Breaking the Hydro-illogical Are we making progress? Donald A. Wilhite, Director

School of Natural Resources
Breaking the
Hydro-illogical Cycle:
Are we making progress?
Donald A. Wilhite, Director
School of Natural Resources
University of Nebraska
R
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
The Dirty
‘30s . . a
reference
point
The Great Depression will never happen again!
Responding to the 1930s
Drought
• First federal response to drought
• Combination of reactive and proactive
responses
– Proactive responses emphasized building
institutional capacity
– Creation of new federal infrastructure
– Public works projects
• Federal efforts in the 1930s sets a
precedence for future federal involvement
in drought response
• Similar practices were followed in the
1950s, i.e., a combination of reactive and
proactive response measures.
Designation
of drought
emergency
areas, 1977.
What were the
criteria used for
designations?
1977
Criteria used by the
Interagency Drought
Coordinating
Committee
• PDSI
•Political influence
Drought impacts today are similar but more
complex as more economic sectors are
affected, creating more conflicts between
water users.
How do we break the cycle?
STOP!
The Cycle of Disaster Management
CRISIS
MANAGEMENT
Movement from
crisis to risk
management . .
RISK
MANAGEMENT
. . . . requires a paradigm shift!
Principle
Elements
of Drought
Risk
Reduction
Framework
School of Natural Resources
National Drought Mitigation
Center . . . . a catalyst for
change
Mission:
To lessen societal
vulnerability to drought by promoting
planning and the adoption of
appropriate risk management
techniques.
R
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Support for RISK-BASED DROUGHT
MITIGATION PLANNING . . . .
Federal
Regional
State/Local/
Tribal
has been from the BOTTOM UP!
Response
Mitigation
Increasing need for more reliable seasonal forecasts/outlooks
Increasing need for timely, reliable climate/water supply assessments
Increasing need for higher resolution analysis for policy/decision support
The progression to drought
mitigation planning . . . . .
Demand for mitigation
planning
Development of new
monitoring tools
a synergistic relationship!
New tools not only make the
USDM task much easier and the
finished product more reliable,
these tools promote improved
decisions by a diverse set of
users from local to national and
from managers to policy makers.
Progress has been impressive . . . .
. . . . with more on the way!
and then along comes . . .
NIDIS
Major Drivers of NIDIS
Western Governor’s Association
•
•
•
•
1996: Recommendation for national preparation for and response
to drought.
2000: Creation of National Drought Policy Commission.
2003: Partnership with NOAA to improve drought monitoring and
forecasting.
2004: Formal document published recommending NIDIS.
U.S. Congress
•
The 109th Congress introduced a bill (H.R. 1386/S. 802) to improve
national drought preparedness, mitigation, and response efforts, etc.
Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction (President’s
National Science and Technology Council)
•
•
Highlighted drought as one of the grand challenges for disaster
reduction in 2005.
Proposed actions calls for developing an implementation plan for NIDIS.
U.S. Integrated Earth Observing System
•
NIDIS is one of six near term opportunities identified by U.S. GEO.
Are we there yet?
Darn!
. . . but we’re making
good progress!
“If we don’t succeed, we run
the risk of failure.”
Dan Quayle
School of Natural Resources
That’s all folks!
School of Natural Resources
snr.unl.edu
[email protected]
R
University of Nebraska-Lincoln