NOAA - Shoreline Change Workshop of 2012: Perspectives on the Great Lakes

OMB# 0690-0030

Pre-Workshop Survey Materials

11/29/2012

Survey Invitation Email [to be sent on January 4, 2013 via our Vovici survey software]

To: [list]

From: [email protected]

Subject: Input requested for Shoreline Change Workshop: Perspectives on the Great Lakes

NOAA’s Coastal Storms Program plans to convene a Shoreline Change Workshop: Perspectives on the Great Lakes on April 10-11, 2013 in Chicago, IL. This workshop will help inform funding priorities while the Coastal Storms Program is focusing on the Great Lakes Region over the next 3-4 years.

We are seeking input from a broad array of stakeholders in the Great Lakes region in order to design an effective workshop.

We would greatly appreciate your participation in this pre-workshop survey by January 15, 2013:

[Link to survey will appear as “Great Lakes Shoreline Change Workshop: Pre-Workshop Survey”]

Thank you in advance for your input!

Sincerely,

NOAA Coastal Storms Program Staff

Survey Reminder [to be sent automatically to non-respondents on January 10, 2013]

To: [list]

From: [email protected]

Subject: Reminder: Input requested for Shoreline Change Workshop - Great Lakes

If possible, please participate in our pre-workshop survey for our Shoreline Change Workshop: Perspectives on the Great Lakes, to be held on April 10-11, 2013 in Chicago, IL.

[Link to survey will appear as “Great Lakes Shoreline Change Workshop: Pre-Workshop Survey”]

Your input by January 15, 2013 will help us design an effective workshop and help inform the Coastal Storms Program’s funding priorities in the Great Lakes over the next 3-4 years. Thank you in advance!

Sincerely,

NOAA Coastal Storms Program Staff

Shoreline Change Workshop: Perspectives on the Great Lakes

Pre-Workshop Survey

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other suggestions for reducing this burden to Maria Honeycutt, Coastal Hazards Specialist, NOAA Coastal Services Center, 1315 East-West Hwy, Rm 10353, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subjected to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Storms Program is organizing a Shoreline Change Workshop: Perspectives on the Great Lakes to be held on April 10-11, 2013 in Chicago, IL. Workshop objectives are:

• Engage and educate stakeholders from all sectors who have a shared interest in managing shoreline change in the Great Lakes and foster a dialogue about tools, data, and procedures used to make coastal management decisions.

• Explore policy, planning, and regulatory approaches to manage shoreline erosion hazards.

• Outline local needs and leverage opportunities for improved data, mapping, and visualization that will support shoreline management activities in the Great Lakes region.

By the end of the workshop, we hope to have prioritized the region’s shoreline hazard management requirements and developed some consensus on the best allocation of the Coastal Storms Program’s resources for Great Lakes shoreline projects.

Your feedback on shoreline change management data, tools, and strategies in the Great Lakes will help us design an effective workshop.

Your Great Lakes Shoreline Management Activities

1. Role (check all that apply):

• Coastal manager (permitting or non-regulatory)

• Coastal engineer

• Local planner

• Scientist

• GIS analyst

• Elected official (local government)

• Public works official

• Environmental advocate

• Conservation practitioner

• Academic research

• Educator/outreach specialist

• Shoreline property owner

• Contractor

• Consultant

• Other:

[text box]

2. Geographic area of focus (check all that apply):

State/Province:

MN	WI	IL
IN	MI	OH
PA	NY	Quebec
Ontario

Lake Basin:

Superior	Michigan	Huron
Erie	Ontario

3. Datasets used (check all that apply):

NOS T-sheets Bluff erosion rates Beach erosion Beach profile surveys Historical recession lines Littoral processes LIDAR bathymetry LIDAR topography Historical topography Historical bathymetry USGS Topo Quads Aerial photography Satellite data

Lake levels Historical lake levels Extreme water level analysis FEMA flood maps Precipitation Stream flow Ice cover Wave data Wind data Currents Evaporation rates Net basin supplies Isostatic rebound Soil type Nearshore substrate Nearshore habitat

Wetland type (NWI) Threatened and endangered species Biodiversity Land use Zoning Inventory of existing infrastructure (stormwater, inlet elevation, impervious surface, etc.) Inventory of shoreline communities (land use, land cover) Shoreline protection Property parcel Public access

• Other (list below):
  [text box]

4. Tools used (check all that apply):

• C-CAP

• ENOW

• Digital Shoreline Analysis System

• eCoastal Tools

• HAZUS

• VDatum

• CanVis

• Wave modeling tools

• Storm surge modeling tools

• Beach runup and overtopping modeling tools

• Great Lakes Coastal Forecasting System

• GIS software

• Other (list below):
  [text box]

Data

Please rate the extent to which adequate scientific and spatial data are available for the following to support shoreline management in the Great Lakes:

Fully Adequate

Inadequate / Unavailable

Don’t Know

Don’t Use

5. Historic and current water levels 1 2 3 4 5  

6. Future lake levels 1 2 3 4 5  

7. Historic and current storm surges and seiches 1 2 3 4 5  

8. Storm return period 1 2 3 4 5  

9. Storm intensity 1 2 3 4 5  

10. Meteotsunamis 1 2 3 4 5  

11. Flooding 1 2 3 4 5  

12. Bluff erosion 1 2 3 4 5  

13. Beach/shoreline erosion 1 2 3 4 5  

14. Sediment transport 1 2 3 4 5  

15. Underlying geology and morphology 1 2 3 4 5  

16. Elevation (topography and bathymetry) 1 2 3 4 5  

17. Coastal/nearshore habitat 1 2 3 4 5  

18. Habitat function 1 2 3 4 5  

19. Habitat restoration/monitoring 1 2 3 4 5  

20. Beach nourishment 1 2 3 4 5  

21. Land use 1 2 3 4 5  

22. Land acquisition 1 2 3 4 5  

23. Public trust/access 1 2 3 4 5  

24. Shoreline structures 1 2 3 4 5  

25. Grey infrastructure 1 2 3 4 5  

26. Green infrastructure 1 2 3 4 5  

27. Ice prediction 1 2 3 4 5  

28. Other:

[text box]

29. Applications (examples of how you utilize available data):

[text box]

Tools

Please rate the extent to which adequate technologies are available to support shoreline management in the Great Lakes:

Fully Adequate

Inadequate / Unavailable

Don’t Know

Don’t Use

30. Coastal data portals 1 2 3 4 5  

31. High resolution data (e.g., LiDAR, aerial photography) 1 2 3 4 5  

32. Visualization tools and data viewers (e.g., CanVis) 1 2 3 4 5  

33. Lake level change 1 2 3 4 5  

34. Flood pattern modeling 1 2 3 4 5  

35. Wave propagation models 1 2 3 4 5  

36. Beach profile surveys 1 2 3 4 5  

37. Economic analysis (e.g., ENOW) 1 2 3 4 5  

38. Great Lakes Observing System 1 2 3 4 5  

39. State coastal atlases 1 2 3 4 5  

40. Other:

[text]

41. Applications (examples of how you utilize available tools):
    [text box]

Needs

Please rate the importance of the following for improving shoreline management in the Great Lakes:

Very Important

Not Important

Don’t Know

42. Greater funding 1 2 3 4 5 

43. More/improved data 1 2 3 4 5 

44. Improved access to data 1 2 3 4 5 

45. More/improved tools 1 2 3 4 5 

46. More/improved management strategies 1 2 3 4 5 

47. Improved access to technical assistance 1 2 3 4 5 

48. Resources (including expertise) to foster community

involvement and behavior change 1 2 3 4 5 

49. Collaboration/partnerships 1 2 3 4 5 

50. Capacity building (e.g., leveraging expertise) 1 2 3 4 5 

51. Training 1 2 3 4 5 

52. Other:
    [text box]

53. Applications (examples of how meeting needs you rated important could change shoreline management):

[text box]

Workshop Topics

Please rate the importance of these potential workshop topics as a means of exploring Great Lakes shoreline management and best use of federal support:

Very Important

Not Important

Don’t Know

54. Current shoreline change hazards 1 2 3 4 5 

55. Shoreline change trends and future hazards 1 2 3 4 5 

56. Currently available data 1 2 3 4 5 

57. Unmet data needs 1 2 3 4 5 

58. Currently available tools 1 2 3 4 5 

59. Unmet tool needs 1 2 3 4 5 

60. Current shoreline management approaches 1 2 3 4 5 

61. Shoreline management unmet needs 1 2 3 4 5 

62. Best management practices 1 2 3 4 5 

63. Potential future management approaches 1 2 3 4 5 

64. Opportunities for collaboration 1 2 3 4 5 

65. Opportunities for federal support 1 2 3 4 5 

66. Other:

[text box]

67. If you wish, please recommend experts who could speak/present on issues identified above:

[text box]

68. Other comments:

[text box]

Thank you for completing this survey!

Pre-workshop survey, 11/29/2012 8