Proactive Planning for Resilience: Protocols for Community-Led Climate Adaptation in Virginia

Strategy Development

Addressing Risks to Historic and Cultural Heritage Sites

Just like other physical infrastructure in communities, historic and cultural heritage sites are vulnerable to increasingly frequent and severe storm events, extreme heat, and sea level rise with its attendant rise in groundwater level and coastal erosion. So developing strategies to address the threats facing historic structures and cultural sites is an integral piece of community adaptation planning. It is important to incorporate long-term planning for how to deal with these sites, as strategy development needs to be an iterative, community-driven process and actions taken to preserve sites today may need to be revisited as vulnerabilities and risks change. In addition, site interventions can be very expensive, so it is important to plan funding sources in advance. It is important to note that historic preservation efforts can affect sites’ historic status. Federal and state level guidelines and organizations can advise communities about that and other preservation questions, and recommend potential funding sources. For more information, see The Virginia Department of Historic Resources and The National Trust for Historic Preservation websites.

Communities can consider three strategies when undertaking adaptation planning for sites with historic and cultural significance: modification, relocation, or abandonment with documentation.

Modification

Modification means taking steps to protect historic sites in their current locations. Modification, or “protect in place”, is a popular preservation option that can be achieved through a variety of methods, including elevation of structures, government-funded seawalls and levees or earth berms, and both formal and “do-it-yourself” (DIY) fortification of existing structures. It is important to note that modification efforts can disrupt sites’ historic characteristics and affect their historic status. In addition, if a few homeowners drastically modify their houses, or there are no standards governing modification, it can impact the overall appearance of an historic neighborhood. Local governments can address this by adopting design standards and any necessary zoning ordinance amendments to address modifications to buildings in historic districts.

Case Studies

The entire historic district in the City of Mandeville, Louisiana on Lake Pontchartrain is in a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area and subject to recurrent flooding, so the City adopted Design Guidelines for its Historic Preservation District that address modifications to flood proof structures.1 Numerous hurricanes and high water events over decades have caused extensive flood damage to the Historic District, resulting in the hardening or elevation of many buildings and an attendant reduction in risk.2 For example, Hurricane Katrina passed to the east of the City in 2005, with a resulting 423 flood insurance claims filed that cost almost $26,617,000. Hurricane Isaac then passed to the west of the City in 2012, with a resulting 226 flood claims filed that cost almost $7,740,000. The storms created the same storm surge, but the number of claims was cut almost in half due to the City’s mitigation efforts.3 In light of the many damaged and modified buildings in the historic area, the City decided to adopt the Design Guidelines to have a standardized, consistent approach to structural elevation and keep their historic area’s context intact. The Guidelines include a requirement that the lowest floor of structures within the Historic District shall be elevated twenty-four inches above the base flood level, with property owners authorized to determine appropriate elevation levels and methods to mitigate impacts on historic buildings.4 They also usually require appropriate stair design, foundation piers, screening and landscaping for elevated properties.5

Key Takeaways:

  • Communities can provide guidelines that prevent unsightly modifications to historic structures while still permitting elevation or other significant flood proofing measures. In the face of recurrent and major flood impacts, communities can join together in a coordinated manner to reduce their risk while maintaining their community’s character.
  • If a local government decides to pursue elevation to save historic structures, it should ensure that zoning ordinances do not prevent elevation due to height limitations or setback requirements that prohibit longer stairs needed to reach raised access levels.
  • Some of the elevated homes in Mandeville have turned their ground floor spaces into useful screened storage and vehicle parking areas or shady sitting areas with swings. So elevation does not necessarily mean complete loss of use of the lower level of a building.

1 City of Mandeville, La., “Mandeville Design Guidelines,” September 19, 2019, mandeville-design-guidelines.adopted.hpdc_.9.19.2019-compressed.pdf.
2 Ibid., 19, 25.
3 Louisette L. Scott, Director, Mandeville Department of Planning & Development, “Hazard Mitigation in Historic Districts,” American Planning Association, January 31, 2018, https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/document/PIE-Webinar-Hazard-Mitigation-in-Historic-Districts.pdf.
4 Mandeville Design Guidelines, 2019, 96. (See 1).
5 Ibid., 26.

The City of Charleston, South Carolina is one of the most rapidly sinking cities on the East Coast, due to land subsidence.1 Intensified precipitation and flooding events have contributed to increased water levels in recent years, threatening many of the historic city’s culturally significant properties.2 The City has adopted a comprehensive 2023 Flooding and Sea Level Rise Strategy Update to protect historic sites and build city-wide resilience through formal measures such as extending the city’s seawalls and improving drainage.3 The Strategy also includes home elevation guidelines and Climate Resilience Guidelines for private property owners seeking to retrofit and fortify historic buildings.4 These guidelines were designed after extensive outreach and engagement to identify community concerns, such as the impacts of climate-related hazards and public interest in undertaking adaptation measures.5

The Guidelines promote liveability in historic homes through modifications that are more accessible for private homeowners than other more costly and intensive preservation efforts. Examples include constructing flood barriers, landscaping for water management, and other “‘simple improvement projects’ that anyone can take on to enhance their property’s resilience.”6 For more information visit the Climate Resilience Guidelines for Charleston.7

Key Takeaways:

  • Local decision makers can promote a broad range of resilience solutions for private homeowners to impactfully preserve historic properties. These include formal government-initiated approaches, larger-scale projects, and smaller individual efforts.
  • Engaging the community to understand their concerns and capacities is key to providing useful guidance for historic preservation, and can make modifications more accessible for private property owners.

1 Leonard O. Ohenhen et al., “Disappearing Cities on US Coasts,” Nature 627 (2024): 108-115. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07038-3.
2 John H. Tibbetts, “Water Cities: Can We Climate-Proof the Coast?,” Coastal Heritage Mag., South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium 28, no 4, (2014). https://www.scseagrant.org/wp-content/uploads/Coastal-Heritage-Fall-2014.pdf.
3 City of Charleston, “Strategic Plan: 2023 Flooding and Sea Level Rise Strategy Update,” 2023, https://storymaps.arcgis.com/collections/5f03a3cd61d244908eed5be10489d9a4?item=3.
4 Ibid.
5 “Writing the first resilience guidelines for Charleston property owners,” Preservation Society of Charleston, February 7, 2024, https://www.preservationsociety.org/climate-resilience-guidelines-for-property-owners/.
6 Ibid.
7 “Climate Resilience Guidelines for Charleston,” Preservation Society of Charleston, https://www.preservationsociety.org/what-we-do/preservation-initiatives/climate-resilience-guidelines-for-charleston/.

The Point is located at one of the lowest spots in Newport, Rhode Island, sitting only a few feet above sea level on filled former marshland. Settled by Quakers in the 18th century, The Point contains one of the largest concentrations of colonial-era homes in the United States today.1 In 1968 the heiress Doris Duke created the Newport Restoration Foundation (NRF), which saved many properties in The Point from loss to deterioration or tourism development.2 The NRF now owns 70 historic properties, maintaining them by restoring the buildings and renting them out to stewards, keeping many of The Point’s historic homes in near-original condition.3 However, despite these preservation efforts, nearly one-third of the NRF’s colonial houses are vulnerable to flooding.4

In 2017, the City of Newport conducted a study to analyze flood threats and installed two large tide gates to mitigate flooding in The Point.5 Still, when storms align with high tides, the neighborhood experiences up to a foot of water flooding streets and driveways. The City has responded to flooding threats by elevating homes.6 Streets remain flooded, requiring residents to move their cars further from their homes during flood events. The City has considered stormwater pumping stations as a viable solution, but have not implemented them due to economic and equity concerns about spending so much tax revenue on a single community. The City has also considered working with uphill communities and improving their stormwater management systems to reduce downhill runoff into The Point. However, beyond housing elevation, there currently are no additional long-term projects underway to address worsening flooding in The Point neighborhood.7

Key Takeaways:

  • Modifying cultural and historic sites through elevation and tide gates can be effective short term preservation approaches for local decision makers.
  • Sometimes, as in the example of The Point neighborhood, using short-term historic preservation strategies may not be sufficient for a vulnerable locality. Local decision makers should engage in long-term preservation planning as well.
  • One method to reduce flooding in the target community is to work with uphill or upstream neighboring communities to reduce their stormwater runoff.

1 Bob Curley, “Where Past is Present,” Newport Life, https://www.newportlifemagazine.com/architecture/where-past-is-present/.
2 Cornelia Dean, “‘We Cannot Save Everything’: A Historic Neighborhood Confronts Rising Seas,” The New York Times, July 8, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/08/science/historic-preservation-climate-newport.html.
3 Telephone Interview with Alyssa Lozupone, Director of Preservation, Newport Restoration Foundation. March 5, 2024.
4 Ibid. See also Andrea McHugh, “Keeping History Above Water: The Future of Saving the Past,” BlueDotLiving, March 8, 2023, https://bluedotliving.com/keeping-history-above-water-the-future-of-saving-the-past/.
5 City of Newport, “Drainage Investigation and Flooding Analysis Wellington Avenue and Bridge Street,” March 2017, https://www.cityofnewport.com/CityOfNewport/media/City-Hall/Departments/Utilities/Capital%20Projects/WELLINGTON-BRIDGE-Newport_Drainage_Investigation_FINAL_REPORT_051517.pdf.
6 Telephone Interview with Shantia Anderheggen, Principal, Preservation Strategies, April 2, 2024.
7 Telephone Interview with Robert Schultz, Director of Utilities, City of Newport, Rhode Island, April 8, 2024.

 

Relocation

Relocation is another strategy that community decision makers may consider when pursuing historic and cultural site preservation in vulnerable areas. Relocation refers to when buildings are physically moved away from risks to preserve their structural integrity. It results in the loss of historic setting, however, and thus potentially the loss of historic status, so local governments need to consult with experts before moving historic and cultural heritage structures. When loss of a structure will be unavoidable if it is left at its original site, however, relocation becomes the next best option to preservation in situ.

Case Studies

The residence at 91 Coquina Avenue is a 960 sq. ft. cottage from the 1940s that originally sat on a large, low-lying tract of coastal land. The home originally belonged to the Meldrim family, which owned the largest operating turpentine and timber farm in Northeast Florida. The cottage predates other buildings in the Davis Shores neighborhood where it was originally located.1

The land on which the cottage was constructed is subject to frequent flooding. In the 2010s, the City of St. Augustine, Florida purchased the land with plans to turn it into a passive park that allows periodic floods. The City initially planned to demolish the cottage, which was estimated to cost $5,000. However, the project team members were interested in historic preservation, and submitted a Request for Proposals (RFP) to relocate the building. The City then decided to contribute the $5,000 that would have gone to demolition costs to incentivize the cottage’s preservation. After the release of the RFP, the City hosted two open houses and the preservation project generated community interest and engagement. The building was relocated to the grounds of the Florida Agricultural Museum, which is working to create a turpentine and timber exhibit to tell the story of the home and its legacy to visitors.2

Key Takeaways:

  • This is an unusual example of a city government choosing to pay a third party to preserve a structure when abandonment was the far easier choice. The cost of demolition went toward the preservation of the project, so preservation of the structure did not cost the City any more than it would have spent to destroy the house.
  • The historic significance of the cottage is better preserved and will be better chronicled for the public now that it is relocated out of its original flood-prone context and owned by a museum. In this case, remaining at the original site was not an option, so saving but moving the structure was the next best option.
  • Community support for the cottage’s historic preservation was a by-product of the RFP’s release, rather than a motive for the project. The issuance of the RFP generated public interest. This reiterates the point that local decision makers should engage the community as early as possible in adaptation planning for historic and cultural heritage sites.
 

1 E-mail from Corey Sakryd, Director of Gen. Servs., St. Augustine, Fl., to Sarah Templeton, Student, Univ. of Va., April 1, 2024, 01:07 EST.
2 Telephone Interview with Corey Sakryd, Director of Gen. Servs., St. Augustine, Fl., April 1, 2024.

The 1898 Oregon Inlet Life-Saving Station No. 16 is located on Hatteras Island off the coast of North Carolina. The station operated for nearly 99 years before its decommissioning in 1988.1 After a legal battle, the station was donated to Dare County, NC and became property of the State. North Carolina spent $7 million in 2008 to elevate and refurbish the station.2

The State, under a new administration, plans to relocate the life-saving station to preserve it from erosion and worsening coastal storms. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), typically an advocate for keeping historic sites in their original context and preserving them in place, has determined that the current site is not viable for the station in the long term due to coastal conditions.3 However, plans to relocate have been met with community discontent, particularly from a community member who founded a nonprofit organization to preserve Outer Banks history. He has challenged SHPO concerns about the threat of erosion and hurricanes and insists the station should remain where it is as a historic site and tourist destination, and be developed into a visitor’s center, museum, and event space.4 As of 2024, the State has not taken any further action on relocation because it needs additional funding and has not yet evaluated potential relocation sites.

Key Takeaways:

  • While preservation may be the common goal of the community and decision makers, the best method of doing so can spark extensive disagreement.
  • Plans to preserve historic sites may be met with community opposition, whether due to the cost or the preservation path chosen. This raises the question of who gets to make decisions regarding preservation of publicly owned properties, as with other aspects of adaptation planning. Community engagement on that topic needs to occur early in the process.
  • Relocation moves heritage buildings out of their original sites, and raises concerns of how and if these sites can be understood outside of their original context. Communities should give thought to how relocated structures will be used and their stories will be preserved and communicated.

1 Telephone Interview with Jeff Michael, Deputy Secretary for Natural Resources, N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, April 12, 2024.
2 Telephone Interview with James Charlet, Founder, Outer Banks Coast Guard Hist. Pres. Grp., April 5, 2024.
3 Telephone Interview with Jeff Michael. (See 1).
4 Telephone Interview with James Charlet. (See 2).

 

Abandonment

Another option for local decision makers in communities with vulnerable historic and cultural sites is abandonment. Abandonment requires assessing a site and recognizing that it cannot be saved, either because it is too vulnerable or too large to relocate, or because most communities cannot afford to save all historic properties. Abandonment speaks to important framing questions about the authenticity and integrity of historic structures, trade-offs to be made with preservation strategies, and whether trying to save everything is really the best approach for historic properties or a ranking of priority sites is in order. Instead of preservation, decision makers can choose to document information about a site in photographs, historical records and signs, and then either remove the structure and preserve pieces of it in a local museum, or simply accept the natural degradation of the site if it does not pose a danger.

Case Studies

Scotland, occupied by humans for several thousand years, has 11,000 miles of coastline speckled with historic sites.1 Many of these sites have been left in poor condition due to inadequate maintenance, misguided intervention, or abandonment.2 The conditions of these sites are only worsening due to the impacts of climate change, sea level rise, and erosion. Some of the larger sites are castles that cannot be relocated. Scotland’s governing body for historic resources, Historic Environment Scotland, has developed Guidelines for Climate Change Impacts in response to the worsening conditions of coastal historic sites. The Guidelines include a strategy known as “Acceptance,” which encourages recording information about a site in anticipation of damage or loss, and allows for the site to naturally degrade and return to nature.3

An example of use of the Acceptance strategy is the Findhorn Bay boat graveyard. A previously undocumented wreck of a Zulu fishing boat was discovered just northeast of Inverness in 2015. These boats were Scottish herring drifters that largely fell out of use at the turn of the 20th century, as they were outcompeted by other vessels.4 The wreck was reported to an organization funded by Historic Environment Scotland, which decided the best course of action was to accept the state of the vessel, record its existence, and forgo any attempts at artificial preservation. The site now gives “insight into how the fishing industry changed along the Moray Coast during the early years of the 20th century,” serving an important preservation purpose, while allowing the wreck to degrade naturally.5

Key Takeaways:

  • Abandonment can include documenting information for historical records and allowing sites to return to nature.
  • Scotland has countless historical sites and lacks the capacity to modify or relocate them all. Adopting a “progressive loss” worldview and accepting natural degradation allows the country to preserve the history and integrity of sites, while focusing costly preservation efforts on the most valued sites.
 

1 James Crawford, “Scotland’s Coastline From Above,” Historic Environment Scotland, April 16, 2019, https://blog.historicenvironment.scot/2019/04/scotland-coastline/.
2 Historic Environment Scotland, “Defending Scotland’s Heritage – Climate change fact sheet,” https://www.historicenvironment.scot/media/10000/dsh-climate-facts-v9a.pdf.
3 Historic Environment Scotland, “A Guide To Climate Change Impacts,” October 8, 2019, https://app-hes-pubs-prod-neu-01.azurewebsites.net/api/file/40e3b1f5-05c9-417a-a5e3-aae0008d342d.
4 “Findhorn Bay boat graveyard,” The Scottish Coastal Archaeology and The Problem of Erosion Trust (SCAPE), https://scapetrust.org/findhorn-bay-fishing-boat-graveyard/.
5 Ibid.

The Pamunkey Indian Tribe and Reservation

The Pamunkey Indian Tribe has a reservation in King William County, Virginia on the shores of the Pamunkey River. The approximately 1,200 acre reservation, established in 1646, is perhaps the oldest inhabited Indian reservation in North America,1 so it is rich with cultural heritage and sites that are sacred to the Tribe. The area is vulnerable to flooding, with the highest point on the reservation lying 10’ above sea level2 and the roads on the reservation tending to flood at low points. Significant erosion at the shoreline exacerbated by sea level rise has reduced the size of the reservation over time.3 To limit erosion and mitigate flooding, the Tribe worked with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science to install a living shoreline with a rock breakwater to reduce wave energy.4 This will not mitigate all sea level rise impacts, since the tribal museum, schoolhouse, sacred sites and homes are still exposed to flood risk, as well as cultural artifacts in the soil – including Chief Powhatan’s burial site.5

Key Takeaway:

  • Communities need to be aware that the loss of shoreline to erosion does not just mean the loss of land, but also potentially the loss of cultural artifacts and even burial sites in the soil. And of course, if tribal artifacts are found, relevant Virginia Indian Tribes must be consulted in addition to historic resources experts.

Historic Jamestown, Virginia

Historic Jamestown was the first permanent English colonial settlement in America. Preservation Virginia (PV) obtained 22.5 acres on Jamestown Island in 1893, and in 1994, it established the Jamestown Rediscovery Foundation (JRF) to preserve and recover historic structures and artifacts from the site.

Each year, hundreds of thousands of people visit Jamestown, making the site a popular tourist destination. However, due to concerns about climate change impacts on the low-lying site next to the James River, Jamestown was declared by the National Trust for Historic Preservation to be one of America’s 11 most endangered historic sites in 2022.6 Much of the site is projected to be completely inundated with water by 2075.7 Increasingly frequent severe storms also threaten the site; in 2003, Hurricane Isabel risked destroying hundreds of thousands of artifacts.8 Worsening environmental impacts are already forcing the site to close more frequently each year because of flooding, and buried artifacts are at risk of being destroyed due to decay.9 In an effort to preserve the historic structures and protect yet-unexcavated archaeological sites, the JRF has created a comprehensive, long-term climate change resiliency plan. The strategies in the plan include a reinforced seawall, structural flood protection through earthen berms and pumps, stormwater management, elevating roads and landscapes, and elevating and flood proofing buildings.10

Key Takeaways:

  • Long-term planning, using data on projected flooding and sea level rise, is necessary for historic preservation. And sites such as Jamestown, with artifacts buried in the soil, may require very expensive measures to prevent groundwater seepage into sites in addition to protections from pluvial and tidal flooding.
 

1 Pamunkey Indian Tribe and Reservation, “About the Tribe: Reservation,” 2021, https://pamunkey.org/reservation.
2 See USGS, “King William County topographic map,” https://en-us.topographic-map.com/map-lfsxzs/King-William-County/?center=37.56849%2C-76.96426&zoom=12.
3 Nicole Hutton and Tom Allen, “Coastal Adaptation Priorities: Results from a participatory mapping process with the Pamunkey Indian Tribe,” October 26, 2021,
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/27d949c686714953a6c86bda0fa12dde.
4 National Fish & Wildlife Foundation, “Protecting Habitat Where Land Meets Water,” https://www.nfwf.org/media-center/featured-stories/protecting-habitat-where-land-meets-water.
5 Ibid.
6 Brenda Jones, “America’s 11 Most Endangered Historic Places – 2022 list unveiled,” National Trust for Historic Preservation, May 4, 2022, https://savingplaces.org/press-center/media-resources/americas-11-most-endangered-historic-places2022-list-unveiled.
7 Historic Jamestowne, “Save Jamestown,” https://historicjamestowne.org/savejamestown/.
8 “A Wave of Outrage on Jamestown Island,” Daily Press, October 11, 2003, https://www.dailypress.com/2003/10/11/a-wave-of-outrage-on-jamestown-island/.
9 “Norfolk Southern Contributes $1 million to Save Jamestown Campaign,” Jamestown Rediscovery Foundation, January 9, 2024, https://historicjamestowne.org/wp-content/uploads/Norfolk-Southern-Gives-1-mil-to-Save-Jamestown.pdf.
10 “Save Jamestown,” Jamestown Rediscovery Foundation, https://historicjamestowne.org/savejamestown/. See also “Historic Jamestowne Climate Change Resiliency Plan,” Jamestown Rediscovery Foundation.

Helpful Tools/Resources

Cemeteries

An important type of cultural and historic site that is becoming increasingly vulnerable to climate impacts is cemeteries. “While serving as places to bury the dead, cemeteries also have political, historical, social, emotional, and geographical importance.”1  In communities that lack a centralized record keeping system, cemeteries can be a valuable record of community history and culture.2 These burial sites were meant to last in perpetuity without being disturbed. Due to this conception of longevity, cemeteries are bound to face decades of natural erosion, weathering, and storms. However, in recent years, coastal cemeteries are being threatened and upheaved by unprecedented erosion and sea level rise.3 Flood prone communities often do not know how to address this sad situation; for example, on Tangier Island in the Chesapeake Bay, a cemetery on the Uppards part of the island from a former settlement called Canaan is now partially underwater and has been washing away into the tide, scattering bones and pieces of coffins.4

It is important to include cemeteries in flood prone areas in adaptation planning, rather than waiting until the sites are at risk of significant or complete loss. The first step for a local government is to determine where there are cemeteries in vulnerable areas within its jurisdiction, and assess how flood prone the cemetery and its access roads are, and how subject to erosion. While communities often receive government assistance to address the negative impacts of flooding or to relocate, historic cemeteries may not receive the same consideration.5 As with other cultural and historic sites, there are three main options for preserving cemeteries: modification, relocation, and abandonment with documentation. Modification can include shoreline hardening and elevation of gravesites into above-ground vaults. Abandonment can entail installing a commemorative sign, recording gravesite information, and maintaining the records at a local museum or courthouse for posterity.

Officials seeking to address flooding historic cemeteries by relocating them or excavating them should conduct genealogical research to locate descendants of the buried, and engage with them to obtain informed consent. Obtaining informed consent through community engagement can help officials make fair and ethical decisions on how to best preserve sites. For example, Colonial Williamsburg excavated the site of the historic First Baptist Church, one of the earliest churches in the United States established by an enslaved and free Black congregation, and found more than 60 grave sites. The archaeologists consulted with descendants of the First Baptist Church community about how to proceed: abandon excavation in the burial ground, uncover grave stains and commemorate in place, or excavate some of the burials to evaluate their potential for scientific analysis; and the descendants chose the third option.6 After analysis, the human remains are being returned to their graves and Colonial Williamsburg is working to educate descendants and the public on the history of the site.7

Case Study

Maryland has many historic gravesites in its low lying regions.1 Sea level in Maryland has risen three times faster than average over the past twenty years, leaving its historic cemeteries vulnerable.2 The small Robson Family Cemetery in Taylors Island, Maryland houses ten graves of the Robson Family, immigrants from England during the 1700s.3 The historic cemetery used to sit far from the water, but now, it is only eight feet away from coastal wetlands. Several of the cemetery’s headstones have sunk into the earth, leaving only the weathered tops of the graves visible. The site is projected to be unreachable within the next century.4

A retired woodworker who specialized in historic preservation, Joe Ferhrer, recorded information from the graves so the site’s history was not lost. After taking records, he donated them to the Maryland Historic Trust. He chose this preservation method because the saturated cemetery was unable to be fortified or relocated, and he believed keeping the graves in their original context gave them meaning.5

Key Takeaways:

  • For cemeteries, abandonment must involve recording information from the gravesites and putting them on file to avoid loss of important historical data.
  • Sites that are sunken, eroded, or waterlogged may be difficult to modify or relocate, so local governments must plan ahead and engage the community so descendants understand the current and predicted risks and can weigh in on proposed options.
 

1 Terra Bowling, “Burial at Sea: Maryland’s Historic Cemeteries at Risk,” Natural Resources & Environment 34, No. 3, Cultural Resources and Historic Preservation, (2020): 39-43, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27010598.
2 Ibid.
3 Jenny Rodgers, “A Cemetery in the Path of a Rising Sea,” The Nature Conservancy Magazine, November 26, 2019, https://www.nature.org/en-us/magazine/magazine-articles/eastern-shore-cemetery-sea-level-rise/.
4 Severn Smith, “Sinking Cemetery: Salt Marsh and Sea Level Rise,” The Nature Conservancy, August 15, 2023, https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/maryland-dc/stories-in-maryland-dc/salt-marsh-and-sea-level-rise/.
5 Ibid.

Helpful Tools/Resources

Citations for This Page

1 Noah J. Mueller and Christopher F. Meindl, “Vulnerability of Caribbean Island Cemeteries to Sea Level Rise and Storm Surge,” Coastal Management 45, no. 4, (2017): 277–292, https://research.fit.edu/media/site-specific/researchfitedu/coast-climate-adaptation-library/latin-america-and-caribbean/regional—caribbean/Mueller–Meindl.–2017.–Vulnerability-of-Carribean-Island-Cemeteries-to-SLR.pdf.
2 Marta Marie Paulson, “Cemeteries and Climate Change: What Can We Learn from the Past, Do in the Present and Plan for the Future?,” University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Climate Change and Human Responses, Chapter 13, (2022): 111-113, https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=utk_anthpubs#page=122.
3 Mueller & Meindl, 2017. (See 1).
4 Jon Gertner, “Should The United States Save Tangier Island from Oblivion?,” The New York Times, July 6, 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/magazine/should-the-united-states-save-tangier-island-from-oblivion.html. 
5 Terra Bowling, “Burial at Sea: Maryland’s Historic Cemeteries at Risk,” Natural Resources & Environment 34, No. 3, Cultural Resources and Historic Preservation, (2020): 39-43, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27010598.
6 Meredith Poole, “Wrapping Up Excavations at the First Baptist Church Archaeology Site,” Colonial Williamsburg, April 28, 2023, https://www.colonialwilliamsburg.org/learn/behind-the-scenes/wrapping-up-excavations/#:~:text=The%20discovery%20of%20graves%20on,coffin%20or%20body%20was%20laid.
7 Ibid.

Scroll to Top