/Arcadis, + 3 members Storm Damage/RiskDr. Jordan Fischbach, RAND + 7 members Project - Effects Models Team Members 14 Over 60 Team Members, Support Staff, and Technical Advisory Committee Members

Review and Coordination Project Effects Models Technical Advisory Committee Prioritization Tool Technical Advisory Committee Master Plan Delivery Team Cultural Heritage Technical Advisory Committee CPRA Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority Science & Engineering Board (MP-SEB) Modeling Workgroups

Ecosystem Science / Coastal Ecology William Dennison, University of Maryland Edward Houde, University of Maryland Engineering Robert Dalrymple, Johns Hopkins University Jos Dijkman, Deltares Geosciences Charles Groat, University of Texas at Austin Social Science and Risk Greg Baecher, University of Maryland Philip Berke, University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill Climate Change Virginia Burkett, U.S. Geological Survey Environmental/Natural Resource Economics Edward Barbier, University of Wyoming National Science and Engineering Board - Independent Technical Review 16

Review and Coordination Project Effects Models Technical Advisory Committee Prioritization Tool Technical Advisory Committee Master Plan Delivery Team Cultural Heritage Technical Advisory Committee CPRA Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority Science & Engineering Board (MP-SEB) Framework Development Team (FDT) Stakeholders Modeling Workgroups

Framework Development Team- Over 30 Federal, State, NGO, Academic, Community, and Industry Organizations 18

Framework Development Team as Key Consultative Group Represent broad range of interests Ports and Navigation Fisheries and Restoration Oil and Gas Focal point for communications CPRA Local Outreach Political and PR Strategies Coastal Louisiana Website Communication & Outreach Elements of Framework Development Team

Review and Coordination Project Effects Models Technical Advisory Committee Prioritization Tool Technical Advisory Committee Master Plan Delivery Team Cultural Heritage Technical Advisory Committee CPRA Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority Gulf Recovery Plan Other Federal Programs Science & Engineering Board (MP-SEB) Framework Development Team (FDT) Stakeholders Modeling Workgroups

Planning Framework Guides Investments Towards a Sustainable Future 21 How do we get there? What should we do now? How can we adapt to evolving uncertainties and improved information? What tradeoffs remain? A sustainable future -Sustainable coastline & ecosystems -Resilient communities and assets -Long-term cost savings through strategic investments Future without action -Severe land loss -Increasing hurricane flood risk -Loss of ecosystem services -Loss of cultural heritage -Reactive expenditures

Master Plan Outputs Maps showing ranges of Master Plan outcomes Levels of flood protection Levels of ecosystem services Extent and character of landscape An adaptive management plan to guide implementation Maps of near-term projects Maps of potential future project Schedule Costs Expected sources of funding

Master Plan Delivery Team as a Collaborative Effort 23

Current and future protection and restoration projects should progress with the same sense of urgency and compressed timelines as was seen in the Greater New Orleans HSDRRS. Recommend adoption of the same timelines and level of detail used on the “LCA 6” for all feasibility studies. Acknowledge that Coastal Louisiana is in a catastrophic state of system collapse and that requiring individual projects to be sustainable in perpetuity is an untenable policy. Our Future??? 24

Current and future protection and restoration projects should progress with the same sense of urgency and compressed timelines as was seen in the Greater New Orleans HSDRRS. Recommend adoption of the same timelines and level of detail used on the “LCA 6” for all feasibility studies. Acknowledge that Coastal Louisiana is in a catastrophic state of system collapse and that requiring individual projects to be sustainable in perpetuity is an untenable policy. Resolving Issues 25

Current and future protection and restoration projects should progress with the same sense of urgency and compressed timelines as was seen in the Greater New Orleans HSDRRS. Recommend adoption of the same timelines and level of detail used on the “LCA 6” for all feasibility studies. Acknowledge that Coastal Louisiana is in a catastrophic state of system collapse and that requiring individual projects to be sustainable in perpetuity is an untenable policy. Your Legacy??? 26

Questions? 27