From epic wildfires to epic flash floods: Rethinking environmental planning in an era of extremes

On January 9, 2018, a series of debris flows killed 23 people and caused over a $1 billion in economic losses in Montecito, Santa Barbara County, California. The debris flows followed a classic pattern in mountainous areas of southern California: A large wildfire (the 2017 Thomas Fire) burned the headwaters of streams draining the Transverse Ranges southward to the Pacific. A cell of intense rain fell on hydrophobic soils in the burn area, generating debris flows that propagated downstream, affecting areas along the stream channels. The 2018 Montecito debris flows raise compelling questions about the role of scientific information in decision making generally, and specifically how hazardous areas along rivers and streams are mapped, how land use is regulated in these zones, and how best to respond in emergency situations. We analyze the evolution of urban development in these flood hazard areas since the beginning of the 20th century, the recovery planning strategies that the local government adopted after the event, and the role of post-fire debris flow maps in environmental planning. We highlight the importance of exposure as a key element to reduce risk

Projecte científico tècnic de definició de subunitats paisatgístiques del Parc Natural de l'Alt Pirineu

La identificació i caracterització de subunitats de paisatge per al Parc Natural de l'Alt Pirineu (PNAP) s'ha fet en base a la Llei 8/2005, de 8 de juny, de Protecció, Gestió i Ordenació del Paisatge la qual estableix que "els catàlegs del paisatge són els documents de carácter descriptiu i prospectiu que determinen la tipologia dels paisatges de Catalunya, identifiquen llurs valors i llur estat de conservació i proposen els objectius de qualitat que han de complir" (Article 10). Igualment, la Llei ha previst que la responsabilitat dels catàlegs sigui de l'Observatori del Paisatge que "és una entitat de suport i col·laboració amb l'Administració de la Generalitat en totes les qüestions relacionades amb l'elaboració, l'aplicació i la gestió de les polítiques de paisatge" (Article 13). Per això, aquest treball es basarà en els criteris establerts per l'Observatori del Paisatge (document de referència pels grups de treball, Olot i Barcelona, maig de 2005) i les bases conceptuals, metodològiques i procedimentals que han elaborat per a la realització dels Catàlegs del Paisatge de Catalunya que s'han recollit en un document anomenat Prototipus de Catàleg de Paisatge (PCP). Com que en l'actualitat aquests paràmetres estan en fase de desenvolupament, aquest Projecte Científico Tècnic de Definició de Subunitats Paisatgístiques per al Parc Natural de l'Alt Pirineu s'ha inspirat en aquest document adaptant-se a les necessitats del Parc i desenvolupant les metodologies proposades. El document que es presenta recull la Primera Fase del treball, que s'ha destinat al tractament i adequació de la informació existent (cartogràfica i escrita) per a la delimitació i definició posterior de les diferents subunitats de paisatge

Restoring Rivers and Floodplains for Habitat and Flood Risk Reduction: Experiences in Multi-Benefit Floodplain Management From California and Germany

Conventional flood control has emphasized structural measures such as levees, reservoirs, and engineered channels—measures that typically simplify river channels and cut them off from their floodplain, both with adverse environmental consequences. Structural measures tend to be rigid and not easily adapted to increased flooding regimes resulting from environmental change. Such actions also limit the natural hydrologic benefits of floodplains such as storing floodwaters, improving water quality, providing habitat for invertebrates and fish during periods of inundation, and supporting a multitude of cultural services. As these benefits are more widely recognized, policies are being adopted to encourage projects that reduce flood risks and restore floodplain ecosystems, while acknowledging the social-ecological context. The number of such projects, however, remains small. We assessed four multi-benefit floodplain projects (two in California, United States, and two in Germany) and characterized their drivers, history, and measures implemented. In both United States cases, the dominant driver behind the project was flood risk reduction, and ecosystem restoration followed, in one case inadvertently, in the other as a requirement to receive a subsidy for a flood risk reduction project. One German case was motivated by ecosystem restoration, but it was more widely accepted because it also offered flood management benefits. The fourth case was conceived in terms of balanced goals of flood risk reduction, ecosystem restoration, and recreation. We conclude that projects that both reduce flood risk and restore ecosystems are clearly possible and often cost-effective, and that they could be more widely implemented. The principal barriers are often institutional and regulatory, rather than technical

Risk as a process: a history informed hazard planning approach applied to the 2018 post-fire debris flows, Montecito, California

Historical information about floods is not commonly used in the US to inform land use planning decisions. Rather, the current approach to managing floods is based on static maps derived from computer simulations of the area inundated by floods of specified return intervals. These maps provide some information about flood hazard, but they do not reflect the underlying processes involved in creating a flood disaster, which typically include increased exposure due to building on flood-prone land, nor do they account for the greater hazard resulting from wildfire. We developed and applied an approach to analyze how exposure has evolved in flood hazard zones in Montecito, California, an area devastated by post-fire debris flows in January 2018. By combining historical flood records of the past 200 years, human development records of the past 100 years, and geomorphological understanding of debris flow generation processes, this approach allows us to look at risk as a dynamic process influenced by physical and human factors, instead of a static map. Results show that floods after fires, in particular debris flows and debris laden floods, are very common in Montecito (15 events in the last 200 years), and that despite policies discouraging developments in hazard areas, developments in hazard zones have increased substantially since Montecito joined the National Flood Insurance Program in 1979. We also highlight the limitation of using conventional Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) to manage land use in alluvial fan areas such as Montecito. The knowledge produced in this project can help Montecito residents better understand how they came to be vulnerable to floods and identify action they are taking now that might increase or reduce their vulnerability to the next big flood. This science-history-centric approach to understand hazard and exposure evolution using geographic information systems (GIS) and historical records, is generalizable to other communities seeking to better understand the nature of the hazard they are exposed to and some of the root causes of their vulnerabilities, in other words, both the natural and social processes producing disasters

Genetic analyses of aplastic anemia and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patients with short telomeres, possible implication of DNA-repair genes

Background: Telomeres are nucleoprotein structures present at the terminal region of the chromosomes. Mutations in genes coding for proteins involved in telomere maintenance are causative of a number of disorders known as telomeropathies. The genetic origin of these diseases is heterogeneous and has not been determined for a significant proportion of patients. Methods: This article describes the genetic characterization of a cohort of patients. Telomere length was determined by Southern blot and quantitative PCR. Nucleotide variants were analyzed either by high-resolution melting analysis and Sanger sequencing of selected exons or by massive sequencing of a panel of genes. Results: Forty-seven patients with telomere length below the 10% of normal population, affected with three telomeropathies: dyskeratosis congenita (4), aplastic anemia (22) or pulmonary fibrosis (21) were analyzed. Eighteen of these patients presented known pathogenic or novel possibly pathogenic variants in the telomere-related genes TERT, TERC, RTEL1, CTC1 and ACD. In addition, the analyses of a panel of 188 genes related to haematological disorders indicated that a relevant proportion of the patients (up to 35%) presented rare variants in genes related to DNA repair or in genes coding for proteins involved in the resolution of complex DNA structures, that participate in telomere replication. Mutations in some of these genes are causative of several syndromes previously associated to telomere shortening

Governing for Integrated Water and Flood Risk Management: Comparing Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches in Spain and California

Flood risk management in the context of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) is becoming widely accepted as an approach to improving resilience in light of increasing flood risks due to climate change and other factors. This paper contributes to a better understanding of the governance arrangements needed for effectively implement integrated approaches to managing flood risk. We compare how IWRM and flood risk management have been operationalized within “top-down” and “bottom-up” governance arrangements in the European Union and the United States. We focus in particular on two case study regions, the Catalan coastal region in Spain and the San Francisco Bay Area in California, which have strong similarities in economy, climate, and environmental values, but different institutional settings. Our findings contribute empirical evidence of the need for a balance between “top-down” and “bottom-up” approaches. While the San Francisco Bay Area’s strongly collaborative and participatory approach has generated new connections among flood managers and other stakeholders, the lack of a central entity with the capacity and mandate for on-going coordination and region-wide risk assessments appears to constrain its ability to support integrated and adaptive management. The European Union’s top-down approach and the presence of a central authority at the river basin scale have led to a consolidated regional plan in Catalonia encompassing all phases of flood risk management, but the degree of engagement and opportunities for knowledge-sharing among participants may be more limited

Integrated water resource and flood risk management: comparing the US and the EU

Floods are the most important natural hazard in the EU and US, causing 700 deaths and at least €25 billion in insured economic losses in Europe since 1998, and causing nearly $10 billion annual average flood losses in the US. Flood control is commonly viewed as a matter of building dykes, dams, and other structures, but effective flood management within the perspective of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) must address multiple components of the flood risk management cycle (Figure 1). We systematically reviewed governance structures, guidance documents, and mapping products in both the EU and US, drawing particular examples from California and Spain, to determine how the US and the EU approach the flood risk management within different IWRM initiatives, which strategies and agencies are involved in the different phases –characterization (flood hazard and risk assessment and mapping), mitigation (prevention and protection), emergency (preparation and response), and (short and long term) recovery-, and how these agencies relate to each other. The regions have strong similarities in economy and environmental values, but have evolved very different approaches to cope with floods. The US and EU have similar organizational structures, but very different legislative frameworks. In the US overarching policy and large scale infrastructure funding have traditionally resided at the federal level with state and local agencies exercising strong land use control. EU member states have arguably advanced ahead of the US in some significant ways since adoption of the EU Floods Directive in 2007, a more top-down approach. Among the Directive’s many components, one important requirement is submission of flood risk management plans (by the end of 2015), which, for first time, take into account all phases of flood management. This umbrella strategy to cope with floods is creating a more consistent and integrated flood risk management approach in Europe. In 2008, the State of California, with over 2500 km of levees, enacted a comprehensive package of flood management legislation and state bond financing that far exceeds federal and other state’s actions. This program known as FloodSafe California provided funding for projects within Integrated Regional Water Management Plans, an attempt to implement IWRM at regional scale. Although the efforts of FloodSafe California represent as a major change in direction in US flood risk management, the actions still do not fully implement the integrated flood risk approach promoted by the EU

Integrated water resource and flood risk management: comparing the US and the EU

Floods are the most important natural hazard in the EU and US, causing 700 deaths and at least €25 billion in insured economic losses in Europe since 1998, and causing nearly $10 billion annual average flood losses in the US. Flood control is commonly viewed as a matter of building dykes, dams, and other structures, but effective flood management within the perspective of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) must address multiple components of the flood risk management cycle (Figure 1). We systematically reviewed governance structures, guidance documents, and mapping products in both the EU and US, drawing particular examples from California and Spain, to determine how the US and the EU approach the flood risk management within different IWRM initiatives, which strategies and agencies are involved in the different phases –characterization (flood hazard and risk assessment and mapping), mitigation (prevention and protection), emergency (preparation and response), and (short and long term) recovery-, and how these agencies relate to each other. The regions have strong similarities in economy and environmental values, but have evolved very different approaches to cope with floods. The US and EU have similar organizational structures, but very different legislative frameworks. In the US overarching policy and large scale infrastructure funding have traditionally resided at the federal level with state and local agencies exercising strong land use control. EU member states have arguably advanced ahead of the US in some significant ways since adoption of the EU Floods Directive in 2007, a more top-down approach. Among the Directive’s many components, one important requirement is submission of flood risk management plans (by the end of 2015), which, for first time, take into account all phases of flood management. This umbrella strategy to cope with floods is creating a more consistent and integrated flood risk management approach in Europe. In 2008, the State of California, with over 2500 km of levees, enacted a comprehensive package of flood management legislation and state bond financing that far exceeds federal and other state’s actions. This program known as FloodSafe California provided funding for projects within Integrated Regional Water Management Plans, an attempt to implement IWRM at regional scale. Although the efforts of FloodSafe California represent as a major change in direction in US flood risk management, the actions still do not fully implement the integrated flood risk approach promoted by the EU

Opportunities for green infrastructure under Ecuador's new legal framework

La nueva constitución de Ecuador reconoce los "derechos de la naturaleza" y el derecho de las personas a beneficiarse del medio ambiente y los recursos naturales que mejoran el Buen Vivir (Calidad de vida). El plan nacional para el Buen Vivir exige una planificación espacial para garantizar la sostenibilidad ambiental territorial y global, aumentar la seguridad de las personas al minimizar el impacto de los peligros naturales como las inundaciones. En este contexto, analizamos oportunidades para infraestructura verde en Cuenca (la tercera ciudad más grande de Ecuador). Mapeamos las áreas verdes y los vínculos existentes, analizamos los roles de las instituciones implementadoras con el aporte estructurado de 33 expertos gubernamentales, académicos y de la industria. Descubrimos que las autoridades fragmentadas y los mandatos a menudo contradictorios de diferentes agencias impidieron la gestión óptima de las áreas de espacios abiertos dentro de la ciudad. Además, los esfuerzos de planificación dentro de la ciudad de Cuenca están completamente desconectados de las áreas periurbanas que se urbanizan rápidamente fuera de los límites de la ciudad, lo que resulta en oportunidades perdidas para espacios verdes conectados para la vida silvestre, la recreación humana y los beneficios de la calidad del agua.Ecuador's new constitution recognizes “rights of nature” and peoples’ right to benefit from the environment and natural resources that enhance the Buen Vivir (Quality of Life). The national plan for Buen Vivir calls for spatial planning to guarantee territorial and global environmental sustainability, increase people s safety by minimizing the impact of natural hazards such as floods. Within this context, we analyzed opportunities for green infrastructure in Cuenca (Ecuador s third largest city). We mapped existing green areas and linkages, analyzed the roles of implementing institutions with structured input from 33 government, academic, and industry experts. We found that fragmented authorities and often-contradictory mandates of different agencies prevented optimal management of open-space areas within the city. Moreover, planning efforts within the city of Cuenca are completely disconnected from the rapidly-urbanizing peri-urban areas outside the city limits, resulting in missed opportunities for connected green space for wildlife, human recreation, and water quality benefits