[0:03] And as a reminder to all post - Act members,
[0:06] presenters and public speakers, please make sure you're within two
[0:09] inches of the microphone when speaking. This helps ensure we
[0:12] maintain an accurate public record. Members of the committee are
[0:16] you ready. We are ready. All right, we can begin.
[0:24] Thank you. And good evening and welcome to the June
[0:28] 25, 2026 meeting of Boulder County Parks and Open Space
[0:32] Advisory Committee. I'm Trace Baker, and I'm chair for this
[0:37] term. We'll start off with the roll call. Trace Baker
[0:41] here. Carol Byrly. Here. Christine Johnson. Here. Lauren
[0:50] Kelso. Here. Vicky Lawrence. Here. Joan Lutz. Jeff Audi
[1:01] is excused, although he is going to be participating remotely.
[1:07] And I do see him on the video at the
[1:10] end of the hall here. And John White here. Thank
[1:16] you. None of the topics we have tonight are scheduled
[1:21] for decision recommendations to the County Commissioners. So therefore, we
[1:27] will not be taking public comment tonight. And our first
[1:34] topic is Michelle Marati presenting on the five - year
[1:40] study. So it's yours. Great. Thank you, Trace. I'm really
[1:47] happy to be here this evening. Thanks for having me.
[1:50] As Drew said, I'm Michelle Muradi. I work on the
[1:54] education and outreach team in the land stewardship branch for
[1:58] the department. In addition to education outreach and volunteer work,
[2:04] I'm also responsible for conducting some of the visitor studies
[2:09] for the department. And that's what I'm here to talk
[2:12] about today is the five - year visitor study that
[2:17] was conducted last year. And the results of that. So
[2:24] this is an overview of what I'm going to talk
[2:27] about this evening. So I'm going to cover the purpose.
[2:31] The reason why we did the study, the areas that
[2:33] we surveyed, the methodology that we used. And I'll spend
[2:37] most of my time going over some of the results
[2:40] of the study. So some of the overall results and
[2:44] some of the demographic results, we won't be able to
[2:46] cover all of the questions that were asked in the
[2:49] survey just because of the time frame that we have
[2:51] tonight. So why do we do this study? In order
[2:58] to gather information about park visitors, Boulder County Parks and
[3:02] OpenSpace are department has actually been doing this system -
[3:06] wide survey every five years since 1995, which is pretty
[3:11] incredible. So some of the questions have a data set
[3:14] going all the way back to 1995. Other questions we
[3:18] have not asked for that long of a timeframe, but
[3:21] that's how long the study has been going on. And
[3:24] it's really meant to be a snapshot of all visitors
[3:28] during the busiest months of the years of the year,
[3:31] and it's most helpful for looking at really those overall
[3:34] trends and to better understand what's shown on the slide.
[3:38] So the demographics of our visitors, visitation patterns, satisfaction with
[3:43] their park experiences, and our management practices. And then also,
[3:49] perceive the perception of conflict and crowding out on the
[3:51] trails. I did want to mention, though, that this is
[3:57] one study that we do about our park visitors, and
[4:00] it does help give us this broad understanding, but it's
[4:02] not the only study that we will do to understand
[4:05] our park visitors. So we do have a visitor count
[4:09] program where we estimate visitation to all of our parks
[4:12] on an annual basis. And then we also do have
[4:16] volunteers and staff who are collecting observational data about visitor
[4:20] activities. And then for more specific questions that we have
[4:24] where we want to address questions about a specific demographic
[4:28] group or a specific management concern, or maybe a specific
[4:31] park, we'll do additional studies. And those may be done
[4:35] in - house. They may be contracted out, or they
[4:37] may be through the small grant research program. These are
[4:44] the parks where we surveyed. So we surveyed at 15
[4:48] different properties and a total of 28 different survey locations.
[4:53] So some of these properties on the list, they have
[4:56] multiple trailheads. So Hall Ranch, Waldon Pons, wildlife habitat, Haw
[5:01] Valley Ranch, and Walker Ranch. And we surveyed at each
[5:04] of their trailheads. And then some of the properties they
[5:07] may not have a formal trailhead, but they have other
[5:10] access points that are major access points where people come
[5:12] through that trail system. Like Carolyn Holmberg Preserve at Rock
[5:16] Creek Farm, as well as Lagerman Reservoir and Batasso Preserve.
[5:23] And so for those locations, we also did survey at
[5:25] those other major access points. And all of the surveying
[5:28] for the parks where we did multiple locations was based
[5:31] on the visitation to each of those access points. How
[5:34] many shifts we would do so that we could get
[5:36] an accurate picture of visitation to those parks and visitors
[5:40] to those parks. So when did we survey? Um, so
[5:48] historically, the study was conducted from memorial data labor day.
[5:52] Uh, and then in 2010, we extended it through September.
[5:55] And so, uh, we matched that timeframe. So we surveyed
[5:59] from May 28 to September 30th. And this is an
[6:03] exit survey. So we're asking people to complete surveys as
[6:06] they leave the park. And we, um, made sure that
[6:10] we were getting accurate representation, um, for all days of
[6:15] the week. So weekdays and weekends, as well as morning,
[6:19] afternoon and evening shifts. And then for each property where
[6:24] we did survey, um, we were looking to get anywhere
[6:28] from 125 to 175 surveys based on the visitation of
[6:33] that park. So higher visitation parks. We tried to get
[6:35] more surveys, lower visitation parks. We had a slightly lower
[6:38] goal. All right. Here are the people that made it
[6:44] happen. We had 18 volunteers and 15 staff. So a
[6:48] total of 33 surveyors, uh, in order to collect all
[6:52] of this data. And so across the 15 Park properties,
[6:55] we did a total of 245 survey sessions. Each survey
[7:00] session was about two hours each. Um, so we did
[7:03] 490 hours spent surving in the parks. And after all
[7:10] of that, we were able to get 2, 594 surveys
[7:13] that were completed, deemed valid and used in the study.
[7:18] Uh, this sample size gave us a 1. 9 percent
[7:22] estimated margin of error with the confidence level of 95
[7:24] percent. And we also were able to get a 71
[7:29] percent response rate, which is great if you know survey
[7:33] response rates. Uh, and I really think it shows how
[7:37] much our park visitors care about our parks and also
[7:41] how much they want us to, uh, take their feedback
[7:45] in consideration about those parked properties that they love. Oh.
[7:53] Let's give it a head. Anyways. So, uh, we're going
[7:58] to talk about the results now. So I'm going to
[8:00] go through, um, slides of some of the different questions
[8:03] that we asked and talk you through. Uh, some of
[8:07] the highlights from those questions, uh, it is a lot
[8:10] of data on the slides. So hopefully it won't go
[8:14] through too quickly. But, uh, I think I'll try to
[8:19] kind of use my, uh, little cursor to highlight things
[8:23] and talk through a few things that aren't also included
[8:25] in the slides. Okay. So one of the questions we
[8:31] asked that we actually haven't, um, asked since 2010 was
[8:36] about information sources. So we asked people, did they seek
[8:40] information about the park prior to their visit that day?
[8:43] And we found that, uh, to visit the park that
[8:51] day. And then we also asked them, where did you
[8:54] get that information? And so this slide is highlighting where
[8:58] people mention that they got information if they sought it
[9:01] before their visit. You can see here that the main
[9:07] ways people are getting information is the Boulder County website.
[9:10] And this is the same as we saw in 2010
[9:13] that people were mainly getting information from the Boulder County
[9:15] website, uh, what's new is that these trail and park
[9:20] apps are very, very popular way of getting information. So,
[9:25] uh, a different trailer perk app and Cotrex that accounts
[9:30] for good amount of people that are getting information. So
[9:36] friends or family, um, to get information about a park
[9:41] that day. Okay. So this is the second time that
[9:48] we've asked about parking difficulty. So we asked about parking
[9:51] difficulty in 2021 as well. Uh, I do want to
[9:55] mention that this surveys and exit surveys. So we're only
[9:58] capturing people that were actually able to park at the
[10:00] park. So this is not telling us people that had
[10:04] so much difficulty that they had to leave the park
[10:07] property. Yes, Carol. Um, excuse me to interrupt, but I'm
[10:10] wondering about the timing of this because this is from
[10:13] 2025, but that you said a lot of the information
[10:17] is from 2021. No, so, um, so there was a
[10:22] study in 2021. The five year study was supposed to
[10:26] be conducted in 2020. And then it was conducted in
[10:29] 2021 because it was delayed a year for the pandemic.
[10:32] So this study is from 2025, but there are surveys
[10:37] going back to 1995. So every five years. So some
[10:41] of the questions will have data from multiple years. Then
[10:45] you say the surveys were collected in 2021. The surveys
[10:50] were collected in 2025. That's an error if it says.
[10:53] Yeah. That's a typo. Okay. Yes. 2025. Okay. Yes. And
[10:58] then you also refer to 2010 comparison. But I thought
[11:04] you had surveys every five years. We do. So we
[11:06] have surveys every five years, but not every single question
[11:10] is continuously asked every single time. So sometimes we'll adjust
[11:15] the questions and remove questions and add questions. Um, based
[11:19] off of staff recommendations. So we do have some questions
[11:22] that have been asked consistently. Um, since 1995, but the
[11:27] other questions that we, we don't have that long -
[11:30] term data set for. Okay. Does that help? Okay. Yeah.
[11:35] Thanks. Yeah. Thank you. The first slide had 2021 on
[11:39] it too. Yeah. So see some of us were confused.
[11:43] Okay. Sorry about that. That's my mistake. Okay. I'll go
[11:49] forward. All right. Looking at parking. So, uh, this, if
[11:53] you look at this table, it'll show you the results
[11:55] from 2025, um, overall in the first column. And then
[12:00] it's broken out by weekends and weekdays and the other
[12:04] two columns. As I was saying, uh, this is only
[12:07] people who could actually park at the park. And so
[12:11] it's not capturing people who did have to leave and
[12:14] were able to find parking. Uh, so what you'll see
[12:18] is that about five percent of people reported parking as
[12:21] difficult or very difficult, uh, overall. And then when you
[12:26] look at weekends versus weekdays, uh, it's a little bit
[12:31] more than two thirds had trouble parking, um, on weekends.
[12:36] And it also, when you look at mornings versus afternoons
[12:40] versus evening, so what we're seeing is that we weekend
[12:47] mornings are really the busiest times in our parks when
[12:50] people are having the hardest time finding parking. Michelle. Yes.
[12:55] Peaco Lawrence Pozak. Just another quick question. Did you make
[12:58] any effort to count the number of people that couldn't
[13:02] park and just left? Did you ever stand at the
[13:04] parking lots and watch and see who just bailed and
[13:07] went away? No, that wasn't part of this study. Okay.
[13:16] We asked two questions about visitor activities. So we asked
[13:19] people about all activities that they participated in the park
[13:23] that day. And then we also asked visitors, what was
[13:26] their primary activity today at this park? So this slide
[13:30] is just highlighting the results of the primary activity showing
[13:34] both the 2025 and 2021 results. And you can see
[13:39] that they're pretty consistent over the past four years. So
[13:42] the majority of visitors reported their primary activity being hiking,
[13:46] biking, running or walking the dog. Uh, if you look
[13:50] at the overall activities, you will see that there are
[13:53] a lot more people that are going out and wildlife
[13:55] viewing, doing photography and art, family gatherings, picnicking. So that
[14:00] is those activities are happening in our parks. They're just
[14:04] not being recorded as that primary activity. Uh, this will
[14:11] kind of highlight a question that's been asked for over
[14:13] a significant period of time. So this shows, uh, when
[14:16] we ask people how often have they visited the park?
[14:20] We've been asking that since 2005. And in 1995 and
[14:26] 2005, um, we also, um, the question was kind of
[14:30] worded a little differently, um, but from 2010 on, it's
[14:34] been worded more consistently. Uh, and what you can see
[14:38] is that, uh, the number of visitors that are first
[14:41] time visitors, uh, was increasing over time up until 2021
[14:46] where we had just over 30, 31 percent of visitors
[14:50] that it was the first time there's their first time
[14:54] at the park that day. Uh, I also wanted to
[14:59] mention, uh, on here that when you look at frequency
[15:03] of visitation and you break down visitors that are infrequent
[15:07] visitors. So come once a season or less versus visitors
[15:11] that come once a month or more. Uh, you'll see
[15:14] that, uh, 57 percent are seasonal visitors or infrequent visitors
[15:21] in 43 percent visit very frequently So I think that's
[15:24] really important for us to remember is that we have
[15:26] that kind of break of visitors that come a lot
[15:29] and visitors that come less frequently that are out in
[15:32] the parks. Next we ask people about the number of
[15:38] trail miles in the park. So thinking just of that
[15:41] park where they were that day, how would they describe
[15:43] the number of trail miles on a scale of one
[15:46] to 10 with one being not enough and five being
[15:49] too many? And we've been seeing the number of visitors
[15:52] that are reporting that we have about the right number
[15:55] of trails increasing, uh, and so in 2025, uh, we
[16:00] saw a three percent increase from 2021. So now 72
[16:03] percent of our visitors reported that we had about the
[16:07] right number of trails. Now this does vary depending on
[16:10] which park, um, that they were surveyed. So the properties
[16:15] with the highest percentage of visitors that reported not enough
[16:18] trails. So they selected one or two, uh, was Hall
[16:22] Ranch, bald Mountain Batasso preserve and higher valley ranch. And
[16:27] we also know that bikers and runners were more likely
[16:30] than hikers to report their not enough trails, uh, and
[16:34] so three of those properties are big mountain biking destinations.
[16:39] Uh, the properties with the highest percent of visitors that
[16:41] thought we had the right number of trails was Carolyn
[16:44] Holmberg Preserve Walker Ranch Walden Ponds and Caribou Ranch. Okay.
[16:54] So we asked visitors if they experienced at the experience
[16:58] conflict at the park that day. And we found that
[17:01] the vast majority of people did not have any conflicts
[17:05] with only four percent of visitors experiencing conflicts. Uh, This
[17:10] question was added to the five year study, um, in
[17:16] 2025. Um, and there was, uh, conflict study, um, going
[17:21] back a little bit further. Um, but, uh, you'll see
[17:26] in 2010, we had our peak conflict. That was when
[17:28] we asked not an open - ended question, but we
[17:30] actually had categories of conflicts that people could read through.
[17:34] And after that, we decided to return to an open
[17:37] - ended question because we weren't sure if people were
[17:40] selecting things they felt should be conflicts or if they
[17:43] were actually experiencing conflicts by just selecting from the list.
[17:46] So it remains an open - ended question. Uh, the
[17:50] properties with the highest conflict are Hall Ranch, Lagerman Agricultural
[17:54] Preserve, Batasso Preserve and Carolyn Holmberg preserve. Uh, the parks
[17:58] where we saw the lowest conflict reported were Pela Crossing
[18:02] Rabid Mountain, Walden Ponds, Bald Mountain, and Legion Park. And
[18:07] all of those had just one percent conflict. So the
[18:11] top conflicts that we were, it was about 90 people
[18:14] that reported conflicts and the full list of all those
[18:17] conflicts is included in the report that you can read
[18:19] through. Um, but we grouped them into some themes, uh,
[18:22] to get an idea of what those conflicts were. So
[18:25] we found that, uh, the conflicts that were most common
[18:28] were right away passing or trail sharing issues. As well
[18:34] as, uh, biker speed or communication. Uh, dogs off leash,
[18:39] uh, bikers not yielding. And that may be, um, bikers
[18:43] also reporting on other bikers who are not yielding. So,
[18:47] you know, downhill bikers not yielding to uphill bikers. Uh,
[18:50] and then lastly, Skittish horses are horses on the trail.
[18:53] And that was a very small number, but there was
[18:56] one bad day at caribou ranch, um, that had quite
[18:59] a few number of reports of conflicts with some skittish
[19:03] horses that were there that day. Okay. So we asked
[19:10] about crowding. And this is, uh, tables showing crowding on
[19:17] the weekend and the weekday at the trailhead and at
[19:20] the trail. And so let me walk you through this.
[19:28] So respondents were asked to rate their crowded feeling on
[19:30] a scale of not at all crowded to very crowded.
[19:33] So this is the second time that we've asked them
[19:36] to rate how crowded they felt both at the trailhead
[19:39] and on the trail. And so that's what this is
[19:43] actually showing is, um, weekends at the trailhead and on
[19:48] the trail. And then weekdays at the trailhead and on
[19:50] the trail. This up. Hold on. One sec. Okay. So,
[20:00] uh, the properties with the highest rating for crowding were
[20:03] visitors felt moderately to extremely crowded at the trailhead were
[20:07] annu white caribou ranch, hall ranch and potassio preserve. The
[20:11] properties with the average, um, the highest average rating for
[20:14] crowding on the trail. So that was at the trailhead.
[20:17] This is on the trail is also annual white, hall
[20:22] ranch, caribou ranch, but then you have Colton Trailhead thrown
[20:25] in there as well. So on a weekend, feeling moderately
[20:34] to extremely crowded at the trailhead and 12 percent on
[20:37] the trail. And on a weekday nine percent reported feeling
[20:40] moderately to extremely crowded at the trailhead. We did ask
[20:47] them their opinion on an e - bike pilot. So
[20:52] current, uh, this question was basically asking about a potential
[20:56] e - bike pilot, um, on designated trails, um, in
[21:00] the foothills and mountains. So currently e - bikes are
[21:03] allowed on our planes trails. And so, uh, this is
[21:08] looking just at foothills and mountain trails that already allow
[21:10] bike use. So that includes potassium preserve, hall ranch, higher
[21:15] valley ranch and Ron Stewart preserve. And we found for
[21:19] all respondents about half, a quarter of all respondents indicated
[21:27] they were neutral. And strongly support an e - bike
[21:32] pilot. So bikers were more likely than hikers to support
[21:37] for the pilot with one third of all bikers indicating
[21:41] support or strong support. Uh, the sample size of visitors
[21:44] who actually reported e - biking that we got surveys
[21:47] from was really small. It was only 28 respondents. But
[21:51] 96 percent of those supported are strongly supported the pilot.
[21:56] And then we asked visitors for a reason why they
[21:59] support or oppose. And the most common concerns were about
[22:03] safety. So high speeds, narrow trails, limited visibility, uh, potential
[22:08] conflicts, uh, and then many respondents did still say that
[22:13] they, um, they felt that e - bikes could improve
[22:17] accessibility for older adults or people with disabilities or those
[22:21] with limited physical ability. So although, um, some didn't support,
[22:30] uh, the, the widespread use, they still thought there should
[22:33] be considerations for accessibility. We ask people, how would they
[22:39] rate this park overall on a scale of one to
[22:41] 10 with one being poor and 10 being excellent? And
[22:45] you can see that our park rating has been increasing
[22:47] since 1995. So in 2025, we got a 9. 0
[22:54] average overall rating, which is really great. Uh, and people
[23:00] rated our parks based on the aesthetic beauty scenery, nature
[23:03] views, uh, that they were well maintained and clean and
[23:07] that they, there was a good or great hike park
[23:09] or trail. Uh, this shows our highest rated parks and
[23:15] lowest rated parks kind of going back over time. Uh,
[23:19] in 2025, Batasso Preserve was our highest rated park. It
[23:22] was also highest rated in 2005, uh, whereas the lowest
[23:27] rated park, uh, has been legion park, um, consistently over
[23:31] the period of the study. All right. I just have
[23:36] two quick demographic questions. So the first one is residency.
[23:45] Soulder or Longmont. So adding both of these up.
[23:57] Uh, and then about a third of visitors are from
[24:03] outside of Boulder County, including, um, anywhere else in Colorado
[24:08] outside of Colorado, Denver and Broomfield unincorporated Boulder County. Um,
[24:14] the rest of, or not including unincorporated Boulder County, sorry
[24:18] about that. Uh, and then the rest of visitors, uh.
[24:24] This is kind of showing a combination of two questions
[24:27] that are asked about Reese and ethnicity in the five
[24:30] - year study. And they are, uh, designed to match
[24:33] the census so that we can compare, uh, the visitors
[24:36] to our parks with the Boulder County Census data. So
[24:40] this is taking those two questions and putting it into
[24:43] one, uh, the two questions that we asked, sorry, this
[24:47] says, what is your age? That wasn't a question that
[24:48] was asked. So the two questions that were asked where,
[24:51] um, are you of Hispanic, Latina, Latina, Latinx or Spanish
[24:57] origin? Which of the following best describes your race and
[25:00] or ethnic heritage? So, uh, you can see here that
[25:06] there is a, well, I guess you can't see here,
[25:09] but if you looked back at the other data, you
[25:11] would see that we have an increase in our Hispanic
[25:15] Latino Latinx or Spanish visitors. Uh, we had six percent
[25:20] in 2021 gap when you look at that compared to
[25:27] the Boulder County Census data, which is at, uh, there
[25:35] is an increase that is happening. So the work that
[25:38] is going on with the cultural responsiveness and inclusion strategic
[25:41] plan and community engagement as well as the changes to
[25:44] the science standards and messaging manual, maybe having an impact.
[25:51] All right. So the five year study report is available
[25:54] online. This is an information only item. Um, I'm, I'm
[26:00] now pretty much working on, uh, getting the word out
[26:03] to staff about all of the results of the data.
[26:06] So they have available to them as well as the
[26:08] public. I'm also working on, uh, story map that's going
[26:12] to be hopefully a more engaging way other than the
[26:15] big long report for people to also, uh, be able
[26:19] to interact and look through the data, uh, map of
[26:24] all of the parks. And you can zoom into each
[26:25] individual park and see the results, um, for that individual
[26:29] park. Okay. Thank you. Michelle, thank you so much. Um,
[26:36] and also my thanks to Tori or assistant, the design
[26:42] and the analysis in the presentation, I think are just
[26:46] incredible. So thank you. Um, I will open it up
[26:50] to Possac for questions and comments, uh, Jeff, I'm going
[26:56] to go through the, uh, people who are here. And
[26:59] then I will, um, uh, call on you when we're
[27:03] done on the, uh, going around the table here. So
[27:08] questions from post sack, Christine. Uh, Christine Johnson Posack. I
[27:14] noticed something in the document that was sent in our
[27:18] packet. And that is that under 25 was seven percent
[27:23] of the visitors. And I, I looked up, um, supposedly
[27:29] under 25 in the county is concerning. And I don't
[27:37] know if that was an undercount or if young people
[27:40] are just being indoorsy, um, but, but I'm concerned. And
[27:46] then just another comment and you can address either of
[27:50] these comments. Um, I saw in your memo that, um,
[27:57] people would like more parking. And I'm just, I know
[28:02] that for some of these sites, um, biking there is
[28:10] a little bit sketchy, public transportation is difficult. But I'm
[28:18] wondering about, um, like I don't necessarily want to see
[28:23] us expand parking because it's expensive. And I don't like
[28:26] that as a land use. Um, however, um, so I'm,
[28:31] I'm wondering about alternate modes of getting to trailheads. Thanks.
[28:38] Okay. Uh, should I answer? Okay. Um, so yes. So
[28:44] we just to clarify for the study because I didn't
[28:46] mention it. So, uh, we only survey visitors who are
[28:51] the age of 16 and over for the survey. Um,
[28:54] so I do have in the report the census data
[28:58] for the ages. So you can see there is that
[29:01] gap. You're correct. So for, uh, the 20 to 24,
[29:06] um, as well as the 16 to 19, our park
[29:10] visitors, we have an underrepresentation compared to what you see
[29:13] in terms of Boulder County as a whole. So I
[29:15] think that is something that, um, we would probably be
[29:19] working to address, um, I feel like that has been
[29:23] something that I've seen in previous studies as well that
[29:26] we've had that gap. So it's one age group that
[29:28] is not utilizing our parks as much. And then transportation.
[29:36] I think that's above me. Alternate mode. I might know
[29:46] about it.
[29:58] Bevan Critters Resource Division Manager. And Christine, I think that's
[30:02] a really good question. And I think most people know
[30:04] we're on our 16th season with the Hessey shuttle, which
[30:07] is amazing. Um, the drawbacks as well. Last year, we
[30:13] reported 48, 000 visitors to the Hessey Trailhead via this
[30:18] shuttle. So we know that parking, um, can restrict visitors.
[30:25] And it's a matter of equality. Uh, so we really
[30:28] look into that. But then when we, when we figure
[30:31] if we can start to add these additional modes of
[30:33] transportation, it really expands those numbers. So, um, that's a
[30:38] forest service property that we manage. Uh, and we've completely
[30:43] exploded probably the number of visitors that would have been
[30:45] there had we not offered the shuttle. So the real
[30:49] trade off in, wow, are we overwhelming the Indian peaks
[30:53] by providing shuttles for visitors? But now we've managed parking
[30:57] lot better. So we're really looking at that. The other
[30:59] thing that the county's looking at is how can we
[31:02] provide, um, transportation that gets closer to trailheads. So it
[31:06] encourages people to take their bikes on the buses, like
[31:09] the hop, the skip. And then they can get off
[31:11] and ride to a trailhead. So the County is looking
[31:13] at that of, Hey, instead of expanding parking, can we
[31:16] get people a little bit closer? So, um, hopefully that's
[31:19] a helpful, helpful answer. Sometimes, um, those alternative modes of
[31:24] transportations to trailheads have a little bit of a backfire
[31:28] on us as well. But, um, they've really opened it
[31:31] up. The other thing I just wanted to mention too,
[31:33] based on your question about demographics, we've noticed this, um,
[31:38] lack of participation in the outdoors from that same age
[31:41] group. What we're finding is that, um, in the research
[31:45] that when kids are little, their parents will tell them
[31:48] to go outdoors. But then around that age 13, 14,
[31:52] they get to make their own decisions. And we're not
[31:54] seeing them in park. So part of what we did
[31:57] years ago was start the left hand outdoor challenge program
[32:00] that was to get teens outdoor. It's been super successful
[32:03] over the last 15 years or so. Um, but it's
[32:06] interesting because when they're with the Rangers doing the programs
[32:09] they're outside, but then what we're finding later on is
[32:12] they're not selecting to go back outdoors. So just a
[32:16] really interesting demographic that everybody's seeing and kind of parks
[32:19] and outdoors. The good news about that is when they're
[32:23] in their late 20s, early 30s, they start to choose
[32:25] to go back outdoor. So yeah, it's, it's, it's a
[32:29] conundrum, but it's, it's kind of nationwide. So hopefully that's
[32:32] helpful. Vicky, thank you. Vicky Lawrence Post. I quick question
[32:39] though. Do you have any idea if that's related to
[32:41] car ownership. Could be. Could be. I'm sure that's, I
[32:45] can't get to the trailhead. Yeah. Car ownership transportation. We
[32:48] know those college years too that age group, that demographic,
[32:52] they're busy. And they don't always choose to go to
[32:55] trailheads. Even we'd think Hey Boulder County CU's right here.
[32:58] You could go to any trailhead you'd like. We just
[33:01] don't see it. So I think there's just a whole
[33:03] plethora of reasons. Um, but the good news is they
[33:06] come back. So. Thank you. Great. Um, Christine, we cut
[33:13] you off. So did you have some more? I just
[33:16] wanted to make one last, uh, comment. And that is
[33:19] that I drag my 85 year old mother who has
[33:23] limited mobility to various sites. And I do appreciate that
[33:27] you are considering accessibility because she greatly enjoys her, her
[33:33] access to, um, the open space. Joan, let's pull Zack.
[33:42] I just wanted to say, I think it's great that
[33:44] we're doing this survey every five years. And also that
[33:49] of course it's obvious we need to continue to work
[33:52] on increasing the number of Latino, um, Hispanic Spanish speaking
[33:59] people. Which, which we are doing. We need to continue
[34:02] that. Let's see. I think, um, Ariel. Hi Arielle Barbaria
[34:11] Gieb. Um, thank you for the presentation. It was great.
[34:13] I have a question about the e - bike pilot
[34:16] question. Was it the first year that this question was
[34:18] in the survey and what prompted having this question in
[34:22] the survey. Yeah. So it was the first year. So
[34:26] sometimes we will have questions that we don't plan to
[34:29] repeat in the survey just to address a specific management
[34:33] question that we can ask in one question. That could
[34:36] be included. Uh, and it was prompted by, uh, we
[34:40] went through the e - bike process to determine that
[34:43] we wanted to allow e - bikes on the planes,
[34:45] uh, and they are not allowed in the foothills and
[34:47] mountain trails. Uh, and we're continuing to see, uh, more
[34:50] people utilizing e - bikes and more people, uh, as
[34:54] they're aging, expressing interest in being able to continue to
[35:00] go biking on trails, uh, and so therefore we were,
[35:04] we were wondering what our park visitors felt about the
[35:08] possibility of allowing e - bikes on these other trail
[35:12] systems just to kind of gauge their interest in that,
[35:16] um, and so we don't have any current plans at
[35:20] this point in time, but it was to kind of,
[35:22] we are hearing from people about accessibility related to e
[35:26] - bikes on those foothills and mountain trails. And so
[35:28] we wanted to see what as e - bikes are
[35:31] more popular, because even then we did, when we did
[35:33] the first e - bike pilot in 2019, the more
[35:36] e - bikes out there now than that were then.
[35:39] So it was to gauge that. Thank you. Um, John
[35:44] Mike Posack. I know what margin of error is. How
[35:49] in the world do you measure that you have a
[35:51] 1. 9 percent margin of error when all you're doing
[35:54] is asking people questions. Yeah. So, uh, I calculate an
[35:59] estimate for what I would consider the number of visitors
[36:03] to the parks. So we have an estimate of 1.
[36:06] 8 million visits to the park. And then based on
[36:10] the responses we get for frequency of visitation, we adjust
[36:13] that number to get an estimate for the population. So
[36:18] that would be the number of unique visitors that go
[36:21] to the park in the year. And then you take
[36:22] that as your population and put in your sample. And
[36:27] that's how you calculate the percent error. Carol. And. Carol
[36:35] Byley Hossag, and I want to say also, I think
[36:38] it's great that we survey every five years and we
[36:42] have this continuous information coming in. My question is, how
[36:47] does, how do you use this information? So, um, do,
[36:53] does the staff look at it and say, okay, well,
[36:56] now we're going to move on this or now we're
[36:57] going to move on that. But is there a protocol
[37:00] for integrating this information into the promotion? So it happens
[37:06] a little more organically than that. So I do present,
[37:09] I present the five year study results to staff, um,
[37:12] I'll also do that to volunteers. I'll do it to
[37:15] individual work groups if they ask me to, um, and
[37:18] then when there's a planning process coming up, um, things
[37:22] going on with facilities, staff will ask me for the
[37:25] data about visitors. Um, and it's one, one piece of
[37:30] the puzzle in terms of our decision making. So it's
[37:33] not, it's not going to do everything, but it's utilized
[37:36] in those management planning processes when we're looking at new
[37:39] trailheads, uh, when we were looking at East Boulder Creek,
[37:43] we're looking at what do people want in parks? What
[37:45] are these improvements that we can provide? So, uh, so
[37:49] that's really how it's used is it's kind of in
[37:51] the planning processes as we're making improvements, uh, in our
[37:55] parks staffer utilizing the data for that. So, so it's
[37:59] not an event. It's basically, um, a resource can be
[38:05] called upon at appropriate times. Okay. Great. That makes sense.
[38:08] Thank you. Any other post sac members. Okay. Uh, Jeff
[38:16] Oddy. Yeah. Thanks. Um, my, my question is, uh,
[38:26] did you, I guess when you think about how you're
[38:29] putting together this survey and what sort of information, what
[38:32] questions you're going to ask and what information you're going
[38:35] to capture. Are you having discussions around like, you know,
[38:39] specific data points that you want to gather information on?
[38:44] And if so, like what were a few of the
[38:45] ones that you were looking for information on this year.
[38:50] Yeah. That's a great question. So it's a big process
[38:53] to determine what questions should be included in the survey.
[38:57] So it usually starts in the winter and we have
[39:00] multiple meetings with staff to kind of talk through that
[39:04] and make those decisions. Uh, one, one point is that
[39:08] we are trying when we are able to remain consistent,
[39:12] uh, with some of the questions that we've asked over
[39:14] time. So we can continue to have that trend data.
[39:18] So some of the demographic questions, some of the visitation
[39:21] pattern questions, conflict and crowding. We're trying to keep those
[39:24] as consistent as possible so we can see changes over
[39:27] time. So those questions, we will only adjust or change.
[39:32] Uh, if we feel like there's a problem in, in
[39:35] the way that question is worded or we're not getting
[39:37] the data that we feel like is useful, uh, otherwise,
[39:42] uh, we will discuss the possibility of these additional questions
[39:46] like the information, um, that was one that we added
[39:50] as well as the e - bike pilot based off
[39:52] of the needs that leadership sees, uh, for this upcoming
[39:57] year. So we do try to limit it because it's
[40:01] a long survey already. Um, it's a very long survey.
[40:05] So we're not trying to add too many extra different
[40:07] questions. So it has to be a question that can
[40:09] be asked across all parks. Um, that's relevant to all
[40:13] visitors across all parks. So that does limit things. Uh,
[40:16] so it is a big lengthy process, um, and we're
[40:20] kind of trying to manage a lot of different things.
[40:23] Um, but really we're focused on those four specific questions
[40:26] for this study. So we want demographic information, visitation patterns,
[40:31] um, conflicting crowding. And then any sort of other questions
[40:35] are going to fall in those, uh, perceptions or management
[40:38] issues. Awesome. Thank you. Anything Mark Jeff. No, nothing else
[40:47] from me. Thanks for asking. Okay. Thank you. Um, excuse
[40:51] me. Um, so, uh, Trey Spaker Posack. I've got a
[40:55] few, um, questions and comments. Michelle, and first of all,
[40:59] um, two weeks ago, my daughter was visiting from Alaska.
[41:03] She's no longer a teen, of course. But, um, uh,
[41:06] she wanted to go for a hike. So he went
[41:08] to annew white. And she just loved that. I'm going
[41:13] to concentrate on conflict because, uh, that's going to come
[41:19] up in, uh, Bevins, uh, presentation on the alternate use
[41:25] days. And what I did was that, um, you know,
[41:35] I realized that, um, conflict, um, as you described it
[41:40] on page 19 of your report is not limited to
[41:44] bikes. And so therefore restricting bikes to certain dates, um,
[41:50] in the pilot, uh, may reduce, but it won't eliminate
[41:56] conflict. And so, um, what I did was that I
[42:00] looked at your appendix E and I tried to break
[42:05] down the number of, um, you know, tally conflict by
[42:10] what I'm calling offender, you know, who was named or,
[42:17] you know, what group was named as the cause of
[42:19] the conflict. And, you know, please let me know if
[42:22] I miss using your data here, um, but, um, what
[42:27] I did was identified, um, offenders as bikes, dogs, horses
[42:36] and runners. And there were quite a few that I'm
[42:39] calling on specified because somebody would say, you know, there's
[42:42] trash on the trail or, uh, you know, there were
[42:45] people standing in the middle of the trail, but not
[42:48] identifying who left the trash or who was blocking the
[42:51] trail. And so what I found that, um, listing, uh,
[43:00] offenders in numerical order, uh, bikes were responsible for 1.
[43:05] 5 to percent dogs 0. 47 percent horses 0. 27
[43:11] percent and runners 0. 04 percent. And so, um, in
[43:20] my numbers, I think are going to be slightly different
[43:22] than yours because I, you know, I was coding and,
[43:25] um, was doing this while I was, uh, I was
[43:28] sitting in the hotel and crest to beate last week.
[43:31] So, um, but, um, so it looks like, um, also
[43:37] from your data, uh, but they're, you know, responsible for
[43:44] about 1. 5 percent of the
[43:46] conflict. And so, uh, you know,
[43:56] to me that suggests, you know, a Pareto - like
[43:59] problem where if you dress the top source or the
[44:04] top few sources of conflicts will give you greatest benefit
[44:08] for reducing conflict. So, um, that's what I found. And,
[44:16] you know, would be happy to share that with, uh,
[44:19] post - Act members with staff, you know, if I
[44:22] can figure out how to, how to get that sent
[44:25] out, um, you know, in the proper, um, post -
[44:29] act form. Any other questions? Vicky. Vicky Lawrence Pozak. Trisk,
[44:35] let me ask you a question. So your percentage obviously
[44:38] don't end up to a hundred percent. So what I'm
[44:40] curious about is can you tell us what the percentage
[44:44] of the conflicts were caused by bikes or horses, like
[44:48] out of a hundred, so we can get a sense
[44:50] of. But I guess it needs to be in comparison
[44:54] to how many of those people are there. It gets
[44:57] to be a complex problem. Yeah. And, um, you know,
[45:00] I was looking at conflict as a percentage of total
[45:04] respondents as opposed to a percentage of those who reported
[45:10] conflict. Oh, okay. And so, um, you know, it's, you
[45:17] know, it's, you know, bikes, you know, again, 1. 5
[45:20] percent very, very low. That's higher than dogs, but if
[45:28] you add, you know, dogs plus horses, you know, that's
[45:32] close to half a percent. And so, you know, it's,
[45:37] it's non - human sources of conflict, you know, I
[45:40] guess. But anyway, just Ariel? Yes, question for you. But
[45:45] did you analyze the bike on bike crime or just
[45:49] crime conflict, sorry, bike on bike conflict? Or was it
[45:53] just like the reported source of conflict and not who
[45:55] was receiving it? I'll just report it source because I
[45:58] did not have access to the data in table E.
[46:03] Everything I tallied was, uh, appendixy. Yeah. Okay. Lauren. Yeah.
[46:10] Lauren Kelso. I want to zoom out just a little
[46:13] bit and I'm curious what you think about the overall
[46:16] conflict number four percent. I work at a highly public
[46:21] setting four percent for conflict feels really good. I'm wondering
[46:24] like when you guys compare that to other parks or
[46:27] other spaces that are seeing a similar amount of people,
[46:33] um, interacting with each other is that, how do you
[46:35] guys feel about the. Yeah, just in general four percent
[46:39] out of all your people experiencing conflict for the human
[46:42] race seems pretty good to me. Yeah. So, you know,
[46:48] when people are going to parks, it's a recreational experience.
[46:52] So they're kind of expecting to have a positive experience.
[46:56] Um, so I think in general, maybe they're in a
[46:58] good mood because they're doing something that they want to
[47:00] do. They're out in nature. Um, we do have a
[47:03] regional round table, um, where we get together with, um,
[47:08] different agencies who are doing visitor studies, uh, and we,
[47:12] we ask the questions about conflict a little differently across
[47:16] our different agency. So it's hard to directly compare. That's
[47:19] something we've talked about is, is trying to have, um,
[47:22] maybe some questions that we ask across agency so that
[47:26] we can actually kind of compare how we stand compared
[47:30] to other agencies along the front range in terms of
[47:33] conflict. Um, so I, I feel like it's interesting because
[47:38] I always thought that our conflict numbers would go up
[47:42] as our parks got even busier in 2021 was a
[47:45] very, very busy year. Uh, and in fact, it still
[47:48] wasn't as high a number as I thought it was.
[47:52] Um, so overall I would say that, yeah, conflict is
[47:55] very low. Um, it doesn't mean it isn't happening. It's
[47:58] happening in our parks. It is a concern. Um, we
[48:02] are constantly doing education and outreach to try to reduce
[48:06] conflict in parks relating to yielding and sharing the trail.
[48:10] Um, as well as some conflicts from, um, people feeling
[48:15] crowded, um, or from people not following the rules and
[48:19] leaving their dog poop bag, things like that. Um, so
[48:22] I would say that Parks stuff are very focused on
[48:24] conflict and trained to reduce it. Um, but I don't
[48:28] have good. It's hard, it's difficult to compare across agencies,
[48:32] um, because we're all, we're asking questions differently. We're asking
[48:35] about interpersonal conflict in our question specifically. Um, so yeah.
[48:41] Thanks. That's super helpful. Yeah. I think it helped, it
[48:44] would help probably with that negativity biased piece of just
[48:47] like trying to figure out how much of a comparative
[48:50] problem it is. Yeah. Thanks. Anybody else in the room.
[48:55] Jeff, uh, anything more. Sorry. It took me a sec
[49:04] to get off mute. Nothing else from me, Trace. Thanks
[49:06] for asking. Okay. Thank you. Well then, um, looks like
[49:11] we are done with your presentation. Again, thank you very
[49:14] much, Michelle and Tori. I'm going to stay. Here.
[49:26] Do you want. Me to win? Yeah.
[49:57] Hey, Bevin, it's all yours. Thanks, Trace. Good evening. Pose
[50:01] act just first of all, thank you all for being
[50:03] here. I think, um, we've been going through a lot
[50:07] of parks, a lot of, um, opinions about the things
[50:10] we're doing. And I think it's really nice that we
[50:13] get to come here before you, um, just tell our
[50:16] story and kind of what, what we're experiencing, what we're
[50:19] hearing from visitors. So thank you all for being here
[50:21] and listening and asking such great questions. Um, first, before
[50:25] I get going, this is Pride Month. So I left
[50:28] some stickers on everybody's chairs there. The first one is
[50:33] our Pride Badge. So the Ranger, some of us are
[50:35] wearing the pride badge for the month of June just
[50:38] to show how inclusive and open and welcoming our parks
[50:41] are. And then the other one is a little Ranger
[50:43] hat. Um, our friends at the National Park Service were
[50:46] not allowed to participate in pride events the last two
[50:49] years in their community. So, um, some Rangers got together
[50:53] and said, well, we'll show our, our thanks to them
[50:56] and create stickers for them without the national park service
[51:00] logo on it. So that's what that represents. So, um,
[51:04] just good stuff going on out there. Uh, tonight, Jarrett
[51:08] asked me to present on the alternative use survey results
[51:12] for our, the pilot program. So I just want to
[51:14] say, uh, this is Michelle's work. So, um, I'm lucky
[51:18] enough to present what Michelle put together, the survey, the
[51:23] data crunching the results. That's all her work. Um, and
[51:26] then a group of us that work together with Jared
[51:28] at Parks to throw all this together and get the
[51:31] pilot thing, the proposals going. So, um, as much as
[51:34] I would love to take credit for this, really it's
[51:36] Michelle and she'll answer the hard questions. Um, if you
[51:40] have difficult questions for me, just remember I do have
[51:43] a taser. So, uh, let's, let's take it easy tonight.
[51:47] And, uh, we'll go through these survey findings. This is
[51:50] just for us to show you what we heard from
[51:52] the public through this survey. So I'll start with, um,
[51:57] the purpose just to show you what we, what we
[52:00] heard from community feedback. Um, we will be meeting with
[52:03] the County Commissioners on the 30th of June to go
[52:06] through, uh, these results and talk with them about next
[52:09] steps and where they would like us to go with
[52:11] the pilot program and to let them know what we
[52:13] heard from the community. And then again, tonight, this is
[52:16] just an action only. This is no actions required. This
[52:20] is just information only. Just a little bit of background.
[52:24] We've heard a lot from Michelle. So actually Michelle's presentation
[52:27] is excellent because it really has laid out the background.
[52:31] And what our visitors overall think about the parks, um,
[52:34] staff was asked to explore alternatives for community informed alternative
[52:38] use pilot program on existing trails. So we were asked
[52:42] to look at existing trails, not new trails, not new
[52:46] management plans, nothing like that. Just what's, what's existing within
[52:50] our parks now. And then we used a survey developed
[52:53] by Michelle and then open houses to put all the
[52:56] community input together. What I'm showing you tonight is just
[53:00] the survey results. The open house, um, information that we
[53:03] gathered was abundant. It was great. Um, and it's just
[53:07] going to take us a long time to, to get
[53:09] all that put together. So tonight we'll just be the
[53:11] survey results. So here's the amazing participation that we had.
[53:20] So we had 7, 522 responses. Um, the survey was
[53:25] self - selected. So I want to make this very
[53:28] clear. This is a different type of survey. So, uh,
[53:31] we've heard a lot of people say, well, this isn't,
[53:33] you know, statistically relevant. It's not accurate. Well, they're correct
[53:37] because we, we did not go out and, you know,
[53:41] survey entire community randomly. We put the information out there
[53:45] and said, Hey, if you'd like to take our survey,
[53:48] please do that. So the information that we were provided
[53:51] is amazing. We're listening to all of it. We're taking
[53:54] it all in. It's all relevant. It's the experiences people
[53:57] have in our parks. Is it statistically valid? No, we're
[54:01] not going to crunch these numbers as if it were
[54:04] Vicky. Blood and fix. Um, Vicky Lawrence pose that quick
[54:07] question though. Did you and does the survey ask. What
[54:11] kind of use the person the respondent does on the
[54:15] park? Like, are they a bike or they hike? Okay.
[54:17] Absolutely. And I'll get to that. So, um, yeah. And
[54:19] I just want to make that very clear that all
[54:22] of these results, every response we received is valid. It's
[54:26] important to us. We're glad to hear it. But can
[54:28] we make big generalizations about entire community? No, we can't
[54:33] say that every biker thinks this. Every hiker thinks this.
[54:37] Um, but the responses are what we received and they're
[54:39] all valid in and of themselves. So. It's some of
[54:45] these questions are going to be very similar to what
[54:47] we've seen from Michelle's work previously. But again, we asked
[54:51] about frequency of visit. Boulder County Parks and OpenSpace. So
[55:00] these are people that are highly engaged with our parks.
[55:03] They're visiting often. Many actually said they visit more than
[55:07] one time in a week. So, um, these are people
[55:09] that know our parks very well. Here's the next is
[55:15] the activities of the respondents. And I think Vicky, this
[55:18] will get to your question. Um, we saw very strong
[55:20] participation from bikers as a whole. So many, many people
[55:24] reported that they were bikers. Um, We also saw high
[55:31] levels of people that are hiking, multiactivity participation, dog walking
[55:36] wildlife viewing. It's actually very similar to the results that
[55:39] Michelle shared with you in the five year study. So
[55:43] if we look at this, you'll see that 55 percent
[55:45] of the respondents reported be their primary activity being biking,
[55:51] walking, running, bringing a dog and on from there. Christine
[55:57] actually, Christine Johnson Posack, I think that something that I
[56:00] noticed when I was preparing for the meaning is that
[56:02] those numbers are reversed. On roughly on Michelle's survey, that
[56:08] it was, um, the percentage for bike and hike walk.
[56:14] I reversed. Yeah. And that, and that, that would go
[56:17] with who, who we know reported as biking as their
[56:20] primary activity. Let me, let me go to this next
[56:22] slide. So here we said, Hey, tell us about all
[56:25] the activities you do on Parks and Open Space. And
[56:28] there you'll see people reported a high likelihood of hiking
[56:32] or walking, biking, running's very high, bringing a dog, viewing
[56:36] wildlife. So those still are also the very high activity.
[56:40] So it's, it didn't surprise us that most of the
[56:43] primary activity was from bikers because we know that's who
[56:46] responded to the survey. So make sense. Um, but just,
[56:50] this is interesting to show that not all visitors or
[56:54] most visitors to open space do more than one thing.
[56:57] Um, they may hike one day. They may bike one
[56:59] day. One day they'll take the dogs out. Maybe another
[57:02] time they just want to go see wildlife. So we
[57:04] know that people are doing more than one activity on
[57:07] our parks. We also saw a real range of perspectives
[57:13] as we thought we would. Responses really reflect that the,
[57:17] the views of those that took the survey are very
[57:20] engaged with parks in open space. Um, many respondents described
[57:24] some concerns or reservations about alternate use. And then there
[57:28] were others that were supportive and had some conditional interest
[57:32] in that. So here is what we asked in general.
[57:37] Please indicate your level of support or opposition for an
[57:41] alternating use pilot on select parks and open space. And
[57:44] you can see overwhelmingly opposed an alternating use pilot program.
[57:53] While 18 percent support are strongly supported. And then this
[58:00] is a little breakdown. Support or opposition for the pilot
[58:03] by the primary activity reported. So of those that reported
[58:07] that their primary activity was biking or walking 58 percent
[58:14] opposed that run were at 77 percent opposition bringing a
[58:20] dog was 57 percent. So again, this is the information
[58:24] provided by those that responded. And I think. Speaks to,
[58:30] um, kind of what we expected out of seeing what
[58:32] those primary activities were. So here this, this next question
[58:36] were some, some open - ended responses that we received.
[58:40] Um, when we asked about that opposition or support of
[58:43] an alternating use pilot program, um, and I'll read some
[58:48] of these. I only have certain days that I can
[58:50] get outside. Limits like this make it harder. Designated days
[58:54] could reduce stress for slower users. Education may be more
[58:58] effective than limits. Any pilot should be clearly communicated and
[59:02] fair. So those were some of the comments. And we
[59:05] heard those often. We actually have 900 pages of open
[59:08] - ended comments that we are still sifting through. Um,
[59:12] Michelle and the education and outreach team have gone through
[59:15] every one of them. They've redacted names. They've redacted any
[59:20] kind of personal attacks or curse words. And we have
[59:23] all those now. Um, I think it's finished. Yeah. So
[59:27] it's finished, but it's 900 pages. So, um, lots and
[59:31] lots of comments on there. And then we went through
[59:37] those comments and we, we had to use AI because
[59:42] the time frame was so short. Normally we would categorize
[59:45] the comments and pick out themes and try to move
[59:49] different comments into different themes. Because of the time frame
[59:52] for this, we actually used AI to do that for
[59:54] us. We use Copilot. And here's some of the kind
[59:58] of themes that we saw in the comments, um, this
[1:00:02] would restrict biker access. Reduces trail availability. Inconvenient scheduling, user
[1:00:10] conflict, improve safety, supports pilot as a test. Um, people
[1:00:15] wanted us to build more trails. Uh, education on etiquette.
[1:00:19] There's no problem to solve. Um, and so on and
[1:00:23] so on. So using AI, those are the major themes
[1:00:26] we saw in those open - ended comments. And then
[1:00:32] we asked the question of if we, if we implement
[1:00:34] this pilot program, where would you like to see it?
[1:00:38] Uh, the number one response was higher valley ranch. And
[1:00:42] people reported that if we did do this pilot, they
[1:00:44] would suggest what PD or picture rock trails. Second was
[1:00:49] Hall Ranch with the bitter brush trail. Uh, third was
[1:00:52] Walker Ranch with the walker ranch loop. And then fourth
[1:00:56] was Pitasso with the canyon and Benjamin loops. I'm sorry.
[1:01:01] I thought Batasso already had, I'm sorry, Lauren Kelso. I
[1:01:05] thought potasso already had alternating use. It does. And Lauren,
[1:01:08] that was one really interesting thing that we saw. And
[1:01:10] I'll show it a little later in the presentation too,
[1:01:13] um, that kind of looking at Batasso as one place
[1:01:18] had already had it. And then I guess reimagining that,
[1:01:22] or I think what really came of that was that
[1:01:24] the idea that since we had hiking only days that
[1:01:27] we should have biking only days at Potasso. So if
[1:01:31] we drilled down, that's really what staff found in those
[1:01:34] comments. And this just shows that the pilot location preferences,
[1:01:41] uh, we don't want a pilot program. So and then
[1:01:50] of those that do, uh, of those that responded Batasso
[1:01:53] came up, um, hiking only days. Let's have biking only
[1:02:00] days. Um, and then other than higher valley ranch, Walker
[1:02:04] Ranch and home ranch. And then we asked about scheduling
[1:02:11] consideration. So if we do an alternative use, pilot program,
[1:02:15] tell us about how we might schedule that. Um, again,
[1:02:18] most respondents said, don't have a pilot program. Um, among
[1:02:22] those that supported it, said fix days were preferred because
[1:02:25] they could schedule for it. So if they knew that
[1:02:27] it was Thursday or Wednesday, they knew they could, they
[1:02:30] could make a schedule for being outdoors based on that.
[1:02:33] And then there was a lot of concerns about scheduling
[1:02:35] complexity inequality. Um, and I think a lot of those
[1:02:39] came from other counties that have, um, alternating weekend days,
[1:02:44] odd and even days. And so the concerns about, Hey,
[1:02:48] don't make it too complex for people to understand. And
[1:02:54] this is just a graph that kind of shows that
[1:02:57] 50 percent of respondents noted that specific days for multi
[1:03:00] - use trails were somewhat or very important.
[1:03:10] Andoted that specific days for bikers with somewhat or very
[1:03:15] important. And then again, we said, please select your preferred
[1:03:23] alternative use scheduling for allowing separate days for different activities.
[1:03:28] Again, 70 percent of the respondents that we don't even
[1:03:31] want this. So that was their response. Um, favorable, um,
[1:03:44] I think that comes from a lot of users that
[1:03:46] go to Jefferson County where that's been in place for
[1:03:49] a while. And then four percent reported other things. And
[1:03:53] then we asked about the same kind of question using
[1:03:56] Copilot and what themes in those open - ended comments
[1:03:59] could we see from this. The themes were categorized. And
[1:04:05] here's what we found, scheduling an accessibility concern. So people
[1:04:08] really have concerns about, Hey, if I, if I have
[1:04:11] a day free from work and I want to go
[1:04:13] out, I don't have to worry about, you know, this
[1:04:16] trail being open or not to this use. People find
[1:04:20] it confusing or difficult to plan for. People said, Hey,
[1:04:24] just build more trails or improve the trail design that
[1:04:27] we have. Um, fairness and equity continue to come up,
[1:04:31] limiting biking access. And again, you know, education enforcement, all
[1:04:37] those things were also themes that we found as we
[1:04:39] went through the open - ended questions. Christine Johnson Posack,
[1:04:44] what is a horse related point? What do you mean?
[1:04:47] Give an example, please. Let's ask AI. We'll have to
[1:04:51] ask Copilot. Any idea, Michelle? I couldn't look it up.
[1:04:55] Actually, it wasn't just something. Yeah, we'll let Michelle look
[1:05:01] that up while we go through this. There's. A point.
[1:05:07] There's a horse. And Christine, here's your force. Um, as
[1:05:13] Michelle's looking through that, then we asked about, Hey, if
[1:05:15] we did a pilot program, what would you, how would
[1:05:18] you like us to evaluate it? What are those, those
[1:05:20] markers of success? Um, and the themes to related to
[1:05:24] what success would look like for a pilot, um, including
[1:05:28] educate included education and etiquette, clear rules and communication. Um,
[1:05:34] equality over user groups. Purpose - built trails and directional
[1:05:37] use, enforcement and compliance and conflict reduction. So they said,
[1:05:42] Hey, if you're going to, if you're going to see
[1:05:44] if this, if you do a pilot, this is what
[1:05:47] success would look like for those that responded to the
[1:05:49] survey. And again, just kind of, we asked us a
[1:05:59] little differently, um, pilot outcomes that should be measured, community
[1:06:04] and visitor satisfaction, 54 percent reported that that would be
[1:06:08] one of the outcomes they would like us to measure.
[1:06:11] Um, fewer conflicts between different types of trail users, reduce
[1:06:16] trail crowding and then. So those are the major kind
[1:06:22] of outcomes that we saw from this. Um, that we
[1:06:26] wanted to share tonight. Our next steps staff is still
[1:06:30] finalizing the survey analysis. The final report was actually released
[1:06:34] about 10 minutes before we started the post - AC
[1:06:38] meeting. So it's out there. Um, again, that's, that's Michelle's
[1:06:41] really hard work that she spent weekends doing. So please
[1:06:45] take a look at that. Um, again, we'll have a
[1:06:48] session with the Board of County Commissioners on June 30th
[1:06:50] to talk about the report and hear their feedback and
[1:06:54] get further direction. Um, and then we'll continue to provide
[1:06:57] you updates as we, as we go along this journey
[1:07:01] and see where we end up. So, um, and again,
[1:07:04] no actions requested today. So I'm happy to take questions.
[1:07:08] And I've got Michelle and Jason here. If you, if
[1:07:11] they're too difficult. Thank you, Bevin. That is a wonderful
[1:07:16] summary of a huge amount of input. So thank you,
[1:07:22] uh, Bevin and Jarrett and Michelle for getting that together.
[1:07:27] So as before, um, take questions and comments from post
[1:07:33] sac in the room. And then I'll call on Jeffrey
[1:07:37] remotely. Great. So, uh, anybody here. Christine. Johnson Posack, I
[1:07:46] don't always have to go first. I just, I want
[1:07:50] to point out that, um, the county has triggered cyclists.
[1:07:54] I think that's pretty clear. Right. Um, eight, 7, 500,
[1:07:58] 8, 000, whatever responses is a lot. And, um, they
[1:08:03] are really upset. I think that, um, traces analysis of
[1:08:09] the conflict and the report, the excellent report that Michelle
[1:08:13] did just before this are really, really helpful. Um, knowing
[1:08:18] that there is a low level of conflict, but that
[1:08:22] maybe there's disproportionately more from, uh, bikes, from dogs and
[1:08:30] from horses is really informative. And I, this reminds me
[1:08:36] a little bit of the weed process where I feel
[1:08:41] like the process triggered a group of people. And my
[1:08:46] recommendation. For this is the same as for that, which
[1:08:51] is I think that it would be really good to,
[1:08:56] um, engage with the, um. I'm neutral about the pilot
[1:09:03] project, but I think, I think it might be good
[1:09:05] to really engage with, um, the cyclists and maybe the,
[1:09:12] the, uh, the horseback, uh, writers as well and dig
[1:09:17] into what's going on. And is this more of an
[1:09:20] enforcement behavior? Should there be changes in education? I want
[1:09:28] to, I, I have been, um, I've had my own
[1:09:33] thoughts about why this was considered to be a priority
[1:09:38] in the first place. And I wonder if being proactive
[1:09:42] and engaging with, um, the community that's feeling targeted might
[1:09:48] be an effective way to go. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:09:54] Ariel Barberia Gibb. Um, I have a few questions. The
[1:09:59] first one is, well, thank you for the survey. This
[1:10:01] was incredible, a huge amount of work. I really appreciate
[1:10:04] it. Clearly you guys care a lot. And it's very
[1:10:06] evident. So I appreciate that. Um, and in the same
[1:10:11] vein, so the count, the City of Lions recently passed
[1:10:15] a resolution or line board of trustees past a resolution
[1:10:18] opposing the pilot. And so I'm curious how that's going
[1:10:21] to be, um, spoken to when you guys meet with
[1:10:25] the commissioner is just because that wasn't part of the
[1:10:27] survey. So I'm curious how that's going to be wrapped
[1:10:30] in. If it will be talked about, um, or not.
[1:10:36] I think I'd say that though, this is Jason Suk,
[1:10:40] Director Parks Open Space, you know, the commissioners are well
[1:10:43] aware of that resolution. Um, we're well aware of it.
[1:10:46] And I'm not sure what we'll speak to in that
[1:10:48] meeting, but, um, it's something definitely that is, uh, well
[1:10:51] publicized and that, um, you know, that we're aware of.
[1:10:55] Thanks. Um, and then another question is you had a
[1:10:59] lot of questions in the survey about how people on
[1:11:03] the trip or people who use the trail felt about
[1:11:05] conflict and what can be done to like mitigate that,
[1:11:09] be it education or etiquette, you know, that kind of
[1:11:11] stuff. Was the reported level of conflict the four percent
[1:11:14] number ever mentioned in the survey? Or was it up
[1:11:18] to this survey taker to like kind of think about
[1:11:21] how much conflict they've experienced on the trails.
[1:11:33] Michelle Muratti here. Uh, so the question that was asked
[1:11:37] in the online survey was not about interpersonal conflict. So,
[1:11:44] uh, but it was a different question that's commonly asked
[1:11:46] about conflict. That's related to social values conflict. And the
[1:11:50] reason we decided on that was because this was not
[1:11:55] on site intercept survey of people experience in the parks.
[1:11:58] It was open for anyone to complete. So even people
[1:12:01] that don't visit our parks could provide feedback. And therefore
[1:12:07] we asked a question, uh, in the survey, uh, that
[1:12:10] was, I believe Ben showed it. Um, about to what
[1:12:14] extent do you think each of the following is a
[1:12:16] problem on Parks and Open space. So we asked about
[1:12:19] safety and courtesy. So we didn't address in the online
[1:12:24] survey. The results of the five year study. However, the
[1:12:29] results from the five year study were posted on the
[1:12:32] alternating use web page where we discuss the project. So
[1:12:38] we had information about activities as well as the conflict
[1:12:41] rating publicly available. Got it. Thank you. Um, and I
[1:12:47] think we can make comments, right? Um, I am not
[1:12:51] neutral about this pilot. Um, I think the survey speaks
[1:12:54] very clearly to what users of trails be it, you
[1:12:57] know, bikers might have self - reported more or self
[1:13:01] taken the survey more than hikers, but it's pretty clear.
[1:13:05] And I think it's going to be really interesting what
[1:13:07] the commissioners choose to do with this information. And I
[1:13:11] don't think this fire is anywhere near a extinguished. And
[1:13:15] I'm curious and nervous to see what's going to happen
[1:13:19] if the alternating trail use pilot decides to go off.
[1:13:23] Cause I think there's going to be a lot of,
[1:13:26] I really hope, but there seems like there might be
[1:13:28] a lot of backlash. Um, given the results you guys
[1:13:31] have seen. And thank you again for the survey. Carol.
[1:13:36] Carol Byerly POSEC and dog walker. And when, when Christine
[1:13:41] was talking about, um, triggered and challenged, I would say
[1:13:45] the dogs have already lost in Boulder County. And, and
[1:13:49] I don't use the Boulder County Trails because my dog
[1:13:53] runs off leash. I mean, she's, she needs her exercise.
[1:13:55] She's a big dog. And so, um, so I just,
[1:14:00] people go, dogs. Well, you know, the dogs are not
[1:14:03] the dogs aren't there very much because, um, you just
[1:14:07] don't, it's hard. It's not as much fun to walk
[1:14:10] your dog with on a leash, at least my dog.
[1:14:13] So, um, I would say the dogs have been cowed.
[1:14:21] And so now it's, it's the hiking verses, the horses
[1:14:26] and all of that. And I just had to put
[1:14:28] in a word for good, good dogs. Uh, Trey Baker,
[1:14:32] Posack, when I was up at Annu White two weeks
[1:14:36] ago, uh, it was dog City up there with Unleash
[1:14:42] that there were more unleashed than, uh, leashed. And I
[1:14:47] was not in my volunteer Ranger uniform. So I didn't
[1:14:50] call them out. They lost Carol Byley. They lost the
[1:14:57] public policy. Fight. And so now they have to behave.
[1:15:04] So and I just, okay. As I'm on a roll,
[1:15:06] I'm going to just say we have to really comment
[1:15:09] on Copilot analyzing the pilot program. That doesn't generally work
[1:15:14] that way. All right. I'll humor. I'm done. Vicky. Hey,
[1:15:23] Blevin. Um, I don't know if you saw the commentary
[1:15:26] that was written in the daily camera a few days
[1:15:28] ago talking about this pilot project. And they, did you
[1:15:33] happen to see that by any chance? I would say
[1:15:35] which piece comment right. Okay. So I've been out of
[1:15:39] town. I only saw the one recently. My question is
[1:15:42] if you can address the writer to this, and this
[1:15:46] is something I don't know, I don't go out of
[1:15:47] Boulder County a lot. I'm mostly stambledder County Trails. There's
[1:15:50] plenty of them here to suit me. Um, but they
[1:15:54] come in at that neighboring communities or counties or whatever
[1:15:58] have differing ways of dealing with visibility. You know, I
[1:16:03] know one of the issues for hikers. And I can
[1:16:06] say I've seen this as a hiker as having bikes
[1:16:08] come up that you don't know they're coming. And all
[1:16:11] of a sudden they're around a corner and they're flying
[1:16:12] downhill and you're trying to walk uphill. And you know,
[1:16:15] whatever. So that there were some way that other counties
[1:16:18] are dealing with that is a visibility issue. Um, rather
[1:16:22] than having to do the alternating. So can you speak
[1:16:26] at all to what other counties are doing to try
[1:16:28] and alleviate? I'm specifically talking about the bike hiker conflict.
[1:16:32] Yeah. And I think we're, we're doing it here as
[1:16:34] well. And I think when it comes to visibility, um,
[1:16:38] a couple of things came up and maybe I didn't
[1:16:40] hit on it really well, but addressing our sight lines
[1:16:43] on trails is one. So if we, if we know
[1:16:45] we have a corner that's difficult to see around, did
[1:16:48] we move the trail? Can we, can we clean up
[1:16:50] that sight line so you can see those individuals. Another
[1:16:53] thing that we do here is we have directional use.
[1:16:56] So, you know, once a month, we'll, we'll switch the
[1:16:58] use on some of our trails. And we'll ask bikers
[1:17:01] just to go one way so that if you're hiking,
[1:17:03] you know which way those bikers will travel. And then
[1:17:06] as a hiker, you can select, Hey, I want to,
[1:17:09] I want them always to be coming at me so
[1:17:12] I can see them. Or if you're okay with them
[1:17:14] coming up behind you, you can, you can go the
[1:17:16] same way as the biker. So directional use came up
[1:17:20] many, many times in the surveys, um, and we as
[1:17:23] we present our materials to the Board of County Commissioners.
[1:17:26] It'll be one that we look at. Hey, is doing
[1:17:29] something like directional use on some of these trails, something
[1:17:31] we should do more of, um, I think signage is
[1:17:34] important as well. Um, sometimes we forget about, you know,
[1:17:38] just things that we see on the highway all the
[1:17:40] time, like blind corner coming up or slow limited sight
[1:17:44] lines, slow hikers ahead. Um, those are all things we
[1:17:47] can do as well. And those will be some ideas
[1:17:50] that we'll present with the, uh, the board on June
[1:17:53] 30th. Thank you. Anybody else, Posack. Jeff.
[1:18:04] Hey, thanks Trace. Um, yeah, I have maybe a question
[1:18:10] and a couple of comments. Um, yeah, just to echo,
[1:18:13] uh, some of the other folks, kudos on sequencing here,
[1:18:18] that was really helpful to hear the five year survey
[1:18:21] results, uh, kind of before we dived into this survey
[1:18:25] gives a lot of context. So thank you for that.
[1:18:30] Yeah. I mean, I guess just a comment for me
[1:18:32] would be that, you know, uh, obviously I'm personally sympathetic
[1:18:38] to cyclists. I'm nursing cycling injury right now. That's why
[1:18:43] I'm not there. Um, but you know, when I talked
[1:18:45] to people about this pilot, the reason, you know, that
[1:18:50] cyclists are generally upset about it who I talk to
[1:18:54] is because, you know, currently they're, you know, the, the
[1:18:59] alternate use at Batasso Preserve that only existing alternate use
[1:19:04] for multi - use trail, uh, is actually, you know,
[1:19:09] not alternating. It's just a restriction for cyclists, right? Um,
[1:19:12] but there's no restriction for hiking. And so I think
[1:19:15] the anticipation, whether perceived or intended, and I, you know,
[1:19:20] I can't speak for the county commissioners on that, but
[1:19:24] their perception is, you know, that it'll be more of
[1:19:27] that, right? That, that the real question is, are we
[1:19:30] going to restrict Mountain Becking more. And that feels unfair.
[1:19:35] Um, so that may or may not be the intention,
[1:19:38] but I guess regardless, you know, it would seem, uh,
[1:19:42] that the proposal is deeply unpopular. So I'll be interested
[1:19:47] to see what the commissioners do with it. Um, I
[1:19:51] did wonder, you know, and I don't know if you
[1:19:54] have a sense of this, but like, do we know
[1:19:57] what next steps are for Posec on this issue? I
[1:20:00] know this work session is coming up on the 30th
[1:20:03] for the commissioners and there'll be more direction after that.
[1:20:06] But as they're, you know, an intention to like sort
[1:20:09] of bring that direction back in front of Posack, or
[1:20:14] do we just kind of wait and see. Uh, Jeff
[1:20:17] Trayaker Posack, to answer that question, uh, POSAC has not
[1:20:26] been directly involved in the decision making here. We have
[1:20:31] had wonderful updates from staff, uh, but we have been
[1:20:36] excluded. I know that's a strong word, but I'll use
[1:20:39] it from advising the commissioners on this topic. Yeah. I
[1:20:47] guess that's the sense that I'm getting as well. So,
[1:20:50] uh, I don't know if staff can speak to, is
[1:20:54] there an intention to include POSAC at some point or
[1:21:00] do we just kind of see what comes out of
[1:21:02] the work session on the 30th. Sure. Jason Sook, Director
[1:21:09] Parks and Open Space. Uh, Jeff, great question. And, uh,
[1:21:12] well, first off, we're glad you're on screen, but, uh,
[1:21:16] hope to see you soon in person. Hope you recover
[1:21:18] well. And thanks so much for being here. Um, so
[1:21:22] I think, you know, whether it's forming opinions on, on,
[1:21:28] on potential exploration of possible options, uh, on this pilot
[1:21:33] project or even next steps here, I think what we
[1:21:36] first have to do is, um, on the 30th of
[1:21:38] June, um, talk to the commissioners and, you know, have
[1:21:42] a discussion on those next steps. So that's what that
[1:21:44] meeting is for is what are those next steps? You
[1:21:48] know, what decisions, you know, could be made. You know,
[1:21:50] may not be made there. And then move on from
[1:21:52] there. So I think that's kind of the, you know,
[1:21:55] our immediate next step and depending on, you know, where
[1:21:58] we go from there, uh, will determine, you know, sort
[1:22:01] of our, our path forward. So, uh, sort of depends
[1:22:04] on, you know, what we're talking about, what, uh, you
[1:22:08] know, what options we move forward with or perhaps just
[1:22:12] continue to discuss, you know, have a discussion and get
[1:22:15] some information from the Board of County Commissioners. So I
[1:22:18] can't answer it yet, but, um, our intention again is
[1:22:21] always is to, um, keep you well informed. Um, utilize
[1:22:25] the bylaws that we have that govern this body. And,
[1:22:29] you know, and, and work closely with you. Um, so
[1:22:31] that's where we are right now. Thanks so much. Trey
[1:22:34] Baker Post Hack and Jeff, of course, you are, um,
[1:22:38] also free to, uh, email the County Commissioners. You're free
[1:22:43] to sign up on one of the public comment sections
[1:22:47] as an individual, not representing POSAC. But your voice can
[1:22:52] be heard in that way. Awesome. Thanks, Trace. That's all
[1:22:57] I got, uh, on this topic. Appreciate it. Thank you.
[1:23:00] Trey Baker Pocsack got a few questions and comments for
[1:23:06] Bevin. And, um, if the purpose, or at least one
[1:23:13] of the purposes you showed in your slide is to
[1:23:16] reduce crowding a possible solution would be to reduce the
[1:23:23] number of parking spaces on a particular day. Yeah. You
[1:23:30] know, and yes, it would take resources to block the
[1:23:34] parking spaces, but it will also take resources to reduce
[1:23:39] or enforce, you know, alternate use days. Responding to Christine's
[1:23:46] comment about AI. I did ask. Carol on
[1:23:56] AI. I did ask the Claude AI. If people who
[1:24:03] are more likely to feel they're going to lose something
[1:24:07] would be more likely to respond to a survey and
[1:24:11] a site references. And God quite, like two pages worth.
[1:24:19] And it's, you know, part of it is, you know,
[1:24:21] yes, the AI said it's complicated, but in general, uh,
[1:24:25] the biking community, you know, will feel that they are
[1:24:28] more likely to lose something. And therefore are more likely
[1:24:31] to, um, respond to the survey. So there is that,
[1:24:37] uh, bias in there. And, uh, from my systems engineering
[1:24:43] training and experience, um, in, you know, analyzing methods for
[1:24:48] analyzing and selecting from alternatives, uh, one thing we're always
[1:24:53] supposed to include as an alternative is do nothing. And
[1:25:00] so, um, you know, I hope that you will include
[1:25:03] that in your presentation to the County Commissioners. You know,
[1:25:09] as I mentioned during, uh, Michelle's presentation, you know, if
[1:25:14] bikers are only responsible for 1. 5 percent of conflict,
[1:25:20] I will claim there is no problem that needs to
[1:25:23] be solved. On the other hand, you know, dogs show
[1:25:27] out Porses show up. So, you know, if you would
[1:25:30] consider, uh, no dog days or human only days, you
[1:25:36] know, to get rid of the dogs and horses on
[1:25:40] particular days. Of bears. Okay. So, so that's, um, that's
[1:25:48] my point. Uh, thank you. And Carol, yeah, a point
[1:25:52] of personal matter actually. I have a question about procedure
[1:25:56] and it's directed to you, Trace. Yes. Um, what would
[1:26:00] you think if we took a straw vote and then
[1:26:05] on this. And just kind of acted on our own
[1:26:11] and to see where POSAC stands on this pilot. And
[1:26:17] added that to information that can go forward. I am
[1:26:22] not aware of anything in the bylaws that will present,
[1:26:25] prevent that, uh, looking at Jason for guidance here. Or
[1:26:33] the attorney. And I would also then, if I was
[1:26:41] going to propose this, I would propose that we first
[1:26:46] vote on whether we would vote. And so propose Act
[1:26:51] to decide whether they wanted to take a straw vote
[1:26:55] on proceeding with the pilot. And then if we don't
[1:26:58] want to do it, then we don't have to do
[1:27:00] it. But then if we decide that we would like
[1:27:02] to take a straw vote, then we would agree to
[1:27:07] just take a straw vote and then send that information
[1:27:10] into the public policy arena. Well, okay. Um, Jason, it
[1:27:16] looks like you're ready to comment on that. Well, I
[1:27:23] think, uh, Jason Sook, director, uh, Parks and Open Space.
[1:27:27] I think, um, maybe I'd also ask Liana if you'd
[1:27:30] like to, if you have anything to chime in here,
[1:27:31] but my understanding of operations is that you all can
[1:27:36] deliberate. You can talk amongst yourselves. You can have that
[1:27:38] discussion and you can communicate, um, as you've mentioned, um,
[1:27:44] you know, with, with the Board of County Commissioners as
[1:27:46] to fitting in your opinions with our procedures and how
[1:27:51] we operate in the bylaws, I think that's a different
[1:27:53] question. Okay. Lianne. Yeah. This is Liana Larimore, Assistant County
[1:27:58] Attorney. So this is not a question that typically comes
[1:28:00] up, right? Cause you typically only vote on something if
[1:28:03] you've been asked for that direction by the Board of
[1:28:06] County Commissioner. So in order to answer your question, I
[1:28:09] would like to take about five minutes to read through
[1:28:11] the bylaws thoroughly so that I can provide you with
[1:28:14] the best answer. Thank you. And can we cheat and
[1:28:18] not call it a vote. Call it a poll. A
[1:28:21] poll. Okay. Is that okay if we just take a
[1:28:24] short recess for me to read those? Certainly. Thanks. Trace.
[1:28:29] Okay. So let's go to Lauren. Lauren Kelso. I, um,
[1:28:39] I, I think I appreciate this exercise, but I have
[1:28:41] to say there are other things in this agenda that
[1:28:43] I'm really interested in getting to tonight and that feel
[1:28:46] really timely and important also. And since we aren't being
[1:28:49] asked, if we did raise a vote, uh, I guess
[1:28:53] my vote would be that we don't go through this
[1:28:55] exercise. And the ways that we as individuals can share
[1:28:58] our opinions with the commissioners and other things. And since
[1:29:00] we aren't being asked to do that right now, I
[1:29:03] would just like to get to the other things that
[1:29:05] are on the agenda. Okay. Thank you. Joan. Yes. Joan
[1:29:09] Loot's posea. Can I agree with you? And, um, I
[1:29:13] also think that there are other ways to do it.
[1:29:16] Like for example, you could have days that are biker
[1:29:18] only. And you know, limit the days that it's hiker
[1:29:23] only. So the options. It's hard to vote on one
[1:29:28] thing. Okay. Thank you. I would agree with Lauren and
[1:29:34] Joan. Okay. So, um, without a raise of hands here,
[1:29:39] it seems like the verbal consensus is that we will
[1:29:43] not, um, act as a body, but is, you know,
[1:29:49] as I advise Jeff, you know, you're certainly welcome to,
[1:29:53] uh, email the commissioners as individuals. All right, Albarberiel, can
[1:30:01] we still know whether we can do this? Yes. Asking
[1:30:03] the attorney. We don't, you can, you can keep looking.
[1:30:07] I just wanted to know, you did still know. Just
[1:30:10] to know. For the future. A rogue. And Larimor, Assistant
[1:30:17] County attorney. Yes, we can continue with the agenda and
[1:30:20] I will read through the bylaws. And then I can
[1:30:22] come back and answer the question. Okay. Thank you. Okay.
[1:30:25] So, uh, anything more Jeff, anything from Posec. Uh, yeah,
[1:30:33] I was just going to add too that I think
[1:30:36] it's kind of fun to like take an unauthorized vote,
[1:30:40] but I guess my one, my one concern would be
[1:30:43] that, uh, because this is an informational item. We don't
[1:30:47] have a public comment session, you know, and public comment
[1:30:51] hasn't been invited. Uh, to it. And so, you know,
[1:30:55] we would have to sort of vote blind in that
[1:30:58] sense, you know, without being able to hear from folks
[1:31:01] who were interested to show up and speak on it
[1:31:05] one way or another. And so that made me feel
[1:31:07] like, uh, voting on, you know, on an incomplete amount
[1:31:13] of information to me. So I guess maybe my vote
[1:31:17] would be not to also, if we were going to
[1:31:21] vote on it, I don't know. I'm on the fence,
[1:31:24] but that is like a thought that came to mind.
[1:31:27] So I thought I'd just throw that up there. Okay.
[1:31:29] So thank you, Jeff. And, um, I think we're done.
[1:31:35] Jason. Sook, um, I just wanted to again outline kind
[1:31:39] of where we are now. So, um, we're lucky enough
[1:31:42] to have again, talented, uh, Michelle and team to be
[1:31:45] able to very, very, very quickly turn around, um, you
[1:31:48] know, detailed survey results. Um, information from the open houses
[1:31:52] that we had to kind of inform, you know, our
[1:31:56] thinking on moving forward. So where we are now is,
[1:32:00] you know, again, looking forward to June 30th, where we're
[1:32:03] going to talk with the commissioners on next steps and
[1:32:05] also, you know, think through and discuss potential options. So
[1:32:09] we're at the options and kind of collecting information and
[1:32:12] developing those alternatives now. So, um, you know, that, that's,
[1:32:18] we're not, we don't have yet a set path. And
[1:32:21] so I just wanted to emphasize where we are in
[1:32:23] that process currently. And then, um, the other piece that
[1:32:27] I, you know, we presented now just, just now, um,
[1:32:30] and Devon did a fantastic job on the survey data,
[1:32:34] but we had a lot of other things and we
[1:32:36] just posted the finalized survey online. And it also has,
[1:32:40] um, some of the open - ended feedback. So this
[1:32:42] survey results, if I'm not mistaken, is based on the
[1:32:45] actual survey, but we also had open - ended feedback
[1:32:48] that's there. And so part of that, um, you know,
[1:32:52] was kind of diving into how people think and feel.
[1:32:55] And this is the part that I guess has been,
[1:32:58] you know, of interest to me. And I think, you
[1:32:59] know, not speaking for anyone else. But, you know, maybe
[1:33:04] at the heart of the issue where, you know, we're
[1:33:06] talking about numbers here, but conflict, you know, there's, there's
[1:33:11] people who, you know, have real reasons why they don't
[1:33:13] come or when they do come that there are, you
[1:33:16] know, issues that they face. And those are real ones
[1:33:19] and ones that are, you know, I think we take
[1:33:21] serious and are important to consider. So, you know, we,
[1:33:24] you know, I find that it's easy to get lost
[1:33:25] in the survey data and some of the responses, but
[1:33:28] the people who have come forward and shared their stories
[1:33:30] on, you know, things that have happened to them on
[1:33:32] the trail or reasons why they might not. Reasons why
[1:33:35] they don't bring their kids, you know, accessibility issues, many
[1:33:39] things where, you know, that people, um, go to a
[1:33:42] trail and might, might perceive that conflict. And, you know,
[1:33:45] perhaps that's a certain percentage. Perhaps it's not, but it's
[1:33:49] something that we want to take on. And I think
[1:33:50] it's right to at least think about it and consider
[1:33:52] it. And so that's kind of where we are. Um,
[1:33:55] as we try to balance all these different things, balance
[1:33:58] data, balance stories, um, balance people's, you know, I think
[1:34:01] valid opinions. And it's not an easy job, um, but
[1:34:04] it's one that we're trying to figure out and navigate
[1:34:06] together with, um, the commissioners and others. So thanks. Thanks
[1:34:10] for the insight, Jason. And I believe we're done with
[1:34:13] this topic. So Bevin, thank you very much. Michelle, thank
[1:34:17] you again. So our next topic is water rights management
[1:34:22] overview.
[1:34:50] Hi everybody. Um. Hi, my name is Darren Beck. I'm
[1:34:57] the, whoop, thank you. Water program supervisor. Um, for the
[1:35:02] agriculture resources division in parks and open space. I'm here
[1:35:05] with Vanessa McCracken. She's the Ag and Water Manager. Um,
[1:35:09] for the division. Um, we will be discussing, uh, the
[1:35:16] ag water program as well as the current drought conditions.
[1:35:27] So there's a lot to cover. Um, and, um, I'd
[1:35:31] like to kind of try to focus on the drought
[1:35:34] conditions and where we are right now and the impacts
[1:35:36] that we've seen to the drought. But I wanted to,
[1:35:39] um, take a step and make sure that everybody was
[1:35:41] understanding water rights in general. Um, cause I know it's
[1:35:45] a, it's a complex project topic that I think it's
[1:35:50] overlooked a lot. Um, so I'd like to spend a
[1:35:52] little bit of time on, um, just discussing water rights
[1:35:56] and then get into the water program that we have.
[1:36:00] Um, and then some, an overview of the process of
[1:36:04] delivering water. Again, I think it's something that we take
[1:36:07] for granted sometimes that we don't truly understand how it
[1:36:11] happens, like on a farm level. So, um, so yeah,
[1:36:16] so I'd like to do spend a little bit of
[1:36:19] time on that. And then Vanessa will speak to the
[1:36:22] impacts that you're out and what's next. So, you know,
[1:36:30] as I was thinking about this topic, um, I felt
[1:36:33] like I really needed to take a step back so
[1:36:35] that everybody understands, you know, how, how water moves across
[1:36:38] the front range. So, you know, just to apologize if
[1:36:44] this is old news, but just to make sure everybody's
[1:36:47] understanding before I get into water rights themselves, but, you
[1:36:50] know, an irrigation ditch, um, will deliver river water or,
[1:36:57] you know, water from storage, a reservoir, um, from the
[1:37:00] river into a ditch to a farm. I know it
[1:37:04] sounds very simple and I didn't need to state that,
[1:37:07] but at the same time, well, how does that happen?
[1:37:10] There are structures off of the river that are controlled
[1:37:15] to release a certain amount of water into an irrigation
[1:37:18] ditch. And I'll get into how this and why this
[1:37:21] happens. But, um, and then those ditches we can refer
[1:37:24] to as main ditches, um, those stitches then transport water
[1:37:28] to lateral ditches, which again, have a structure in between
[1:37:34] the ditch in the lateral ditch that's controlled. So a
[1:37:38] certain amount of water is delivered to through those lateral
[1:37:40] ditches, which then goes to the farms. So, um, you
[1:37:44] know, as I was, um, going through this presentation, I
[1:37:49] wanted to make sure that that's kind of out there
[1:37:50] and people understand that just as a, as a basis
[1:37:53] of understanding, but water rights overview. A career's, you know,
[1:38:00] information into just a couple of minutes, but, um, the
[1:38:03] prior appropriation doctrine is the law of the land when
[1:38:08] it comes to water rights in Colorado, which essentially is
[1:38:11] first in time, first and right. So the oldest or
[1:38:14] more senior water rights will receive their water first. And
[1:38:19] then the next most senior, the next oldest water right
[1:38:23] is able to take what they are decreed. They're decreed
[1:38:25] amount of water. And then it goes down the lines,
[1:38:28] a junior water rates. Um, being the most recent water
[1:38:32] rights, they can receive their water next. Um, and again,
[1:38:35] this presentation is going to focus on agriculture. Um, and
[1:38:40] our program. So the other considerations in the how that
[1:38:44] administration of the water rights work. But a generalization of
[1:38:48] how things work. Um, water rights, uh, do have conditions,
[1:38:55] those being the time of when it was first put
[1:38:58] the beneficial use. So in time, you know, around here
[1:39:02] 1860s is when we have the oldest senior rights. Um,
[1:39:07] that's a condition of that water, right? How old that
[1:39:10] water right is. The use of the water right, um,
[1:39:13] we're going to focus on agricultural use, but there's also
[1:39:15] domestic use commercial uses. Um, industrial use other types of
[1:39:21] uses as well. Um, there's the rate or the volume
[1:39:26] of a water right. So that would be, um, typically
[1:39:30] referred to as CFS cubic feet per second is the
[1:39:33] rate at which a water right can be diverted from
[1:39:35] the river. And also a volume would be an acre
[1:39:40] foot, which is typically referred to when you're speaking about
[1:39:44] reservoirs. But an acre foot is about a football field
[1:39:48] without the end zones covered in a foot of water.
[1:39:53] So those are what makes up water rights. Direct flow
[1:39:57] rights and storage rights are the main ones that we,
[1:39:59] um, we have, um, direct flow rights are important during
[1:40:04] drought because they are used immediately. So if your senior,
[1:40:09] if you're ditch, you're a water rate is in priority.
[1:40:12] Then you get to use that water right as it's
[1:40:14] coming by your head gate. So you got to divert
[1:40:16] it when you can take it. When it's legal and
[1:40:18] physically available. Um, so that's important during drought, you need
[1:40:22] to be able to act fast on when, when you
[1:40:25] could take that water because it's going to go by
[1:40:27] and somebody else is going to need it as well.
[1:40:29] So, um, the state administers water rights. So they have,
[1:40:35] um, within the major basins and the sub basins within
[1:40:38] the state, their water commissioners who essentially work with ditch
[1:40:42] companies, um, and I'll talk about ditch companies next, but
[1:40:46] on how water is delivered to who and when, um,
[1:40:51] so they, the water commissioners really, um, coordinate with the
[1:40:56] ditch companies on a daily basis to say who's the
[1:40:59] senior rights. You're going to get your water, how much
[1:41:02] do you need? Very difficult job in a system that's
[1:41:05] constantly changing based on whether conditions groundwater conditions, diversions, inflows.
[1:41:12] It's very, it's very complicated, but they do it. Um,
[1:41:15] so yeah, the state are the ones are the ones
[1:41:19] responsible for how rivers in the water rights are managed
[1:41:23] on a daily basis based on the prior appropriation system.
[1:41:29] Quickly on ditch companies and the ownership of water rights.
[1:41:34] Ditch companies manage the water rights. And because farming's very
[1:41:39] old practice, they have evolved in different ways. So an
[1:41:43] incorporated ditch company is a very formal, um, company that's
[1:41:48] filed with the state. They have it elected board of
[1:41:51] shareholders. Um, who represent all shareholders and decisions made for
[1:41:57] the ditch company. Um, they meet regularly the board will
[1:42:00] meet regularly. They, uh, make assessments to the shareholders. Shareholders
[1:42:06] are the owners of the water right for a ditch
[1:42:08] company incorporated ditch company. So they actually issue stock certificates
[1:42:13] to water rates holders and say, if you have 10
[1:42:16] shares of our ditch, then you're entitled to a proportion
[1:42:20] and a model of water for our water right represented
[1:42:23] by 10 shares. Um, so the incorporated ditch companies are,
[1:42:29] they have bylaws. They have regular meetings. They have elected
[1:42:33] board of directors. And so it's, it's a very formal
[1:42:37] process. Unincorporated ditch companies are more wild west. It was
[1:42:42] when we first started to settle and group of neighbors
[1:42:45] said, Hey, we need some water on our farms. They
[1:42:48] filed for a water right. And they just work together.
[1:42:52] Basically to deliver water where it needs to be and
[1:42:55] when. So there is an aboard. There isn't anyone that's
[1:42:57] on staff that helps turn the head gates to really
[1:43:01] use water from the river into the ditches and things
[1:43:03] like that. So that's an important thing to rememora is
[1:43:06] that some ditches are very well organized and others are
[1:43:10] not unorganized, but they're not more informal. And the other
[1:43:16] thing here too is that ditch writers, they are the
[1:43:19] person that's hired by a ditch company to basically operate
[1:43:23] and maintain the ditch. So the ditch company representatives will
[1:43:27] hire somebody to go out on a daily basis, hear
[1:43:32] from farmers, how much water they need, communicate with the
[1:43:36] state on when they can take water and then make
[1:43:39] decisions on when to turn the head gate to make
[1:43:41] releases and diversions. Um, to get the farmers that are
[1:43:46] water. So that's kind of general information on water rights.
[1:43:55] Boulder County's agwater program. I'd like to speak about next.
[1:44:00] So we have 15, over 15, 000 acres of land
[1:44:05] that we irrigate and we lease to tenant farmers. Um,
[1:44:10] and, um, that's across the Boulder Creek Basin as well
[1:44:15] as St. Marine Basin. So all throughout the front range
[1:44:18] of a Boulder County, we own interest in over 160
[1:44:23] different water rates. Um, those are direct flow rights like
[1:44:27] we talked about storage as well as wells, springs, slews.
[1:44:33] Other sources of water. Yes. This is John Wright Posek.
[1:44:36] Are you talking about parks and open space. Water rights
[1:44:41] or the whole County? Just owned by Parks and OpenSpace.
[1:44:45] So what will happen is our program in the past
[1:44:49] and still today purchases a farm. If a fireman wants
[1:44:53] to sell, we'll buy the water that's historically irrigated that
[1:44:58] land. And that's part of that 160 different types of
[1:45:03] 15, 000 was the whole County or just stuff. Yep.
[1:45:07] You guys. Just our program is what we're speaking to.
[1:45:10] Um, so we have about 60 tech farmers, um, that
[1:45:14] have over 100 leases. So in those leases are included,
[1:45:18] the water rates that we own, the 160 or so,
[1:45:22] um, that they are able to use to irrigate that
[1:45:25] land that they lease. Um, currently the, the water group
[1:45:30] in Vanessa sit on, uh, 37 different ditch boards. So
[1:45:35] that's really how we County Parks and OpenSpace lead wanting
[1:45:41] management is through representation of our shares. As well as
[1:45:45] other shareholders, um, on those ditch boards. So these are,
[1:45:50] you know, weeks and evening meetings, these are 37s alive.
[1:45:56] There's a thing about the meetings that you'd have to
[1:45:57] go to. And there's a lot of things that come
[1:45:59] up, um, think about the development that's happening and crossing
[1:46:03] agreements and crossings of irrigation ditches. Very complicated analysis and
[1:46:11] review that needs to be done, both legal and engineering,
[1:46:14] as well as the practicality of things. Um, so that's
[1:46:17] a, that's really an important part of my job. And
[1:46:20] Vanessa's job is representing the county's interest as well as
[1:46:24] all shareholders in those ditch companies on those board positions.
[1:46:28] Um, and other part, I'll just skip ahead real quick.
[1:46:32] The wildfire mitigation program is another way that the county
[1:46:36] leads in manner of our water rights. So, um, this
[1:46:41] legislation was passed a few years ago in this, um,
[1:46:46] is to remove fire hazard and fuel loads along ditch
[1:46:52] corridors. So that's the purpose of that, um, that funding.
[1:46:57] But it does provide a benefit to the ditch companies
[1:47:01] that have, that move water through those ditches. They're the
[1:47:05] ones that are managing those stitches. So they have the
[1:47:08] right to remove trees, placed those trees on the, within
[1:47:11] the easement of the ditch program can go and remove
[1:47:14] those debris piles as well as standing in life. Um,
[1:47:19] trees. But for the purpose of fire mitigation, but it
[1:47:23] does serve a purpose of water conveyance as well. Um,
[1:47:31] and just quickly on the tenant responsibilities too. There's a
[1:47:35] separation of responsibility when it comes to delivery of water
[1:47:38] to the farm. Our farmers know best on how, um,
[1:47:43] to operate those farms. And so the, the point at
[1:47:47] which generally say the tenants responsibility when it comes to
[1:47:50] water is once water leaves the lateral ditch and is
[1:47:54] turned on through a turned through a head gate onto
[1:47:56] a farm. So that's when the, the farmer really needs
[1:47:59] to know, what am I going to grow? When am
[1:48:02] I going to grow it? Um, which land do I
[1:48:06] want to follow this year? Things like that. The decisions
[1:48:08] are made by the farmer because they, they know best.
[1:48:11] Um, so yeah, the, the county can help with certain
[1:48:14] things when we can. We've got heavy equipment. We've got
[1:48:17] staff, things like that come up. And it's just the
[1:48:20] nature of farming that there's, um, coordination and partnerships there.
[1:48:25] Um, but at some point there's that we had to
[1:48:27] kind of be able to say, okay, you're responsible for
[1:48:29] that. We're responsible for this. And so this was just
[1:48:38] a quick discussion on and maybe I have a covered
[1:48:41] some of it, but how water moves through the system,
[1:48:46] uh, legally and physically. Um, so on a given day
[1:48:50] like tomorrow, there's going to be a certain amount of
[1:48:52] water in the river, say St. Verain Creek. And, um,
[1:48:57] the water commissioners in charge of administering, saving Creek will
[1:49:01] say, okay, there's this much water. I know based on
[1:49:05] conversations with Titch companies representatives that all these ditches want
[1:49:11] their water, that person, the water commissioner needs to make
[1:49:14] a decision, okay, I need to set a call, which
[1:49:17] is the senior right that limits the junior rights from
[1:49:21] diverting. Um, and then the water commissioner will do that.
[1:49:25] Um, the ditch companies coordinate internally and say, well, how
[1:49:29] much water do we need? What farmers want their water
[1:49:32] today? They might not all want them. Maybe one's on
[1:49:35] vacation. You know, when whatever reason they need to coordinate
[1:49:38] to say we need this much water. Water commissioner, when
[1:49:43] we're in priority, when we're the senior call, can we
[1:49:45] have it. Um, and then especially what we saw this
[1:49:51] year is water lost to dry soil, which we refer
[1:49:56] to shrink. Um, you know, it's, it's very difficult to
[1:50:00] deliver a certain amount of water not knowing how much
[1:50:03] is actually going to reach the beginning of the ditch
[1:50:06] compared to the end of the ditch, if at all.
[1:50:09] So, um, in a drought year that is really what
[1:50:12] we're seeing this year is that increased coordination between water
[1:50:17] users of a ditch to make sure that they are
[1:50:20] understanding what water is available and when and how they
[1:50:25] can get it to their, their head gain. So, um,
[1:50:28] that's the real difficult thing that I think is a
[1:50:31] kind of trial - eye fire type of experience that
[1:50:34] you need to be able to say, yeah, we might
[1:50:37] lose all of our water this year to shrink and
[1:50:40] not even receive any of it. And we have seen
[1:50:42] ditches that have received no water this year and not
[1:50:47] do just do the shrink, but because of limited water
[1:50:50] supply. Trey Baker Posack. On the subject of shrink. First
[1:50:57] question is evaporation, a consideration from the surface of the
[1:51:02] water. No, not evaporation, but evapotranspiration, water use by trees
[1:51:11] that line the ditches. It's a consideration. Okay. It's, it's
[1:51:15] not quantified. It's not, I would say considered in like
[1:51:21] a, an allotment of water that needs to be delivered.
[1:51:24] Like, Hey, these Cottonwoods are going to take this much
[1:51:26] water, but it is a concern of ditch companies, the
[1:51:30] water lost, um, to trees, to evapotranspiration. Thank you. And
[1:51:36] second question, do farmers or ditch companies? Do they have
[1:51:42] a duty to reduce or eliminate shrink. Um, pipes have
[1:51:50] been brought up. Uh, concrete lined ditches are sometimes discussed.
[1:51:57] Um, and it's a, it's kind of a, it's a
[1:52:00] complicated thing because trees grow and could destroy the concrete
[1:52:04] easily or the maintenance that's required for some of those
[1:52:07] things. The cost that's included, um, a pipe that's buried
[1:52:13] underground that when it fails, there's a huge expense to
[1:52:16] try to fix that. Things like that. So these open
[1:52:18] ditches, you know, I think just in general practice, I'm
[1:52:23] the most efficient in economical way to still move water.
[1:52:27] Okay. Thank you. Uh, so I'm going to kind of
[1:52:34] switch gears to, um, drought. And if I left any
[1:52:37] time, then Vanessa's going to take over, but this, this
[1:52:41] is just a quick figure, which kind of emphasizes that
[1:52:45] ditches are all around us. You know, they, they go
[1:52:47] through municipal, the municipalities. They are in the rural areas.
[1:52:53] Um, their storage facilities that we derive by that are,
[1:52:57] you know, working hard in terms of making releases for,
[1:53:01] for irrigation use. And, um, all the things that are
[1:53:05] going on on that map that you don't see interfere
[1:53:08] with operations of a ditch sometimes. And so it's, um,
[1:53:12] it's, it's, there's a lot that's happening behind the scenes
[1:53:15] when it comes to moving water from a creek, um,
[1:53:18] to the farm. And this is just showing South Boulder
[1:53:21] Creek, which is on the left side of the screen,
[1:53:24] running, running, uh, and then all the ditches in this
[1:53:27] area that are diverting from that just right at the
[1:53:29] mouth of L to O Canyon. Um, just a few,
[1:53:35] um, visuals. This is a river head gate. Um, so
[1:53:39] the river is in the background and the ditch is
[1:53:43] in the more of the foreground. The wheel, you would
[1:53:47] turn that. And I'm sorry, if this is really easy
[1:53:51] to understand, but anyways, um, the wheel, you turn that,
[1:53:55] it's on a stem, a threaded stem. And it raises
[1:53:58] that gate a certain amount and it will divert a
[1:54:02] certain amount of water into the ditch. It's then measured
[1:54:06] typically, we hope, you know, at the, at the beginning
[1:54:10] of the ditch, which is then reported to the state
[1:54:13] to say, Hey, okay, we are diverting our five cubic
[1:54:16] feet per second today. And here it is. And then
[1:54:18] that's the ditch moving into the background. Drought. So this
[1:54:25] is a snow tail site graph, uh, for Boulder Creek
[1:54:30] Basin. Snowtail sites are individual sites around the United States
[1:54:38] that measure the amount of water in snow. So this
[1:54:42] actually has a pillow that's inflatable that has, that measures
[1:54:47] weight. They also measure the depth of the snow. So
[1:54:51] what this is showing us is water in snow over
[1:54:54] the year on the far left X axis is October
[1:54:57] 1st. And then moving to recent. And on the Y
[1:55:01] axis, um, the snow water equivalent, the amount of water
[1:55:05] in snow in inches. Um, the black line is 2026.
[1:55:13] So, you know, we can really see we were, we
[1:55:16] started bad. Uh, early winter. And then we, we, we
[1:55:21] stayed pretty bad, but not as bad as that was
[1:55:23] 1981. And then, you know, just a couple of points
[1:55:27] to, to notice the black line dips around March 1st,
[1:55:33] or just after March 1st, really hot temperatures lost snow
[1:55:36] pack. That relates to lost runoff earlier than when we
[1:55:41] typically would see it. So, um, those, you know, this,
[1:55:45] that's what we're seeing here is those times when the,
[1:55:49] the snowpack falls is lost irrigation water. That's how I
[1:55:53] see it. Um, you know, it could be stored, could
[1:55:56] be used for irrigation, different places, but it's, you know,
[1:55:59] in the front range, it's immediate use basically. And then,
[1:56:04] you know, you can see some other times where we
[1:56:05] had wet weather, built the snow pack. And then hot
[1:56:09] water weather again lost it. And then at the, towards
[1:56:13] the right, the line drops out. No more snow pack.
[1:56:17] So essentially, you know, weeks earlier than typical, we have
[1:56:20] no more snow pack at this site. This is Boulder
[1:56:24] Creek in Boulder. This is only a 30 day view
[1:56:28] most recent 30 days. Um, but what you're seeing in
[1:56:31] the blue line is current conditions. You know, now at
[1:56:34] around 50 feet per second in the black line, uh,
[1:56:38] near the top is over 250 300 CFS. So six
[1:56:44] of the amount of water that we have in Boulder
[1:56:46] Creek today. Christine Johnson, Possette. Are you saying that the
[1:56:51] dashed line is normal average average. And then this is
[1:57:00] Sane Verain Basin, same types of graph. Really evident here
[1:57:04] to see the impacts of hot weather where, you know,
[1:57:09] the red line is, you know, the, the median lows
[1:57:16] is still building at least until March. You're still accumulating
[1:57:19] some type of snow pack. We were losing snow pack
[1:57:23] in early March. And we didn't get any back. Um,
[1:57:27] so, you know, the same brain really a rough story
[1:57:31] as well in a stream flow gauge, um, near hygiene
[1:57:38] shows, you know, minimal flows currently when we, you know,
[1:57:42] typically would like to see over 150 CFS. So yeah,
[1:57:48] it's the drought is real. It's, um, you know, these
[1:57:51] data are just a depiction, but what we're hearing from
[1:57:54] farmers is the real stress of, uh, of the situation.
[1:57:59] And Vanessa's going to talk next about that. Good evening.
[1:58:08] Poseck Vanessa McCracken. Agan water resources division manager. Thanks, Darren.
[1:58:13] So I wanted to back up just a little bit
[1:58:17] geographically and show how widespread the impact of drought is.
[1:58:21] This is not just a Boulder County problem. This is
[1:58:23] not just a Colorado problem. This is a really west
[1:58:27] wide situation. And you can see here our neighbors, Nebraska
[1:58:31] and Wyoming are in really rough shape as well, which,
[1:58:36] um, I'll talk about in a minute, but doesn't help
[1:58:38] us here either. So what are the ag impacts? They
[1:58:44] really are extreme for everyone. Um, on June 4th, Governor
[1:58:49] Polis did activate that phase three drought response plan statewide
[1:58:54] drought emergency declaration. So what that really means is the
[1:58:59] governor's task forces meet more regularly update data more regularly.
[1:59:03] There's potential for emergency funding and a possible federal disaster
[1:59:07] declaration impending. And like statewide, it is the lowest snowpack
[1:59:14] on record statewide here on June 19. This statewide snowpack
[1:59:18] was at 15 percent of median. So it's, it's a
[1:59:24] widespread issue here. Here in Boulder County, as Darren mentioned,
[1:59:29] many of the junior ditches, no water at all or
[1:59:32] as little as one day for the season. That translates
[1:59:36] both South Boulder Canyon and Davidson ditch are both on
[1:59:39] Boulder Creek. And I just wanted to give you some
[1:59:42] numbers for how that translates on the farm. So in
[1:59:45] 2026, South Boulder Canyon had so far and probably won't
[1:59:49] have more seven days of, of water, um, compared to
[1:59:52] 33 days last year in similar story on the Davidson
[1:59:56] ditch. So four days this year compared to 34 days
[1:59:59] in 2025. So these impacts are really extreme. So what
[2:00:05] does that mean here. Survival mode is what our producers
[2:00:10] are in at this point at every scale. Everyone has
[2:00:14] reduced their planted acres. Um, more specifically small grain crops
[2:00:20] typically wheat and barley. I think there will be very,
[2:00:23] very little actually harvested for grain this year. Most that
[2:00:27] was planted has already been cut and bailed for silage
[2:00:31] potentially be grazed off or tilled under. The germination was
[2:00:34] so poor with the low moisture in the all winter
[2:00:38] that there's just nothing there worth harvesting as a grain.
[2:00:41] Hey crops are really seeing the effects, both alfalfa and
[2:00:44] grass. Our producers are reporting about 30 to 40 percent
[2:00:48] of average yields on their first cutting, second and third
[2:00:51] cuttings to be determined. We did have a nice, you
[2:00:55] know, we've had a couple nice showers, but in no
[2:00:57] way will that make up for the reduced irrigation season,
[2:01:01] um, in poor quality as well, just based on the
[2:01:04] hot dry weather. Corn and sugar beets, out there. Um,
[2:01:08] they are drought stressed. A lot of this water is
[2:01:12] going to be used early season. So there's some holding
[2:01:16] on to hope for some rain, but we will see
[2:01:18] how that plays out. Um, market farms are impacted. Similar
[2:01:22] link to all the others. And I think an additional,
[2:01:26] uh, impact for market farms is kind of that regional
[2:01:29] impact where a lot of our market farms also sell
[2:01:32] fruit that typically comes from the western slope. And if,
[2:01:36] if I need to say it out loud, the Western
[2:01:38] slope fruit harvest will be extremely reduced this year as
[2:01:43] well. Mostly from temperature extremes, um, during the flowering season
[2:01:47] on the Western slope as well. It's not just the
[2:01:51] crop producers. It's the livestock producers as well. So livestock
[2:01:54] producers dais horse operations. Anyone that requires forage for their
[2:01:58] animals. Um, there's not enough forage anywhere. There's not additional
[2:02:02] pasture to be found on top of that places that
[2:02:06] had reliable stock water forever are no longer reliable. So
[2:02:10] ditches aren't running that used to be used for stock
[2:02:12] water small ponds and things that were reliable in the
[2:02:17] past, our dry this year, uh, I already spoke about
[2:02:20] the regional impacts, but the additional piece of information there
[2:02:24] is the idea that people can truck in. Forage for
[2:02:29] their animals is not really financially viable. It's freight prices
[2:02:33] are extremely high. So it's, it's the cost is just
[2:02:36] very high to be able to mitigate some of these
[2:02:40] drought impacts. And it's not just egg, right? It's the
[2:02:42] wildlife and it's the ecological impacts. All the animals don't
[2:02:46] have the forage that they are used to. There's extremely
[2:02:49] low flows in the river. That picture on the bottom
[2:02:51] right is actually left - hand creek last Friday, about
[2:02:54] a half a mile east of 63rd. And it was
[2:02:57] barely a trickle. So there is not much water to
[2:03:01] be had out there. What can't we do, unfortunately, we
[2:03:08] can't make more water, you know, as the County government,
[2:03:11] we are constrained by our budgets, by our timing, by
[2:03:15] the scale of the problem, um, it is large. But
[2:03:18] what can we do? I think the number one thing
[2:03:22] we can do that Darren alluded to is we can
[2:03:24] really acknowledge the challenge with our producers. These are really
[2:03:27] tough times. And to be able to listen and understand
[2:03:32] and be there in partnership with them, knowing that this
[2:03:36] is a survival year. I think is one of, it's
[2:03:40] a small thing, but it's important. It's that community piece
[2:03:42] that gets people through the tough times. And so we
[2:03:46] really try to act as partners in that way with
[2:03:48] our producers. And at Parks and OpenSpace, there are things
[2:03:53] that we're talking about. And we can try to have
[2:03:57] some positive impacts on what we can do for a
[2:04:01] producers. But all those things come with challenges. And so
[2:04:04] we're talking through some of those things, but at this
[2:04:06] point, the problem is big. I've like to think that
[2:04:12] in Boulder County, like we've done wildfire and we've done
[2:04:15] flood and, you know, we'll get through the drought too.
[2:04:19] So. That's the last slide so we can open it
[2:04:22] up to questions. Darren Vanessa, thank you so very much.
[2:04:26] Um, opening up post - heck in the room. Lauren.
[2:04:32] Guys, this is such a good presentation. And I genuinely
[2:04:35] feel, oh, sorry, Lauren Kelso, I'm going to remember that
[2:04:38] one of these times, Darren, I really feel like a
[2:04:42] lot of people would benefit from, like I hope they
[2:04:46] blast your presentation from some very visible place through the
[2:04:51] commissioner's office or something, because it's really important information. And
[2:04:54] the number of people who think that ditches are creeks
[2:04:56] and do not understand the life force that it brings
[2:04:59] to our community is tricky. So thank you so much
[2:05:02] for your work and for this presentation. Um, I, you
[2:05:07] know, I have, uh, my questions are really around what
[2:05:12] you all are thinking as far as, um, you mentioned,
[2:05:16] Mini said that there may be sort of state emergency
[2:05:18] funding coming out, um, a lot of my questions are
[2:05:21] generally around, what do you all thinking as moving forward?
[2:05:26] What are the sort of, and these don't have to
[2:05:28] be answered tonight, but it's just so it's coming up
[2:05:30] for me as I'm thinking about this is like, what
[2:05:33] are, um, what are the strategies that you guys are
[2:05:35] looking at as a team in future years? What do
[2:05:37] you feel like is available to you for like vulnerable,
[2:05:40] like figuring out what our vulnerabilities are and addressing some
[2:05:42] of those, um, one thing that's standing out a lot
[2:05:46] to me right now is the fact that, uh, though
[2:05:49] there have been drought considerations in our municipalities, uh, I'm
[2:05:53] really concerned that they are not as severe as what
[2:05:56] our producers are facing, which tells me there's a bit
[2:05:58] of an imbalance of wear water is landing. And that's
[2:06:03] more extreme for some of our municipalities in the county.
[2:06:06] So I'm just wondering what tools are available to you
[2:06:08] guys through IGAs, through, um, I don't know what other
[2:06:13] sorts of what the ditch companies can do. Moving forward
[2:06:16] to try to address some of those needs or if
[2:06:19] the hope of that. Um, so that's my, that's one
[2:06:23] question. I have a couple others, but maybe we'll start
[2:06:26] with that. Yeah, I think, um. For, from like a
[2:06:35] water rights point of view, it's difficult. A storage typically
[2:06:39] has been the first thing that, uh. First discussion to
[2:06:44] have when it comes to drought is that, and in
[2:06:47] the state, the state has a water plan, um, that
[2:06:50] was created, I think in 2021. It was updated a
[2:06:53] few years ago, um, but it, it identifies storage as,
[2:06:57] you know, increased storage or recovering lost storage due to
[2:07:01] sedimentation, siltation. Um, is a very big, um, uh, that's
[2:07:08] something to consider first when it comes to additional water
[2:07:11] supplies. So if we had some water that we could
[2:07:13] keep high in the system, in the mountains, in, you
[2:07:16] know, release when we needed it or, you know, that
[2:07:19] would be something that we could do. That is very
[2:07:23] expensive. And if you look at girls reservoir, you know,
[2:07:26] you see the, the challenges that, that comes with storage
[2:07:30] on a smaller scale, you know, the county is pursuing
[2:07:35] what we have water rights. We have water rights that
[2:07:37] are not developed storage rights. Um, that again, comes at
[2:07:42] a huge expense. But that storage things, the first thing
[2:07:46] that comes to mind for me when it comes to
[2:07:48] available water supply during drought. Northern water has a trans
[2:07:53] basin system of deliveries from Colorado River to the front
[2:07:58] range. And the County owns a lot of that water.
[2:08:03] Um, we do make that water available to our tenants.
[2:08:06] Um, and so that's an additional supply that we have
[2:08:10] at our disposal. Let we can give to our tenants.
[2:08:14] Um, and we've done that. So we're, we're really kind
[2:08:17] of out of options in terms of a physical water
[2:08:20] supply that we have right now. Yeah. I don't really
[2:08:26] have anything other to add that's going to solve the
[2:08:29] problem. But I think the collective brain trust, I think
[2:08:33] we, you know, we'd be interested in ideas that other
[2:08:35] people have. And this synthesize that and see what, what
[2:08:39] could make sense moving forward. Thanks. Um, and then my
[2:08:44] other question was just, uh, the Colorado water conservation board,
[2:08:49] I feel like Vanessa, you're very well over of all
[2:08:52] these grants that come out because of your work with
[2:08:53] the ditches and your work with the county. But I'm
[2:08:58] just wondering if we, do we leverage any of those
[2:09:01] we gotten up to bat for, they do a lot
[2:09:04] of water planning grants and things like that. And I
[2:09:07] just didn't know if that was anything you guys have
[2:09:09] considered. I think it's something the county. Hasn't used a
[2:09:16] lot of in the past. Like there hasn't been a
[2:09:19] hugely great need identified. But times are, are changing and
[2:09:24] county budgets are changing as well. And so looking towards
[2:09:26] the CWCB and other additional sources is something that we
[2:09:30] have talked about and thought about and probably will look
[2:09:32] at more in the future. Cool. Thanks. Um, I think
[2:09:37] those. Are all of my questions. I really again, thank
[2:09:40] you also much for this and your work. And Joan.
[2:09:47] Um, it was perhaps last year that we had some,
[2:09:50] um, farmers leasing land from the County Speak. And started
[2:09:55] to interrupt, Joan, can you move that microphone closer to
[2:09:57] yourself? Okay. And, um, they were complaining about having to
[2:10:03] pay their workers the minimum wage, which was increasing. And
[2:10:10] whether that would be one way you could provide some
[2:10:12] relief to the farmers. Or if that's actually a terrible
[2:10:16] idea because the workers also are facing increased food costs
[2:10:20] and so on. Or the other thing is to reduce
[2:10:26] their rent. But of course that is the opposite of
[2:10:30] helping the County budget, which is in trouble. Just some
[2:10:34] thoughts. Christine. Christine Johnson Posack. I grew up
[2:10:44] in rural Western Colorado less than a quarter mile from
[2:10:47] a canal. And my grandfather was a ditch writer and
[2:10:52] a sugar beet farmer in Morgan County. And I, I
[2:10:56] know what those structures do, but I think that presentation
[2:10:59] should be blasted everywhere. Um, I'm really struck by, um,
[2:11:06] there's a layer of conservation and efficiency that the county
[2:11:12] has done for ag tenants and for better for worse.
[2:11:16] I think we're at the point of looking at the
[2:11:18] next layer. And I think it's really interesting. I can't
[2:11:23] remember which one of you ended on the note of
[2:11:26] talking about flood fire trout. And I think that this
[2:11:30] is part of climate resilience and that we are just
[2:11:34] going to have to continue, continuously be cycling on our
[2:11:39] natural disasters, our unnatural disasters. Because some sentiment that I've
[2:11:45] seen out there is, you know, hopefully next year won't
[2:11:50] be another, another dry year. But there's going to be,
[2:11:55] um, more dry years. And I think that, um, what's
[2:12:01] coming is expensive. It is going to be expensive. And,
[2:12:05] and I am really, I was, I really appreciate that
[2:12:09] you talked about shrinkage and that you talked about Evapotranspiration
[2:12:13] and losses there. And I think that there's all this
[2:12:17] tension with, um, the water losses and the efficiencies and
[2:12:22] the crops and the relationships with the farmers. And I
[2:12:25] think that I'm just curious about like the next, what's,
[2:12:33] what's next on the frontier after center pivots and some
[2:12:38] of the other efficiency measures that have been talked about,
[2:12:42] um, previous, um, post - AC meetings, um, community partnerships,
[2:12:50] um, I think the idea of an intergovernmental, um, agreement
[2:12:56] or some flexibility with municipalities and farmers in drought years.
[2:13:01] Like that's something that has to be planned well in
[2:13:04] advance. You don't do it. Um, on the fly, uh,
[2:13:08] in a drought year, um, moving shares, um, being creative
[2:13:13] about storage, um, and I'm also curious, uh, along with
[2:13:19] Joan about, um, having some policies that with some flexibility
[2:13:24] and the laces in these years, because I just, I
[2:13:27] think about the attrition of farmers. And that's another factor
[2:13:32] in this. It's another thing that we have to plan
[2:13:35] for is to try to stem, um, that. And I'm
[2:13:39] just, um, I'm curious about your comments about any of
[2:13:43] that. Yeah. I can speak to that. Um, so we
[2:13:47] are, as everything you said, I agree with completely. And,
[2:13:52] um, we are developing a tool in terms of how
[2:13:56] we're managing our water for our parks and open space
[2:14:00] properties. Um, we are developing a tool so that we
[2:14:04] can understand where our water is going, how it can
[2:14:08] best serve. That farm. And then also, okay, can we,
[2:14:14] does that farm have too much water, too little water?
[2:14:18] Can we move that water around? And you mentioned different
[2:14:20] shares under a ditch. So, you know, can we move
[2:14:24] water historically on one property to another property that served
[2:14:28] by that same ditch? So that we can, you know,
[2:14:31] be more efficient with our water. So we are developing
[2:14:34] a tool internally now so that we can better manage
[2:14:38] our water. And I think we were speaking for the
[2:14:40] meeting about kind of the infancy of our, of our
[2:14:43] program is over. And now we're kind of in the,
[2:14:46] we're done buying things. Now we're managing things. And that's
[2:14:50] what brought about this tool is that we need to
[2:14:52] be able to manage our water. Um, we have a
[2:14:55] couple of years ago included flexibility, uh, flexible language in
[2:14:59] the leases so that, you know, if, uh, if a
[2:15:03] farmer doesn't want their water for some reason, they have
[2:15:06] other water sources. They, you know, they, they don't need
[2:15:10] it on a certain part of the farm because there's
[2:15:13] work being done, whatever the reason. Um, that farmer could
[2:15:17] say, well, yeah, you could use my water on another
[2:15:19] lease. So we wanted to have that flexibility to the,
[2:15:23] again, use every drop of water, the county owns, um,
[2:15:27] on our agricultural open spaces. So that's for me, that's
[2:15:31] the goal of this whole program. I just want to
[2:15:36] speak briefly to sort of, the system relies on gravity.
[2:15:43] You know, it's an imperfect system that relies on gravity
[2:15:45] and it's 150 years old, the whole thing, all of
[2:15:48] it. So I think there are efforts and ideas and
[2:15:54] people doing it in other places in Colorado where they're
[2:15:57] really upgrading the systems with like automatic head gates and
[2:16:01] things are piped. And it's like, it's even more efficient.
[2:16:03] Those things are out there and they're possible. And they're
[2:16:07] really, really, really expensive. They also have drawbacks. Like when
[2:16:12] you pipe a ditch, the trees do die, the habitat
[2:16:14] goes away, you know, so there's pros and cons to
[2:16:17] efficiency as well. But those conversations are happening because as
[2:16:22] you all know in the West, like water is life
[2:16:25] and the so much of it. So we just have
[2:16:27] to balance the cost and the return with larger scale
[2:16:32] projects like that. And we don't control everything. Like we
[2:16:36] are members on ditch boards, but the ditch companies truly
[2:16:39] are the ones who make the decisions. Yeah. And, you
[2:16:42] know, currently we, the county spends about 500, 000 dollars
[2:16:45] a year on annual assessments to ditch companies. Those assessments
[2:16:49] go to operating and maintaining the ditch. So our wildfire
[2:16:53] mitigation program is another layer of, uh, contribution that the
[2:16:58] county makes, um, to those ditches operating. And then also
[2:17:03] I think just our program itself, the existence of it
[2:17:07] promotes and keeps agriculture and vulner county. You know, we
[2:17:11] have the ability to put water on the land, which
[2:17:15] is serving the downstream land as well through sub -
[2:17:19] irrigated alfalfa and things like that. It's keeping a moist
[2:17:23] soil. This oil moisture reservoir. So it's, um, it's, um,
[2:17:26] our program, I think has those more intangible benefits to
[2:17:30] it. Um, to the community as well. But it's kind
[2:17:34] of goes unseen, I think. John. John, right, Pozak, um,
[2:17:43] I'm going to use a specific example, not because I
[2:17:48] want the answer to this, um, by our house is
[2:17:52] a good hue ditch goes by our house. And, uh,
[2:17:55] right next to us is seventh generation farms, which I
[2:17:58] assume has really senior water rights. But there hadn't been
[2:18:02] a drop water. Now good few ditch goes all the
[2:18:06] way to Eldorado Springs, I guess. Does that mean all
[2:18:12] the farmers on that ditch said they're not going to
[2:18:15] plan anything this year? Or is it because the ditch
[2:18:18] has not been assigned any water? Um, how does that
[2:18:22] work? Yeah. Well, this is part of the 37 boards
[2:18:26] that we sit on. I'm the vice president of the
[2:18:28] good huge ditch. Okay. So I'm schizophrenic often because I
[2:18:32] have to either represent the county or the ditch company.
[2:18:35] Um, but so in this case, I'll speak from the
[2:18:37] ditch company, um, we, we weren't in priority this year
[2:18:42] to be able to call for our water rights. So
[2:18:45] the, the ditch is a more junior right, which is
[2:18:48] still a very senior right and a typical year. But
[2:18:51] this year it was junior enough to where we weren't
[2:18:54] able to divert. So, um, if you had, if you
[2:18:58] were a shareholder of good heat ditch water rights, uh,
[2:19:01] you didn't get water. And if you had a farmer.
[2:19:06] Yeah. Yeah. Well, it's, it's yeah, it's not up to
[2:19:08] the farmer. It's that, that ditch wasn't in priority. It
[2:19:12] wasn't senior enough. And therefore didn't take water right next
[2:19:15] door could be the Davidson ditch running that's able to
[2:19:19] gravity feed the land below that ditch, which is the
[2:19:22] above the good hue ditch. And so you might see
[2:19:25] a farm that has some irrigated agriculture and crop growth,
[2:19:31] um, right next to a farm that does it. And
[2:19:33] it could be because of the priority of those two
[2:19:35] ditches that run parallel to each other. Thank you. Yep.
[2:19:41] Anybody else. Postec? Uh, Jeff, do you have any comments
[2:19:45] or questions. Uh, no. Yeah. Thank you. Thanks for asking,
[2:19:50] Trace. Um, really informative presentation. Thank you all for giving
[2:19:55] it. Okay. Well, Darren and Vanessa, thank you so much.
[2:20:00] Thank you. It was awesome. Thank you. Thank. So, um,
[2:20:10] I think Liana has a finding on our, uh, question
[2:20:16] about, uh, straw polls. Yeah. This is Liana Larimore, Assistant
[2:20:25] County Attorney. In order for me to answer properly answer
[2:20:29] your question regarding whether POSAC can make a recommendation or
[2:20:32] do a straw man poll on an informational agenda item.
[2:20:36] I'm going to recommend that we go into an executive
[2:20:38] session pursuant to CRS 24 - 6 - 402 -
[2:20:43] 4B for legal advice. If you're interested in doing this,
[2:20:47] um, you would need to make a motion, have a
[2:20:49] second, and then have a two - thirds vote in
[2:20:51] favor. Motion to do that. Go into executive session. Nick,
[2:21:00] is it technically feasible to have an executive session. It's
[2:21:07] a great question. We've never done one while I've been
[2:21:10] in control room here. Um, we're also running up to
[2:21:12] our 8 p. m. ending time. So I don't know
[2:21:18] how the timing would work. Okay. So let's table this
[2:21:21] one. And perhaps have an executive session for next year's
[2:21:27] retreat. Presuming the question doesn't come up again. Sorry. Next
[2:21:32] year next year. Oh. Okay. Or next or next session
[2:21:36] I would recommend. Cause I would like to know the
[2:21:38] answer. Well, maybe Nick can figure out, uh, technically what
[2:21:44] we would have to do for an executive session given
[2:21:47] that we're, um, broadcasting this or streaming it. Yeah. So
[2:21:52] executive sessions are done in private between the board and
[2:21:56] its attorney. And so typically when I do this with
[2:21:59] other boards, we go into another room. And if we
[2:22:01] have a virtual number, we call them in. So I
[2:22:03] think that at next meeting we could certainly figure out
[2:22:06] a way to make that happen. Okay. Great. Well, thank
[2:22:08] you. Let's put it on the agenda then. Cause I
[2:22:11] don't think I should wait for a year. Yeah. Okay.
[2:22:15] Great. Okay. Thank you very much. Very much. Jason Sook,
[2:22:20] Director's Update. Troublemaker. Well, we've got limited time. I just
[2:22:27] wanted to say first, um, thanks so much to our
[2:22:30] team was presented tonight. You know, since I've been here,
[2:22:33] I'm feeling incredibly fortunate to work alongside such talented staff.
[2:22:37] People have such deep knowledge and passion on these issues
[2:22:40] from research to patrols to, you know, ag ditches, you
[2:22:44] know, the whole gamut, just strong team. And thank you
[2:22:46] all so much. Um, and also thank you all for
[2:22:49] being here. You know, it's Thursday night. You don't have
[2:22:51] to be. And I appreciate your commitment and really great
[2:22:55] questions insightful advice and good perspective. And just fortunate again
[2:23:00] to work with you all. Um, super quick, not only
[2:23:04] are we running up on time, we've got US men's
[2:23:07] World Cup game here coming up tonight. So we, you
[2:23:09] know, we really, we really got to focus. But just
[2:23:12] a couple of things I wanted to highlight. Um, one
[2:23:14] on the ag side, uh, we have soil health grantees.
[2:23:17] Um, all of those grantees have now received their first
[2:23:20] half of their funding. So they're often running. There are
[2:23:22] staff are conducting field visits to see how the practices
[2:23:25] and those soil health grants are being supported. And, um,
[2:23:29] you know, think about how we can monitor the work
[2:23:31] and then process the second half and final payments for
[2:23:34] those leaseholders. Um, we celebrated national trails day on June
[2:23:38] 6th with a share of the trails trailhead event that
[2:23:41] brought out more than 200 people. Another example of how
[2:23:43] we're kind of trying to get that message out on
[2:23:45] how we can share the trails and, you know, think
[2:23:47] about how we can all use those, uh, incredible resources,
[2:23:51] um, in a way that the accommodates everyone. June is
[2:23:55] festival season. We're in full swing. Uh, we've got Parks
[2:23:59] and OpenSpace representing at Longmont Pride Boulder Pride and Juneteenth.
[2:24:04] And that's been a fantastic time to engage. And it's
[2:24:07] wonderful to see all these flags here on the window
[2:24:09] as well, I'll say. The youth core, we are officially
[2:24:16] underway. I think we're two weeks into it now. Got
[2:24:19] a fantastic group this year. It's supported by a 50
[2:24:22] percent return rate among leaders and core members. I think
[2:24:25] that's a good indication of, you know, whether or not
[2:24:27] they liked it. And, uh, giving us great confidence and
[2:24:30] a really safe and very successful season. In total, we
[2:24:33] have 105 core members, including many returners along with 27
[2:24:37] staff and leaders. And we've partnered with more than 30
[2:24:40] sponsors across all our different work groups inside Parkstape Open
[2:24:44] space. Five municipalities in the play foundation and city of
[2:24:48] Boulder Oscar. And those teams are out right now across
[2:24:51] the county working on trails. Forestry and fire mitigation, resource
[2:24:55] management, historic preservation, weed management, much more. And they'll have
[2:24:59] a lot of opportunities throughout the season for experiential education,
[2:25:03] team building sessions, which is pretty interesting sort of how
[2:25:05] do we think about each other in relation to nature
[2:25:09] and, you know, pretty interesting stuff. So I'm very proud
[2:25:11] of that. District planning. Last month I spoke about district
[2:25:15] level planning. Kind of a conceptual idea, uh, on broader
[2:25:20] landscape management. And, um, will, uh, last month we discussed
[2:25:25] this concept with the Board A County Commissioners. And we're
[2:25:27] going to have a follow up work session with the
[2:25:29] Border County Commissioners on July 21st to continue that discussion.
[2:25:33] And what we're planning to do with this overall concept
[2:25:36] is to move toward an approach to helps us shift
[2:25:39] from Reactive parcel by parcel planning to a more proactive,
[2:25:43] predictable and resilience system that's kind of built around six
[2:25:46] different ecologically, meaningful districts and areas. And, um, you know,
[2:25:52] we want to engage communities, test new methods and improve
[2:25:55] our internal workflows. And, um, you know, not only just
[2:25:58] bring thousands of unplanned acres under management, but also incorporate
[2:26:02] those that have already been under management into, you know,
[2:26:05] more cohesive regional plan. And yeah, so we're looking for
[2:26:09] that conversation. We'll keep you posted and keep you updated
[2:26:12] as appropriate and look forward to engaging as we further
[2:26:16] develop this idea to, you know, more of a conceptual
[2:26:20] plan. Prayer, Iran. I think we talked a little bit
[2:26:22] about that just when we walked in. You had good
[2:26:25] questions last time. We anticipate the opening, the Southwest portion
[2:26:29] of Prairie run in the fall. One of the final
[2:26:32] pieces is the restroom facility. And that was scheduled to
[2:26:35] begin construction recently. Um, but work was paused due to
[2:26:39] an active kill deer nest within the buffer area at
[2:26:41] the 109th Trailhead. So we expect the eggs to hatch
[2:26:45] and then the chicks to fledge any day. And once
[2:26:47] they've safely moved on, then construction will resume and we'll
[2:26:50] continue moving on forward. But, um, so look into the
[2:26:53] fall. And we'll keep it, we'll, we'll think about it.
[2:26:57] But I think it was a good suggestion about a
[2:26:59] potential retreat idea there, which I think would be lovely.
[2:27:03] And, uh, I guess that's it for me for now.
[2:27:05] Um, again, just, uh, feeling fortunate to continue kind of
[2:27:09] learning, develop, um, you know, good ideas and continue thinking
[2:27:13] about, I think, uh, you know, a vision moving forward
[2:27:16] where we can, you know, tackle these kind of dynamic
[2:27:19] challenges. You know, we're seeing real - time climate change,
[2:27:22] like you mentioned Christine. You know, what are we doing
[2:27:25] about that? Um, how can we do things a little
[2:27:27] bit differently to anticipate, you know, to incorporate kind of
[2:27:32] this, this, you know, brave new world we're in to
[2:27:35] serve the County the best that we can. Um, and
[2:27:37] I thought the water management is a good example of
[2:27:39] that. I think that example extends to, you know, across
[2:27:42] our, our department and many work groups, um, look forward
[2:27:44] to, um, that level of planning and engaging with you
[2:27:47] all as we, um, think about those big ideas moving
[2:27:50] forward. Thanks so much. Thank you, Jason. Respecting the World
[2:27:54] Cup any questions or comments for Jason. Done. Um, John
[2:27:59] White Pozak, what's a soil grant? You started off talking
[2:28:03] about those. Yeah, absolutely. And Vanessa can correct me if
[2:28:06] I've gone astray here, but we have a program that,
[2:28:09] um, provides small grants to, um, leaseholders that are testing
[2:28:13] soil practices for, uh, improving soil health on their land.
[2:28:17] So a lot of these are, um, interesting ways of,
[2:28:21] of using compost, um, just testing kind of new ideas
[2:28:25] on, uh, improving soil health to improve productivity and yields
[2:28:30] in a, uh, you know, I think a sustainable fashion.
[2:28:33] I get that one right, Vanessa? Oh, good. Good news.
[2:28:36] Uh, Jeff fought any, uh, questions or comments. You have
[2:28:39] one minute. Got a lot. So let me try to
[2:28:47] cram it all in. No, that's, I'm good. Thank you
[2:28:49] for asking, Trace. I appreciate it. Okay. Thank you. Well
[2:28:53] in that case, we are adjourned.