The Hydro-illogical Cycle and the case for Integrated Flood Hazard Management Dave Murray, P.Eng., CWRA National President
Canadian Water Resources Association Association Canadienne des Ressources Hydriques Water Resources Professionals across Canada promoting Effective Water Management www.cwra.org
Our Objectives To stimulate public awareness and understanding of Canada's water resources To encourage public recognition of the high priority of water as a valued resource To provide a forum for the exchange of information and opinion relating to the management of Canada's water resources To participate with appropriate agencies in international water resource management activities
Overview 4 How did we get here anyway? History and the hydro-illogical cycle Let s do the Integrated approach to flood management?
The Hydro-illogical Cycle
6 We like being near the water We didn t know there was a hazard Why are we here? in the Floodplain that is? We used to travel easier on the water REMEMBER THAILAND This is where we are from
2004 Tsunami 7 Ko Lanta
Awareness 8
New Housing 9
History of Flood Costs 10 Year Province Event 2016 (Millions) 2013 AB Calgary $6,200 1954 ON Southern ON (Hurricane Hazel) $6,124 1948 BC Fraser River $5,875 1950 MB Winnipeg $5,284 1996 QC Saguenay $3,066 2005 ON Southern Ontario $1,803 2005 AB High River, Southern AB $1,725 1997 MB Southern Manitoba $1,397 1948 ON Southern Ontario $802 1993 MB Winnipeg $702 1937 ON Southern Ontario $534 1923 NB Saint John River Basin $526 1955 SK/MB Manitoba and Saskatchewan $526 2004 AB Edmonton $344 1995 AB Southern Alberta $324 1934 NB Plaster Rock $225 1936 NB New Brunswick $214 1999 MB Melita $185 1916 ON Central Ontario $183 1909 NB Chester $169 1961 NB Saint John River Basin $168 1987 QC Montréal $167 1996 QC Montréal and Mauricie Region $165 1920 ON Southwestern Ontario $150 1920 BC Prince George $149 2004 ON Peterborough $147 1972 QC Richelieu River $141 1983 NF Newfoundland $131 1974 QC Maniwaki $117
History of Flood Programs 11 Year Province Event 2016 (Millions) 1909 NB Chester $169 1916 ON Central Ontario $183 1920 ON Southwestern Ontario $150 1920 BC Prince George $149 1923 NB Saint John River Basin $526 1934 NB Plaster Rock $225 1936 NB New Brunswick $214 1937 ON Southern Ontario $534 1948 BC Fraser River $5,875 1948 ON Southern Ontario $802 1950 MB Winnipeg $5,284 1954 ON Southern ON (Hurricane Hazel) $6,124 1955 SK/MB Manitoba and Saskatchewan $526 1961 NB Saint John River Basin $168 1972 QC Richelieu River $141 1974 QC Maniwaki $117 1983 NF Newfoundland $131 1987 QC Montréal $167 1993 MB Winnipeg $702 1995 AB Southern Alberta $324 1996 QC Saguenay $3,066 1996 QC Montréal and Mauricie Region $165 1997 MB Southern Manitoba $1,397 1999 MB Melita $185 2004 AB Edmonton $344 2004 ON Peterborough $147 2005 ON Southern Ontario $1,803 2005 AB High River, Southern AB $1,725 2013 AB Calgary $6,200 Is this hydro-illogical cycle happening? 1930s Transfer Water Mgmt. to Provinces 1953 Canada Water Conservation Act 1950-1960s Flood Damage Reduction Program 1975-1990 Flood Damage Reduction Program 2008 National Disaster Mitigation Strategy 2015-16 National Flood Guidelines
The Hydro-illogical Cycle Political Return Period 2-4 years
13 1990-2014 The Dark Age of Flood Mapping
14
2014 15 The New Dawn!
What has changed? 16 1. No residential overland flood insurance up to 2013 2. Insurance companies in Calgary were exposed 3. One company decided to cover flood damage then others followed 4. Approached Feds with plan to offer insurance if they put skin in the game 5. Several companies have built flood models to assess risk for their purposes 6. Insurance being rolled out but will most vulnerable areas be covered?
Federal Government How to reduce flood damage payout? Provinces and Territories How to quantify and regulate flooding? Private Insurance How to share flood hazard/risk maps? 17 Local Communities How we plan for and pay for flood resilience? Real Estate Industry: Flood Risk on title? Policy Shift from Public to Private Monetization How to transfer the risk of flood damage for the good of society?
18 National Technical Committee Reps from each Province, CWRA, DND, INAC Nov 2015 Mar 2016 November 2016 End 2016 Timeline March 11, 2011
Important Policy Issues 19 1. Who pays for flood damage if private insurance won t? 2. If a homeowner chooses not to insure would the government cover them after a flood? 3. What expectation does the insurance industry have for government to provide flood planning and mitigation? 4. What mapping governs on a payout where both government and insurance maps exist? 5. What about mortgage lenders and real estate, should flood risk be declared on property title? 6. Will insurance companies go after government to recover cost if mitigation fails? 7. Will property value drop after insurers determine they won t cover a high risk property? March 11, 2011
Practical-technical Issues 20 1. How should climate change hydrology be incorporated into determining flood hazards? Best practices from real-world examples. 2. What range of hydraulic scenarios should we use? Should it include multiple hazards (coastal, river, geohazards)? Do dikes count as mitigation in the model or for insurance? 3. What about social consequences of flooding (loss of business, stranding of communities). How is this accounted for? 4. What about environmental consequences? How so we assess this risk? March 11, 2011
Just because we always did it that way! 21 There has to be a better way? Time to start the discussion about changing the way we think!
I have a dream! 22 What is an Integrated Flood Hazard Management Framework? Builds on Metro Vancouver Integrated Stormwater Management Template Considers Science, Safety, Environment, Community Values, Economics Is Holistic and Inclusive Balances risks, consequences and costs Assessing Hazards Coastal River and creek Lake Stormwater Groundwater Debris flow/flood Seismic Mitigation Best available to balance risk and consequences Decision Making Look at full range of impacts and benefits Cost to people Benefits to community and environment
23
Getting on the road to an IFHMP 24 Identify need and secure funding Identify key partners and decision-makers Scoping (can be very difficult!) Assemble a multi-disciplinary technical team Establish stakeholder engagement strategy Solicit input on values, objectives, constraints & opportunities
Community Engagement Scoping 25 Determine what risk can they tolerate? What are their concerns about hazards? Economic, environmental, social, cultural? What infrastructure is critical? What are the cumulative impacts for new development?
Community Engagement 26 Mobilize stakeholders at different stages: values and objectives, planning, implementing Inclusiveness, balance, transparency, and clarity are appropriate objectives for engagement process Lack of community buy-in can limit effectiveness But, need to manage expectations consensus is often not possible Source: City of Burlington Community Engagement Charter
Flood Risk Mitigation: Buying Down the Risk Initial Risk Land Use Planning Tools Site Specific Tools Structural Flood Protection Works Watershed and River Management Public Outreach and Education Emergency Planning Flood Insurance HIGH FLOOD RISK INITIAL RISK Planning Regulatory Land Use Site Specific Structural RESIDUAL RISK LOW Residual Risk Flood Risk Mitigation Tools Adapted from: United States Army Corps of Engineers (Riley, 2008)
Integrated Flood Management Process Hazards 1. Flood Map identifies extents 2. Depth-velocity identifies hazard Consequences Risk 3. Damage Curves property and life etc. 4. Environmental and Social Assessment 5. Determine Risk Approach 6. Determine Risk from Hazards and Consequences Community Engagement 7. Prioritize/triage Risks 8. Inform/engage Community 9. Determine risk Tolerance Mitigation 10. Identify Mitigation Options 11. Determine Costs and Impacts 12. Apply tools to Buy down Risk 13. Prioritize tools and Phasing IFHM Plan 14. Draft Plan 15. Seek Community Input 16. Refine, funding and timelines 17. Implement Plan 18. Revisit and Refine
The IFM Process Distillery 29 Flood Tolerance Pressure Community Engagement Risk Vapour Risk Evaluation Tools Consequences Mitigation Condenser HEAT (Politics, Policy and Funding) Hazards IFMP COOLING Will you get Single Malt or Moonshine?
30
31 Downtown Howe Sound
The Hazards 32 Coastal flood River Flood Dike Breach Debris flow/flood
Depth, Velocity and Debris Factor Floodplain Extent Physical Hazard
Environmental Environmental Consequence Social Social Consequence
Squamis Key IFM Recommendations 35 Squamish 3d figure March 11, 2011
Take-Aways 36 1. The Hydro-illogical cycle is Real 2. It s a New Dawn! 3. The integrated approach (environment, economic, social) is the way to go
The Case for Integrated Flood Planning37 Dave Murray, P.Eng. dmurray@kwl.ca @CWRA_Pres www.cwra.org