Shrinking coastlines: Will more Canadians have to move because of climate change?

W5: Washed Away, part one Molly Thomas investigates how the growing threat of natural disasters, erosion and rising sea levels puts Canada's coastal regions at risk.

Few will forget post-tropical storm Fiona, battering the east coast last fall. From Cape Breton to Charlottetown, Halifax to Port aux Basques, Canadians were caught between downed power lines and trees, with harrowing stories of narrow escapes from the rising waters.

Some homes were completely submerged, and carried out to sea. One woman in Port aux Basques, Newfoundland, tragically lost her life this way.

Two other people in Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island also died during the storm. An initial catastrophe estimate pegs the damage at $660 million, the most costly weather event to ever hit Atlantic Canada.

And, by chance, W5 happened to be on the ground the week leading up to that storm. It’s not completely random, we were working on a climate change story, but it was planned well before we ever even heard of Fiona.

What many viewers may not know is that our biggest pitch meeting of the year happens each spring. Reporters, producers and executives all bring their best story ideas to the table to see what gets the green light.

So we had already spent several months researching coastal concerns along the east coast, specifically the impacts of eroding shorelines, storm surges and rising sea levels on homeowners. But Fiona brought that research to life -- sadly, showing us real life examples of massive destruction from the elements.

The Savery family in Port aux Basques, Newfoundland will never live by the water again.

Their iconic blue house became the poster child for destruction during that storm

Before the storm, their home -- a three-year labour of love -- was meticulously gutted, painted and renovated to perfection by the father of the house, Lloyd Savery.

But heavy swells and wind from Fiona ripped it to shreds in a few seconds the morning of Sept. 24.

“If that storm happened at three in the morning, you would have had a lot more deaths,” said Peggy Savery. “Because nobody took it seriously and then we wouldn't have gotten up [out of bed].”

The Saverys have been living with family for almost half a year now. Their insurance company determined the loss was caused by a flood, which isn’t covered under their policy. So they must rely on government help to get back on their feet.

The federal government promised recovery funding through a few different programs, including the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements (DFAA). The Saverys applied but have not received a dime yet.

Ottawa funnels DFAA money through the provinces. Newfoundland just closed its applications for assistance on Jan. 31, roughly 4 months after families like the Saverys have been without a home. That province is currently assessing more than 300 claims.

Once compensation packages are finalized by the government and each homeowner, it will still take another 3-4 weeks for funding to come through.

“They say time heals all. But I don't think we'll start healing until we know what our future is going to be,” said Savery.

STORMS ARE GOING TO HAVE A 'BIGGER IMPACT'

Climate experts say there are more storms like Fiona on the horizon, so homeowners have to be prepared to adapt.

“Storms that would have occurred 50 years ago are going to have a higher water level in the present day,” said Danika van Proosdij, a geomorphologist at St. Mary’s University in Halifax. “They're going to have a bigger impact, larger waves, larger surge, more extensive flooding.”

Van Proosdij is worried that there are too many Canadians living in vulnerable areas. She believes governments may have to prohibit people from rebuilding in hard hit areas.

Nova Scotia recently introduced its Coastal Protection Act, which requires all future homes be built at a safer height and distance from the shoreline. In the interim, Van Proosdij also suggests homeowners think about nature-based adaptation solutions for their properties, which can provide protection for people and habitat for the environment in the area you wish to shore up. That can include so-called ‘living shorelines’ on homeowner properties.

W5 got an up close and personal view of a living shoreline on our trip out to the east coast. While many homeowners may think of armour stone or hard rock to protect their properties from storm surge and erosion, conservationists like Rosemarie Lohnes are taking what she calls a ‘soft engineering approach.’ She goes out and gathers plants, shrubs and trees in the area to weave together to withstand the encroaching ocean.

"We often think of it as grandmother's quilt, right? It's got lots of different parts to it,” Lohnes explained. She showed us how seeds and small immature plants are planted together to reinforce the natural habitat around the house.

Lohnes’ company, called Helping Nature Heal, works in several provinces across the East Coast and carefully assesses each property to determine if this strategy might work or if it needs to be done in conjunction with rock or mortar protection. She admits that a nature-based solution doesn’t work for everyone, but for the house we visited, it has done wonders.

“This client hasn't lost any of what we call horizontal distance. So the distance from the cliff edge to her home has not changed in six years,” Lohnes said.

“Now, obviously, with big storms like Fiona, some of our locations were completely wiped out. Nothing can stop those things,” she admitted. “You know, this is not a solution to climate change or erosion. This is a strategy to buy you some more time.”

'THE SEA ALWAYS WINS'

Adam Fenech, director of the Climate Lab at the University of Prince Edward Island’s School of Climate Change and Adaptation, agrees that engineered solutions are only a stopgap. His team monitors eroding shorelines across the province.

“I think that we have a habit of thinking that we can control nature and we can in the short term. But, I always think, the sea always wins.” Fenech told W5.

“In the end, we've got to think about not building so close to the shore, leaving behind vulnerable places and living in more secure, resilient places.”