 Great, good afternoon everyone, thanks for joining us this Monday afternoon at the start of our Climate Adaptation Data Week online briefing mini-series. I'm Dan Berset, the Executive Director of the Environmental and Energy Study Institute. And on behalf of everyone at ESI, I hope our briefing audience today is hanging in there and feeling well. Today marks the one month mark from the first time we moved the briefing online to encourage social distancing. It feels like a lot longer than a month ago, and we probably still have quite a way to go before we see you again in an in-person ESI briefing. But we must keep up our work to build awareness of the policy challenges and solutions to advance climate mitigation, adaptation, and resilience. So thanks for being with us today. For those joining us for the first time, ESI has undertaken a briefing series to explore climate change solutions and resilience strategies in coastal communities across the US. These briefings are intended to inform policymakers and the general public about the challenges and barriers to improving the resilience of coastal communities, and very importantly, share some success stories about how adaptation can be cost-effective, nature-based, and equitable. If you've missed our briefings to date, be sure to visit us at www.esa.org for video recordings and written summaries. We still have two more areas to explore, Alaska next Tuesday, April 21, and on a date to be determined for Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. When you visit our website, you can find out for our bi-weekly climate change solutions newsletter to help stay informed and up to date. Today, in the rest of this week, we are doing something new for this briefing series, and ESI. Since our last briefing on Hawaii and resilience financing strategies on March 20, as we said we would do, we took stock of how our new online briefing model was working, thanks to everyone who offered feedback, and I still encourage everyone to take a few moments and complete our survey after today. While we will continue to hold online briefings that follow our traditional in-person model, four or five-person panel, a 90-minute format, we also got a little creative. The dynamics of an in-person briefing are just different than they are online, and so are the logistics and planning. Given this new medium, what could we do now that before would have been too much? How could we adapt to our new circumstances? One idea that we are kicking off today, a week-long, regularly scheduled briefing mini-series to explore a topic in greater detail. This mini-series will feature shorter individual briefings and fewer panelists, and the exchange between moderator and, in the case of this week, moderator and co-moderator and experts would lend itself to a more conversational style. You can find the complete schedule in this briefing mini-series online, www.esa.org. So here we are, on the first day, to hear from two experts about the topic localizing sea-level rise projections for decision-makers. After the presentation, my colleague Amber Todorov and I will co-moderate a discussion, and you can participate too by following us on Twitter at EESI online and by sending us your questions. You can also send your questions to EESI at EESI.org. Today we are hosting two experts. Let me introduce them now and then get out of the way of their presentations. Let me welcome Dr. Ian Miller, Washington Sea Grant's Coastal Hazard Specialist. Ian works out of Peninsula College in Port Angeles and the University of Washington's Olympic National Resources Center in Forks. Ian works with coastal communities and public agencies on the Olympic Peninsula to strengthen their ability to plan for and manage coastal hazards, including tsunamis, chronic erosion, coastal flooding, and other hazards associated with climate change. After Ian, we will welcome Nicole Fagan, who has worked for 30 years as a land use and environmental planner and lawyer specializing in coastal loan management and waterfront planning issues. At Washington Sea Grant, Nicole focuses on alternative shoreline stabilization, coastal resiliency, and working waterfront issues. Among her projects, Nicole helps local governments develop their capacity to address sea level rise. She also manages Green Shores for Homes, a multi-agency effort to create a voluntary rating system for shoreline homeowners who want to support healthy marine ecosystems. Ian, Nicole, welcome, and I'll turn it over to you. Really looking forward to your presentation today. OK, thank you so much, everybody. So my name is Ian Miller, Coastal Hazard Specialist of Washington Sea Grant. I'm going to be your part one speaker on this presentation focused on innovations to support sea level rise planning with a focus in Washington State. And then, as Dan mentioned, Nicole is going to follow me. And we're going to focus on a project that we recently wrapped up that had, as an element, this effort to localize sea level rise projections to better support coastal managers and decision makers with the hopes that sea level rise would be incorporated into planning efforts. Most of what I'm going to focus on is embedded in the updated sea level rise assessment that we published in 2018, which is shown here on the screen and is available at Wachostlenetwork.com. Before I get there, though, let me just introduce Washington Sea Grant. Washington Sea Grant is a national oceanic and atmospheric administration program, and we are housed at the University of Washington. Although, as Dan mentioned, many of our staff are distributed around the state, like myself, and we fund and conduct marine research, education and outreach programs throughout the state of Washington to support the health and sustainable use of our marine resources. We've got a variety of focus areas. As Dan implied, I work in the area of coastal hazards and coastal resilience, as does Nicole. So let me dive into the main content today, the main purpose. I'm going to start back in 2014 when Washington Sea Grant conducted and then published a survey that went out to coastal managers and decision makers around the state of Washington and really was trying to get a sense for their needs in regards to planning for climate change. What you see in front of you is a table that summarizes some of the results. This is a table of a variety of climate impacts, and those, the respondents to the survey were asked how important each of these climate impacts was to their community. That's the blue bar, and the scale there is percent of respondents from zero to 100. And then the red bar is, do you have what you need to plan for that particular impact? So you can see for all these impacts, there are gaps. There's a big gap between the importance of the impact and impact and what they, what those planners and decision makers think they need. I'm going to hone in on the sea level rise bar, which you see here, where you can hopefully see very clearly this big gap, which I'm going to frame as an action gap. We perceive this as something that told us there was something missing in terms of the information available to coastal managers and decision makers in the Washington state in regards to addressing sea level rise or planning for sea level rise in their communities. And this one was particularly interesting to me, because in 2012, just two years before that survey, we had had quite a rigorous sea level rise assessment published that was intended to be specific for the West Coast of the United States, including Washington state. So this is a publication called Sea Level Rise for the Coast of California, Oregon and Washington. It was a public report published by the National Academies of Science. And so again, this was published just two years before that survey. But there were a variety of reasons why we thought, based on our conversations with planners and decision makers in Washington state, that this was not being incorporated into planning in the ways that one might have expected, given the type of report and assessment that this was. And there was two things that I'm going to focus in on that we set out to address in our updated assessment that was published in 2018. One was in the sea level rise scenarios that were embedded in this report, there was a very narrow range of uncertainty. So what I mean by that is that really the sea level projections themselves were communicated as these kind of narrow lines, these curves, if you will, but didn't have a way to communicate really well the uncertainty in sea level rise projections, especially moving forward into the future. This really became an issue for those planners and managers that we interact with that are quite savvy about following the literature. And in particular, we're focused on some of the projections emerging at that time from especially places like Antarctica that suggested much higher magnitudes of sea level rise were possible than were communicated by these very narrow projection ranges. And that created questions and confusion about how to address that possibility amongst those managers and decision makers. The other thing that we felt was not included in this assessment that was problematic for many of our constituents was that it was not localized for most communities. And so what that means is that the projections were, it wasn't clear if the projections as published were intended for an individual location on the Washington coast. And this will become, it'll become clear what I mean more specifically about that in just a second. So in 2015, we framed and proposed to NOAA a project under their regional resilience grant program that had four objectives that are listed here on the screen and a wide variety of partners, all of whom I won't list, but there are logos on the left side here. We wanted to support an updated sea level rise and storm surge assessment for coastal Washington. That is the part that I led and it's highlighted in red here. And then I'm going to focus on a little bit more. We also wanted to build climate resilience principles into state agency processes and plans. We wanted to look for resilience co-benefit from existing planning processes and investments. So we didn't want to build new sea level rise focused programs, but rather figure out how to leverage the investments we were already making in Washington state and then create outreach tools to facilitate implementation of resilience projects and plans. So again, I'm going to focus on that top bullet, some of the innovations we built into the assessment. And then Nicole Fagan is going to follow me and address some of these other bullets. So I'm going to focus in particular on two innovations that we built into that assessment that we felt like addressed some of those shortcomings of the 2012 assessment that we were following up on and hopefully serve to fill that action gap that I highlighted at the beginning. So the first thing is we incorporated a probabilistic framework for communicating sea level rise projections. This was published in 2014 by Bob Kopp. And I'm including his photograph here just because his contributions and his work really allowed us to do this. So I wanted to make sure that Bob gets the appropriate credit for that contribution. And on the lower part of this slide is a graphic representation of what those probabilistic projections are. This is a set of sea level rise projections. And these are for Washington State. Down at the bottom you have time out to 2100. And then on the y-axis you have change in average sea level and feet relative to essentially the contemporary average. And then we've got a bunch of lines that sort of feed off from the observed sea level trend in Washington State. And it has very much the same look as sea level projections that you've perhaps seen before. These kind of curves that some of them are quite steep. The difference here, though, and what's been added are these percentiles that are arrayed along the right hand side of this figure, which are assessments of likelihood associated with a particular curve here. And it's that assessment of likelihood that really gives this probabilistic framework its power, so to speak. Because what we think and what we've seen at play is that it allows communities to do some more nuanced decision-making and some more nuanced discussion about sea level rise vulnerabilities depending upon where you work within that likelihood range. So this probabilistic framework was one thing that we wanted to and did build into the 2018 sea level rise assessment that we published. The second thing that we built into it, the second innovation, has to do with localizing. And this slide is intended to convey why that's important, especially in a place like Washington State. So these are tide gauge data. These are observed sea level data from two locations in Washington State, Nea Bay, Washington, which is on the tip of the Olympic Peninsula, and Seattle, Washington. Now these two locations are only about 60 miles apart as the crow flies. What you're seeing here are long time frame sea level trends. The top one in Nea Bay, this record goes back to the mid 1930s. The bottom one from Seattle, the record here goes back to the late 1800s. And these blue lines are monthly average sea levels recorded at both locations. And the key thing to note here is the trend in sea level, what we refer to as relative sea level at these two locations. In Nea Bay, sea level is dropping. Whereas in Seattle, sea level is rising. The ocean is doing the same thing in these two locations. Again, they're quite near to each other. What's different here is what the land is doing. And so land movement is a critical element of understanding sea level rise projections, as well as observations at the community scale. As a consequence for that 2018 assessment, we invested actually quite a bit of our energy, not in what the ocean was doing, what sea level in the ocean was doing, but what the land was doing, how the land was moving vertically. This is our summary figure. These are, this is the shoreline of Washington state in outline. On the left hand side, the colored figure is our estimate of vertical land movement with hot colors being uplift and cool colors being subsidence. And these are expressed in feet per century to align us with the same timeframe and units that we used for projecting sea level. And then on the right in the bluish tones is a estimate of uncertainty for each of those sections of coastline. So what this allowed us to do was take our Washington state probabilistic projections, couple those with these vertical land movement estimates at every location along the Washington coast, and essentially come up with what we call a relative sea level projection, a localized projection that was applicable for every community. So what we developed as a consequence of that was an interactive map. You're seeing a version of it here that allowed a community planner, a person at a particular location or interested in a particular location in Washington state to go in, click on their location, and then download a set of information, a set of seal rise projections for their particular location on the Washington coast. Now, originally, and at their core, those projections are served essentially as a matrix. And this looks onerous when you first take, when you sort of take your first look at it, but it includes some pretty useful information that allows you to get some pretty interesting insights about sea level change in your particular community that I wanna highlight before ending by showing you what we've switched to, to get away from sort of the immediate reaction to a table like this. But there's really three ways that you can sort of use this matrix approach to provide insights about sea level rise at your particular location. The first is obviously you can focus on a particular timeframe of interest and get a sense for the full range of uncertainty across that timeframe. So I'm showing you here, 2100, and embedded in the table are feet of change in sea level. And here we can see by that time, we've got a pretty significant range of uncertainty, 0.3 to 8.6 feet. But we can also focus, of course, on our best estimate or a narrow range in the likely zone. If we wanna tie our decision-making to a particular risk tolerance, we can focus on a particular likelihood set. So for example, I've highlighted here the 50th percentile, what we might assess as being our current assessment of the most likely sea level scenario for the future. Or finally, if we have a particular decision or a particular use that we know has a threshold associated with it. So if sea level changes by X amount, we will start seeing impacts. We can trace that threshold through the table to get a sense for when and how likely those impacts are. So again, the idea here is that you get some insights from this approach that you don't necessarily get from what came before. However, acknowledging that those tables are hard to digest in many cases, our colleagues at the Climate Impacts Group, and I'll use this as an opportunity to also point out that Dr. Amy Snover, who's the director of the Climate Impacts Group, and they were a partner on the Regional Resilience Grant Project we'll be presenting in this series on Wednesday about this and some other climate-related work that the Climate Impacts Group does. They developed this tableau-based interactive sea level rise projection tool based on those tables to allow users to more sort of easily navigate the information that was embedded in those tables in a user-friendly and visually appealing way. This tool is also available at wacostlenetwork.com. So with that, I wanted to pass it off to Nicole Fagan to highlight what's the more important step, which is how do you take these tools that we built as part of this assessment and then translate them into use at community scales. Thank you. So I would like all of you to imagine being in a rowboat on the sea and then you imagine a huge storm is approaching. And now imagine you don't have any oars for that boat. That's really what's happening to our planners and resource managers who need to address coastal flooding and sea level rise. So my name is Nicole Fagan, as Ian told you, and I'm Coastal Management Specialist with Washington Sea Grant based at the University of Washington's College of Environment, where I help coastal planners and resource managers find solutions for complex coastal management issues such as coastal flooding and sea level rise. And as Ian mentioned, Washington Sea Grant funds and conduct marine research outreach and education throughout Washington state, and we support the health and sustainable use of our marine resources to improve the lives of people in Washington. And while I work with coastal planners and resource managers, we also work directly with a host of other constituents that range from fishermen to legislators to tribal communities and educators. So how do we get to implementation? As Ian talked about, we engaged in this four year effort, the Coastal Resilience Project, with four different tasks, which Ian talked about was the sea level rise data developing more specific for Washington state, then working with state agencies to develop better planning and project funding for those purposes, also working with the local experience to help communities in the region identify their sea level rise need for planning and implementation, and then ultimately finding ways to share it with the goal of rapidly increasing the capacity in Washington state to address sea level rise. What I'm going to focus on is the local experience and those aspects of our work. And our goal with that aspect was to enhance the resilience of at least three Washington coastal communities through pilot change, through pilot projects. So we selected two communities to work with on this effort. One was Tacoma, which is really a very urban community with a port and a very significant linear coastal park. And then the other was Island County, which is really much more of a rural community. And there the focus was really on concerning how to address issues of concern of shoreline homeowners. Then our third community partner in this was actually a state program called the Estuarine and Salmon Restoration Program, ESRP, which is at the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. And ESRP, it provides funding and technical assistance to organizations who work to restore shoreline and near shore habitats critical to salmon and other species in Puget Sound. So we worked with ESRP along with our other two partners, Tacoma and Island County, to develop guidance on how to use the sea level rise data we've been talking about to determine how you site and you design, construct and maintain marine restoration projects in the region. And we use case studies to develop the guidance for local governments and others who are working in the field of restoration. And once the case, this example of a case study here is the Lekwe Island and Ziziba project that's in Snohomish County. So then working with Tacoma, we worked with several of their departments, the planning department, the public works department, and then also with Metro Parks Tacoma. And I'm gonna give two examples of working with Metro Parks. So the city had a beach park, Owen Beach, and it was really struggling. It was getting flooded. The infrastructure was crumbling. There was a need to do something and to make changes. And so the city had Metro Parks had taken on the improvement of the facility. But early on, they heard about the work we were doing with our resilience project and they approached us and they said, we think we really wanna try to figure out how to address sea level rise as part of this project. And so they invited us to sit down with Metro Parks and with their designer site works to determine what are the sea level rise issues and how can that be incorporated into designing this park? So Ian gave a presentation very much like what you heard from him already and talked about what the sea level rise projections would be. And we talked through then what the different aspects of the park would be, what are the different infrastructure, what were the implications? These lines you see drawn here are showing the different sea level rise impacts at different times in the future. And we extended these drawings out so that then they could start thinking about what are they actually designing? Then as a result of that, they were able to come up with a complete rework of the project. And now it's designed and it clearly indicates where sea level rise projections might be and the facilities that might be potentially impacted are being pushed way upland outside of what projections might be ranging up until the year 2019 for beyond. Then another project we worked with Tacoma was to evaluate sea level rise and impact along this master planning project that takes into consideration sea level rise, storm surge and wave events. And it was supposed to just be a visioning of this linear park. But then again, Metro Parks said, we want to take into consideration sea level rise. So as a part of all of this area circled is what we were looking at as part of their visioning. So again, first we met with the design team and with the city, with the design team, Methune and the Metro Parks to impart the details of sea level rise to get them to understand what are all of the projections, how to use them, how to use them for different time frames. We also engaged in an exercise on modeling the wave impacts for the site and an effort that would soon be conducted that is going to be conducted throughout the region to give us all better ideas of how storm and wave intersect with sea level rise impacts. Well, then Metro Parks engaged the community. And this is an exercise of a visioning project where they brought all the community together in a series of meetings. And what was incredible is that usual visioning projects just look at the transportation or the access or recreational use of a site. But in this case, they had the whole overlay of sea level rise and brought the community along to understand that for everything that they were interested in, they also had to be thinking about what sea level rise would be. So ultimately with the input from the public and the sea level rise information, Metro Parks is starting to implement it for this linear part and it will be taken into consideration sea level rise. So next was with Island County. And what there we engaged was a series of different types of exercises. And one in particular involved the planning department and issues related to implementation of their shoreline master program and the need for homeowners to have better guidance about what are their options. So the first thing we did was we sat down with the planning department, public works and even a member of their board of commissioner. We walked through all these sea level rises. You see there's Ian explaining how to use these projections and to understand so that everybody was on the same page and really having the same language to talk about. Then we used the sea level rise viewer that Noah's sea level rise viewer. And it's a great way to get people to immediately visualize impacts the slider on the left of your screen, showing feet, that can be changed. And you can use that to simulate what the different elevation gate might be of sea level. And then that can relate to different time frames. And with that starting to notice what are the flooding impacts in different parts of your community and the blue areas show those areas of flooding. And so we had folks working in the room looking at what the impacts were to their community specifically to start to then target what they wanted to address. So Island Community said they wanted to look at adaptation strategies to be made available to the property owners. And they picked three different community types they wanted to focus on. One is their historic beach communities. The second was what they call their canal communities. And the third are bluff communities all in Island County. So what we did is we helped them work through creating a set of recommendation strategies and tables by timeframe, looking at short-term, long mid-term and long-term and considering what can you do to either protect, accommodate or retreat and thinking about all of these within what works within these different time frames. And then we relied first upon the sea level rise timetables that we've been developed now for Island County so we could determine what would be most applicable for a data adaptation strategy within these different time frames. Then another thing that Island County wanted to do is develop a community-based coastal resilience planning guide. Now the big difference here is this is a planning guide that's by the community for the community rather than it being imposed by the planning department or the county coming and saying to it. Five steps into this approach. This is very similar to approaches that you will see in many adaptation planning programs except that this is designed to be totally accomplished at a local level by a neighborhood. So step one is you define what your planning issue is. Step two, you identify the community values and your vulnerable assets. Step three is you analyze and risk the risk and your thresholds for when you wanna take action. Step four is you develop and implement community resilience strategies. And then finally, step five is you monitor the outcomes to inform your future plans. So these are projects. Both of these are ways in which Island County planners are setting themselves up to provide more resources for the shoreline homeowners based on all of the information we started with and the data to get them started. So big question is so how do you get these tools to these decision makers? So once you have the science, like Ian talked about the foundation, it's really foundation and it gets to where people can use it and they'd be emissaries to the broader community. So in order to do this, we held over 20 workshops. We're probably able to touch at least 300 people with this information. And then afterwards, we sent out survey to all the participants in the workshops. And we said, and this is about six months afterwards. And we said, in response to are you using the tools and the information we provided at our workshop, we had a 70% response rate of yes, we are using it, which tells us that this is, we're getting the information out there. And it's our priority to really focus on getting the right information so people can be using it. So through the collaborative efforts of Washington Sea Grant and our partners at Climate Impact Group, Department of Ecology and others, we are helping to put those oars back on the robots for the people of Washington state. Thank you. Thanks very much, Ian and Nicole, that was great. Sorry to audience, our audience, there's a sort of that mad dash to unmute and turn the video back on. So apologies for that little bit of dead air there. But that was a really excellent set of presentations. I love those photos of the community engagement. And to me that's a great evidence that what you're doing is impactful and it's meaningful for the communities you're working with. So thanks very much. So one of our innovations with these shorter format briefings is this idea of co-moderating. And so I'm gonna turn it over to my colleague, but before I do, we still have an opportunity for you to submit questions. You can submit them by following us on Twitter at EESI online or by emailing us at EESI at EESI online. But let me turn it over to my colleague, Amber Todorov. She's a policy associate with EESI coming up on her one year anniversary with us. So I'm actually more junior than she is, I believe, than around since October. Amber, why don't you take it away and let's get the Q&A started. Thanks. Great, thank you, Dan. And thank you both, Nicole and Ian, so much. This was a really interesting presentation and really great work that you guys are doing. So thanks again. So this first question's for Nicole. You started off with three kind of project partners, community partners. Have you seen a lot of interest from other communities? And if so, what are kind of the biggest barriers to communities to start their own similar C level rise adaptation plans? So I'm gonna start back with Ian's survey that he started with saying back in 2014, surveying not only did we find out there was the gap, but another thing that the survey asked was who's doing anything about C level rise and not very many, very few people in the community were. And as we've been working through this project, what we've noticed is because of our work in part, but also because of a heightened awareness, a lot more communities are taking on the work of addressing C level rise in this region. So it's a combination of that there's a lot more awareness. So people are starting to be engaged and because of us reaching out. So when we hold those workshops, we held workshops and we had over 35, 40 jurisdictions, including numerous tribes attending those. And everybody who attends one of our workshops then becomes a more of an adversary for them to go back and do that kind of work. So amount of interest we sold out, our workshops were filled to capacity. And then in terms of what's next, so I think that what we've been doing and what Ian and his team identified as a barrier was really a starting point, which is having information and having the right information. So people were going to, is it one foot? Is it two feet? Should it be three feet? So that was a starting point of we needed better information. So that barrier, we're breaking that one down and then making the information available. Then after that is a lot of work at the local level and priorities and especially now priorities are going to be shifting dramatically. I think we're gonna be seeing an even more need to make the information available to make it possible for jurisdictions to be identifying what their priorities are, but recognizing that this is something we really don't have a lot of time to be holding off on. Great, thanks so much for that. This next question is kind of for Ian more on the data side. So it's great to see another example of NOAA's sea level rise viewer in action. Our Southeast briefing we held last month had a speaker featuring that work as well. So what, and it's got so many great capabilities and functions, but what are there, are there any layers or updates in the database that you would love to see that aren't already there or that are perhaps in the works? Yeah, so yeah, it's a great tool, something that we sort of take for granted now because it's been around for quite a while but it's really ambitious in its kind of scope and scale. So it is part of our workflow, especially for communities that don't have GIS capacity. It's a great way to start interacting with sea level rise projections and get a first look at your exposure at various magnitudes of sea level change. I think the things that I would put on my list of stuff that I would love to see would be, so recent updates, I think maybe a year or two ago, Noah started including links to projections within the viewer and even localized for some locations. So I'd like to see that built out a little bit, right? Some way that really anybody in a community in coastal, the coast of the United States would be able to have localized projections. The other thing that I think we've really struggled with is being able to use the viewer to understand your exposure to what we refer to as extreme water level events, right? So those events where people really notice coastal flooding where water's pushed really high because of the confluence of high tides and storm surge and then what those events look like as sea level rises. That's kind of something that takes a work around to get there in the sea level rise viewer but typically that's what you want to map, right? Because that's where we start to notice that's where we start to notice the impacts of sea level rises on those extremes. So we really have to figure out how to use a sea level rise to be able to visualize those kind of events. Great, thanks Ian, that's really interesting. We're coming up on time and I want to, so we've gotten some questions and there are two that I think are kind of related and so I'm gonna try to combine them to close us out here. A lot of what you discussed today, Ian and Nicole, involved communities, personal property, public property, shoreline property. What are the effects of your work on sort of other essential infrastructure, things like shipping terminals and what are the effects of your work on sort of habitats, whether it's aquatic habitats or shoreline habitats for animals. Are you undertaking similar work for sort of non-human interests as well? Yeah, I'll start on that, Nicole and then you can follow up if you want. So the answer is yes. For example, I have a project that I'm currently just kicking off that is focused on habitat sensitivity and Puget Sound in particular to sea level rise. So essentially trying to use our sea level rise projections to understand if and how habitats may respond to sea level rise. So it's a little bit of a different, I guess, translation. There's different information needs but certainly our interest is in understanding Washington state's vulnerability to sea level rise, writ large, not just impacts to homes but also impacts to infrastructure and impacts to habitat. So and I'm gonna add as to who were our constituents who came to the workshops and who we've worked with for one of our workshops or a couple of our workshops, we had Washington State Department of Transportation who has been very engaged in this work and even before we've been incorporating this. So they've been doing work, looking at the resilience of their local facilities. One of them is a major is their ferry system and where their ferries are located. So Washington's Department of Transportation is using now more specific information because we provided it to them with this data and they're engaged in all sorts of planning and design. Similarly, the ports, one of the presentations was the Port of Tacoma and they were engaged in all of our work in Tacoma. And in fact, the industrial area called the Tide Flats in Tacoma was one of the areas we focused on because they're going to be looking at how they're gonna deal with not just the specific facilities but access in and out of the facilities and the whole range of them. So once you've developed this kind of information, it's broad spread in terms of how it's used and that was part of the beauty of what we were doing is working both with a very urban environment and a very rural to address that. And that gets to our ports, that gets to our industry, that gets into our wastewater, gets to all of the infrastructure and everything is affected but you need the same kind of information as a sort of a starting point and then how you wanna apply it is what you get to do, you have the option to do. So that's the beauty of it all. Thanks so much, Nicole and thanks, Ian and thanks to those who are watching us on YouTube and submitting the questions, thanks for that. In fact, we are not gonna be able to get to all of the questions that have come in unfortunately so we'll try to save them and incorporate them in later presentations that we have this week. Thanks, Amber, for all your work this week. Thanks also to Omri and Ellen and Anna and the other Dan at ESI, Dan O'Brien. Thanks for everybody. It's a lot of work to put a whole data adaptation or excuse me, climate adaptation data week together but I couldn't think of a better way to get it started than to have great presentations from Ian and Nicole about the work that's being done out off the coast of Washington and on the coast of Washington. So thank you very much. A couple of quick reminders as we close out here more or less on time. First, this is new for us. It's off to a great start but we'd love to hear your feedback. Take a moment, if you would, to fill out our survey. Visit us at esi.org to sign up for our newsletter so you can stay in touch and keep up with everything that's coming up. Tomorrow at noon Eastern we have part two titled Assessing National Park Asset Flood Rest. Retreat, Adapt, Fortify. Same time and you can find the link and everything you need of course on the website. Thank you all. Go ahead and there. Happy Monday the 13th to everyone and hope to see you back here tomorrow. Thanks so much. Have a great day. Thank you.