1

ALL HAZARDS MANAGEMENT and MITIGATION IN A NEW

BUREAUCRACYNATURAL HAZARDS WORKSHOP

JULY 14, 2003

presented by

Larry Larson, CFMExecutive DirectorAssociation of State Floodplain Managers

2

Association of Association of ProfessionalsProfessionals

5,500 members 16 Chapters Several pending chapters / state Associations

3

ASFPM MissionASFPM Mission

Mitigate the losses, costs, and human suffering caused by flooding.

and

Protect the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains.

4

ASFPM ActivitiesASFPM Activities Promoted hazard mitigation from beginning Advocate for improved mapping &

Mitigation Certification of floodplain managers--FEMA,

NOAA, COE, NRCS---and EMI for training Input to Congress and Administration

Fed budgets,NFIP & Disaster Mitigation Acts, WRDA

Internationally recognized

5

FLOOD HAZARDS HISTORY in U.S.FLOOD HAZARDS HISTORY in U.S.

1930--60’s---mostly structural NFIP--HUD from 1968 to 1979

First major non-structural national mitigation program

Tried to implement nation-wide, no pilots

FEMA from 1979 to 2002Both Floodplain Management and Disaster

Mitigation

DHS since 2002

6

DISASTER ACT HISTORYDISASTER ACT HISTORY 1980’s and 90’s

Issue--should we include technological hazards, like chemical spills--planning and implementation

Response significantly enhanced in 90’s--rapid deployment of resources--even before the disaster

In 1988, for first time Disaster Act recognized we should not rebuild only as was, but mitigate the structure while rebuilding

7

MITIGATION PROGRAMS HISTORYMITIGATION PROGRAMS HISTORY Mitigation planning was pushed to all

hazards, but funding for implementation usually came from specific hazard---usually post disaster

1994 increases to post-disaster mitigation funding (impetus from Andrew and 93 floods)

15% of most disaster costs 75/25 cost share

Great incentive for citizens, communities and states to participate

8

HOW ARE NATURAL HAZARDS HOW ARE NATURAL HAZARDS FARING NOW?FARING NOW? Floodplain map modernization continues to

be a budget priority--added $200 M in FY04 Map Implementation slow--some delays

related to DHS added layers for approval Mitigation funding mixed bag. OMB

continues to equate pre-and post disaster $ HMGP (post-D) cut from 15% to zero In DHS, FEMA has many layers for approval

9

WHAT MIGHT BE THE WHAT MIGHT BE THE THREATS TO NATURAL HAZARDS THREATS TO NATURAL HAZARDS

IN DHSIN DHS

Primary MissionHUD--primary mission was housingDHS--primary mission is terrorism

Public and Political RecognitionFEMA name issue--will we lose decades of

branding?FEMA still alive in this Administration, but what

happens with future--Adm and Congress SCS/NRCS example---Jamie Whitten was

Champion

10

HOW MIGHT ALL OF US ADDRESS HOW MIGHT ALL OF US ADDRESS THESE CHALLENGES IN THE DHS THESE CHALLENGES IN THE DHS ENVIRONMENT?ENVIRONMENT? More sophistication in educating

Congress and the Administration Hill members and staff, OMB

overwhelmed by all the programs in DHS How to present natural hazards message

in meaningful way to staff and others? Example: No Adverse Impact

11

FLOODS---WHERE ARE WE ?FLOODS---WHERE ARE WE ? The NFIP requirements reduces flood

losses by over $1 billion/yr Most communities adopt minimum

NFIP The NFIP standards for development

have remained essentially constant for 30 years

How can we move the nation beyond this? and Why?

12

1 2 3 4 5 61990s

1980s

1970s

1960s

1950s

1940s

1930s

1920s

1910s

BILLIONS (adjusted to 1999 dollars)

Trends in Flood DamagesTrends in Flood Damages $6 billion annually Four-fold increase

from early 1900s Per Capita Damages

increased by more than a factor of 2.5 in the previous century in real dollar terms

$2.2

$2.0$2.9

$2.4

$3.4

$2.2$4.9

$3.3$5.6

13

What is Influencing the What is Influencing the Trend?Trend?Increased Property at RiskIncreased Property at Risk

Current policy is a compromise: Promotes intensification in risk areas Ignores changing conditions Ignores adverse impacts to existing

properties Undervalues natural floodplain functions FEMA trying to address with CRS, etc

14

No Adverse Impact ApproachNo Adverse Impact Approach

Activities that could adversely impact flood damage to another property or community will be allowed only to the extent that the

impacts are mitigated or have been accounted for within an adopted community-

based plan.

15

Reducing future damages Reducing future damages through communities and the through communities and the private sectorprivate sector

NAI is a concept/policy/strategy that broadens one's focus from the built environment to include how changes to the built environment potentially impact other properties.

NAI broadens property rights by protectingthe property rights of those that would beadversely impacted by the actions of others.

16

Federal RoleFederal RoleFederal government

Update Federal Executive Orders--set example

Adopt policies with incentives to encourage local actions that prevent future disasters Better Disaster Cost share Local $ spent to prevent count toward

non-fed share of future disasters

17

Actions Within DHSActions Within DHS FEMA

Retain the name and brandingEmpower the agency to act quickly in support

not only of disasters, but grants for mitigation, mapping and all other activities

18

Natural Hazards in DHS Natural Hazards in DHS No one argues with having a program or agency

to address terrorism in the U.S.The issue is maintaining and improving the

nation’s ability to reduce disaster costs and to mitigate from day/day natural hazards

for more information contact:

The Association of State Floodplain Managers

608-274-0123Email: asfpm@floods.orgWeb Site: www.floods.org