Professor Anamarija Franki:

I thank the Acting Chairman for the question. In our written statement, we explained the importance of ecological services and functions of those missing habitats, such as kelp and oyster beds and oyster reefs. Those forests were once vast and those reefs were high. We find evidence of 7 m high reefs along the coasts of the United States. We talk about erosion issues. In the last ten years, the living shorelines has become a part of the restoration and the adaptation to climate change. The living shorelines are scientific proof that we need to restore the habitats to protect our shorelines, and not just from erosion but from storms and to mitigate sea energy.

The effects of waves can sometimes be attenuated by 70% through benthic structures constructed by engineers, depending on their vastness. Imagine an 80 km long oyster reef that is 1-mile wide and I do not know how many metres high. What will that do to mitigate and share this energy? I think that is the best. We are talking about artificial wind farms. It is from the way that nature captures, creates and shares the energy that we need to learn. We should not only focus on one source of energy, such as wind, wave or solar.

Living shorelines are now also part of the analyses of insurance companies. In certain coastal areas in the US, if you choose to incorporate the living shoreline as part of mitigation for the rise of sea level caused by climate change, you will be insured better than if you used a hard structure. This is something to consider in the future in the context of restoration. It is not only for biological diversity, there is a complex and cumulative effect from all these species and habitats when we restore them and bring them together, or when we protect them by designating them maritime protected areas.