1. The Adapting to Rising Tides Project San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Hayward Resilience Study

2. ART Hayward: Updates Margaret Davidson (Director NOAA Ocean and Coastal Resource Management) What – Sharks in my backyard?! Public meetings 3/22 and 4/26 Hayward General Plan public meetings 3/8 and 3/13

3. ART Hayward Process

4. Products from Define Step

5. ART Hayward Process

6. ART Hayward Feb. 27 Meeting Objectives Introduce environmental vulnerabilities and adaptation responses Refine and sequence responses in small groups Discuss consensus suite of adaptation responses

7. Protect the environmental value of the Hayward Shoreline area by preserving habitat, water quality and endangered species. Primary objectives: Habitat Water quality Biodiversity Secondary objectives: Flood protection Recreation and education Environmental Scenario

8. Environmental Scenario Assets Eden Landing

9. Tidal marsh response to sea level rise

10. Environmental scenario INFO vulnerabilities 1. Marshes need sediment to keep pace with sea level rise and there is limited information on current vertical accretion rates and sediment sources. Photographs courtesy of John Callaway and Peter Baye

11. Environmental scenario GOV vulnerabilities 2. Current management plans do not account for sea level rise. 3. There is no clear funding source for maintenance, restoration, and adaptation to sea level rise vulnerabilities. 4. Existing regulations make maintenance, restoration, and adaptation near and within tidal marshes and managed ponds difficult to implement, particularly because some measures remain untested. 5. Existing regulations make multiple management objectives difficult to achieve and sea level rise will further exacerbate this issue.

12. Environmental scenario PHYS vulnerabilities 6. Tidal marshes are not projected to keep up with sea level rise and marshes with less “elevation capital” are more vulnerable to downshifting and converting to mudflat. 7. Tidal marshes need space for landward migration to avoid being squeezed between a rising Bay and inboard levee. However, there is not sufficient space for marsh landward migration.

13. Environmental scenario PHYS vulnerabilities 8. HARD Marsh is fully tidal and water flows in and out of the site underneath the pedestrian bridge, which has already been repaired twice for bridge scour and its footings continue to erode by wave action. Sea level rise may increase scour around bridges and tidal inlets because there is less wave height reduction in deeper water. 9. Tide gates in muted marshes may be difficult to operate with sea level rise. 10. Wildlife in managed ponds require particular water levels and sea level rise will put pressure on the existing system of levees, water control structures, and drainage operations.

14. Environmental scenario FUNC vulnerabilities 11. Mudflats and fringing marsh protect levees from wave erosion and flooding. Sea level rise will decrease this natural shoreline protection and increase erosion and potential overtopping of levees. 12. Cogswell Marsh, Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse Preserve, and Eden Landing Baumberg Tract provide wildlife habitat that will be lost if marshes cannot persist with sea level rise.

15. Products from Define Step

16. Environmental Scenario Adaptation Responses 1. Establish an early detection system to determine elevation trends relative to sea level rise, i.e., identify when marshes are approaching key thresholds/triggers for management decisions 2. Update existing management plans to acknowledge sea level rise vulnerabilities 3. Factor sea level rise into ongoing operations and maintenance

17. Sea level rise (feet) Environmental Scenario Adaptation Responses 4. Develop a phased sea level rise adaptation strategy

18. Environmental Scenario Adaptation Responses 5. Develop a funding strategy for implementing sea level rise adaptation 6. Implement measures within a sea level rise strategy Eden Landing

19. Environmental Scenario Adaptation Responses 7. Develop a land acquisition plan to conserve areas adjacent to tidal marshes 8. Develop a decision- making plan to evaluate whether ponds should continue to be managed for particular water levels Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration Project Decision Flowchart DEIR/EIS (2003)

20. Environmental Adaptation Responses 9. Support a regional research agenda to advance the understanding of how tidal marshes and managed ponds will respond to sea level rise 10. Improve coordination among agency departments to ensure consistent planning/regulatory approaches to sea level rise adaptation and reduce programmatic/legislative barriers to assessing and addressing future risks Illustration courtesy of Peter BayeAramburu Island

21. Adaptation Response Card

23. http://www.tidalmarshmonitorin g.org/monitoring-methods- sediment.php

24. Adaptation Response Card

25. Small group adaptation planning Three groups: HARD, EBRPD, CADFW Objectives: Review actions and implementation information for “your agency” Sequence responses to build a draft adaptation response for your agency and assets Flag actions and responses that you cannot or should not implement alone

26. Report back Does this suite of responses, if implemented, “Protect the environmental value of the Hayward Shoreline area by preserving habitat, water quality and endangered species.” How do the suites of responses compare? What is similar and different between HARD, EBRPD and CADFW? Does this identify possible strategies for your agency and for collaboration within and beyond the focus area?

27. Next Steps Synthesized Environmental Scenario Responses based on ART team work and asset manager follow-up. Next scenario-using the same format? Evaluation criteria Location for 3/27 meeting?