 I'm going to be talking about assessing natural hazard risk from water on the Historic Environment Scotland estate. This is based on work carried out by myself, David Harkin, who is climate change scientist at Historic Environment Scotland and a couple of external partners. I thought it would be useful given we've got quite a mixed audience to briefly summarise the already observed change in Scotland since the 1960s in terms of climate change. Broadly speaking, we've got fewer days of frost, fewer days of snow cover, a significantly longer growing season, so about five weeks longer than it was. We've already had a one degree Celsius rise in temperature. We have, on average, more than 20% more rain than we had in the early 60s, and the sea level is rising by three to four millimetres a year and it's speeding up. Our climate projections indicate we're quite fortunate in the UK. We have really detailed climate projections, UK CP09, and we're eagerly anticipating new climate projections which are due to come out this year. By the 2050s, we're expecting that summers will be warmer and drier and that in winter it will be warmer and wetter. However, that's coupled with an increase in extreme weather events. We've looked at 336 properties in the care of Historic Environment Scotland. These are monuments in state care. Many are situated in some of the most susceptible areas to natural hazards. They're often situated in defensive sites or sites with easy access to natural resources. We've got lots of coastal sites, lots of sites situated near rivers and so on. What we realised when we started looking at this subject was that really we didn't have a good understanding of current natural hazard risk across our estate. Although we were aware of risks at some sites, we hadn't looked at it in a systematic way. We realised that if we could understand that, we would have a much better understanding of what our risk was in terms of future climate change moving towards warmer, wetter winters, hotter, drier summers. We've pulled together various data sets from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, CEPA, and the British Geological Survey. We've looked at natural hazard risk from coastal erosion, ground instability and various kinds of flooding, fluvial, fluvial, coastal and groundwater flooding. Our assumption is that as climate change intensifies, we'll get increased occurrence of rates of natural hazard events. As you have realised, a lot of these are very much linked to water, which of course is the subject of our seminar today. I thought it would be useful to show this slide which shows the relationship between landslides and rainfall. This is from the British Geological Survey. Broadly speaking, landslides increase following heavy rain and extreme weather events. There is quite a clear relationship there, as there is with various types of flooding. We've taken a fairly standard approach to risk assessment, which has been informed by Adaptation Scotland's Five Steps to Managing Your Climate Risk, which is available online. We've begun with a special analysis in a GIS, overlaying the various data sets that we've acquired with our site boundary data. I should stress that our site boundaries often extend far beyond what people traditionally think of as the site, whether that's a castle, a stately home, a prehistoric stone circle. We've assigned a likelihood score of one to five for each hazard, with five being the most likely and one being the least likely. The site in this slide is Fort George, which is an 18th century promontary fort at Ardysir, which is near Inverness in the north of Scotland. I think what's important to note in this slide is that in the coastal erosion slide, which is the middle of the bottom row, you can see two areas which are coloured red. As being likely to suffer coastal erosion. This is a summary of the data sets we've used. This was quite a long process to decide how we were going to fit likelihood to the various data sets that are all different. We've also scored on impact, with the score being dependent on the type of property and the type of hazard in question. There's a few examples here of the kinds of properties that we're dealing with. Matrimewr on the bottom right has been rather prone to flooding. We've scored the impact based on defiding the estate into three categories. These categories are also used by our conservation architects in managing the estate. Broadly speaking, you can split the estate into roofed monuments, unroofed monuments and thirdly, field monuments and standing and car stones. We assumed for the purpose of this exercise that the impact would be different on a roofed monument to an unroofed monument and so on, and that field monuments might often be more resilient than say a roofed monument which had a collection inside it of artefacts or paintings or so on. We also looked at whether the site was staffed. We thought that a site that was staffed would be more likely to have a faster reaction to an extreme weather event that might precipitate flooding and so on. We also looked at whether the sites open all year round. Some of our sites are only open seasonally so there's no staff presence on the ground for a significant part of the year. We calculated risk using impact times likelihood. One of the main reasons that we did that was to ensure that the results of this could be fed up into the risk registers for our directorate and for the organisation as a whole. This was never an academic exercise. It was about ensuring that we were in the best position to manage the risks on the estate. We found, based on those variables that we've discussed, that the majority of our sites had a significant high or very high risk and that even once we took into account mitigating factors, we were left with the majority of our sites being at risk of one or more of those variables at an unacceptable level. This is just a sample of the sites that we've looked at showing the results but you can see that a lot of these sites have quite a significant level of risk for one or more of the hazards in question. I thought it would be useful to have a quick look at the sites we've been looking at. That's not Threave Castle. That's Black Ness Castle. Black Ness Castle, which is on the 1st of 4th and is on a promontory sticking out into the 4th and that showed a significant level of risk of coastal erosion. Now, when we looked at this site on the ground, we discovered that actually there was a renewal of defences on exactly that part of the site already taking place. So I think while people haven't tended on the sites to think of these issues as being related to climate change, they are often very much aware of them and are actively managing them. This is Fort George. Fort George, again, I flagged up to you when we looked at this site before that there are two areas flagged as being at high risk of coastal erosion. The one at the top of the slide to the north is actually where there is a slew skate complex which has already been quite badly damaged by wave action. Several years ago before we actually undertook this exercise, there was rock armour put in place. That was a joint exercise between ourselves and the army. The army did it as a training exercise. They actually co-occupied this site. The area at the bottom is some 20th century duck platforms from the war which, again, we were aware of being quite severely affected by coastal erosion. Thirdly, I thought we could look at Kilhurn Castle, which has been shown to be at significant risk of fluvial flooding. Now, this is an interesting one. It's effectively on an island and as you can see from the map top left, it's at significant risk of various flood events. Both, well, one in ten year flood event, one in 100 year flood event and the one in a thousand year flood event. However, when we started looking at this site and the historical records, we realised that this site used to be an island in a law and it was subject to improvements in the 18th century and a lot of the area round about is very marshy. You can physically walk to the site now, but what's happening in these flood events is the site is almost trying to return to its previous state. The castle is actually in a context that it's very much designed for in that flood event. So it's quite resilient and I think that's the case for quite a lot of our sites is that they were designed to cope in these environments. So it's not all doom and gloom. I think the main thing is that we're actually aware of these risks and can manage them where it's appropriate. But I think also it's really important that you kind of scratch below the surface and actually start looking at the environmental history of sites that you're assessing to get a really detailed picture of what's going on in the landscape. So we've come up with a list of top 28 sites which seem to be most at risk, but they're not necessarily the ones you might expect for various reasons. As I say, it's a very limited number of natural hazards that we've actually looked at in this. There are more, but we don't have the high quality datasets that we would like for those. So all this was published in January so you can download our report from the Historic Environment Scotland website. I'll post the link on Twitter again so that people can find it easily. We're also looking at publishing a methodology because what we've always wanted is that the methodology we've developed is reused by others, and that's actually already happening. So I think that kind of document would be really useful for people. As I say, we're looking at conducting more in-depth site-specific studies like we've done at Kilharn at other sites. And we're also having conversations with the staff involved both in the visitor operations at these sites and in the conservation and maintenance of the sites and the results of this have already been fed into the asset management plan for the estate and the investment plan. And the results are also part of the new asset management system for the estate that's being developed at the moment. So in future we're also going to be looking at other variables working closely in partnership with our science team colleagues at the engine shed in Stirling. And we're looking forward to the new climate projections UKCPA team and what they actually mean for our work. Thank you very much.