1
00:00:01,550 --> 00:00:05,070
We call implementing committee meeting to order

2
00:00:07,950 --> 00:00:10,450
at 11, 18.

3
00:00:15,400 --> 00:00:17,920
With that, if we could conduct roll call.

4
00:00:22,620 --> 00:00:25,040
I'm here for the City of San Marcos.

5
00:00:28,080 --> 00:00:28,280
Rowland.

6
00:00:28,280 --> 00:00:38,740
here for EAA and and new brothels is represented day by Amy Niles Amy Niles

7
00:00:44,630 --> 00:00:45,730
and

8
00:00:45,730 --> 00:00:55,500
Patrick Schraper for Donovan Burton for Salis Donovan Stinson and we are lacking

9
00:00:58,340 --> 00:01:04,120
membership from Texas State this this morning so we will not have them present for

10
00:01:04,120 --> 00:01:10,260
today's meeting. And unfortunately, the alternate was unable to attend also. So we're sure to

11
00:01:10,260 --> 00:01:16,100
quorum that we can still, you know, get information and receive reports and discuss items,

12
00:01:16,480 --> 00:01:22,540
we just won't be able to take formal votes because of the quorum or requirement in the rules.

13
00:01:26,660 --> 00:01:31,580
So with that, do we have any public comment, David? No, sir. At this point, we have no comments

14
00:01:31,580 --> 00:01:32,160
on the public.

15
00:01:35,690 --> 00:01:37,790
So with that, we'll move on to the

16
00:01:37,790 --> 00:01:39,630
hydrologic update from Chad.

17
00:01:44,700 --> 00:01:46,660
And you folks have any questions regarding

18
00:01:46,660 --> 00:01:51,220
hydrologic update. I noticed everyone was here for the stakeholder committee meeting will use this

19
00:01:51,220 --> 00:01:52,580
I now if there's any questions.

20
00:01:56,200 --> 00:01:59,900
Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you very much and

21
00:01:59,900 --> 00:02:01,940
appreciated your presentation earlier.

22
00:02:07,060 --> 00:02:09,440
So EACP program announcements,

23
00:02:09,440 --> 00:02:10,600
So I

24
00:02:14,310 --> 00:02:18,940
wanted to give a couple of, can you know, hear me?

25
00:02:19,760 --> 00:02:20,980
I got double buttoned this.

26
00:02:22,000 --> 00:02:25,380
I wanted to give a couple of financial related kind of housekeeping things.

27
00:02:26,100 --> 00:02:32,920
Of course, you should have gotten the budget reports for April May in June of 2024 in your

28
00:02:32,920 --> 00:02:33,180
packet.

29
00:02:33,460 --> 00:02:39,040
So if you have any questions, let me know, or if you don't have any right now, come some

30
00:02:39,040 --> 00:02:39,740
come to my later.

31
00:02:39,940 --> 00:02:43,200
Just let me know and send me an email, those for you.

32
00:02:43,840 --> 00:02:51,460
And also for the budget work group, we have scheduled that that will be held here at the EA office on August 28th from 10 a.m. to noon.

33
00:02:52,040 --> 00:03:01,540
So that'll be available obviously on teams as well for those who can attend in person, but again it will be here just here in the conference room to your right to your left.

34
00:03:02,020 --> 00:03:08,320
And again, the agenda will be available a week prior on August 20th. So that will be sent out to all and on our list service.

35
00:03:08,320 --> 00:03:08,560
Well,

36
00:03:12,580 --> 00:03:14,040
thank you. Any questions for David?

37
00:03:16,680 --> 00:03:17,140
Thank you, David.

38
00:03:24,350 --> 00:03:24,970
I'm up.

39
00:03:27,440 --> 00:03:34,780
So we would like to introduce the EHCP intern for this summer and fall.

40
00:03:34,820 --> 00:03:35,840
Some messers.

41
00:03:36,100 --> 00:03:37,680
Her name is Sarah Garcia.

42
00:03:38,460 --> 00:03:39,760
Give us a wave, Sarah.

43
00:03:39,980 --> 00:03:40,540
Thank you.

44
00:03:40,960 --> 00:03:44,260
She is a student at the University of Texas at San Antonio.

45
00:03:44,660 --> 00:03:48,320
She's studying for her bachelor's of arts and environmental studies.

46
00:03:48,320 --> 00:03:51,860
and her expected graduation is in fall 2025.

47
00:03:52,660 --> 00:03:56,820
So she's been a wonderful asset to our program and staff

48
00:03:56,820 --> 00:03:59,900
and she's been diligently taking notes

49
00:03:59,900 --> 00:04:02,880
for all of our exciting conservation measures,

50
00:04:02,880 --> 00:04:03,980
subcommittee meetings.

51
00:04:05,080 --> 00:04:07,400
So we look forward to having her for the rest of the summer

52
00:04:07,400 --> 00:04:11,760
and getting her more into some GIS components

53
00:04:11,760 --> 00:04:17,040
of the HCPE and other HCP world activities.

54
00:04:17,040 --> 00:04:18,560
so welcome Sarah.

55
00:04:21,500 --> 00:04:26,500
Next I would like to remind the implementing committee and everybody that we have a

56
00:04:26,500 --> 00:04:35,020
national HCP coalition coming up is actually the 10th annual meeting. So please join us for that.

57
00:04:35,060 --> 00:04:41,860
It will be in December 10th through the 12th and Margaritaville Resort Palm Springs, California.

58
00:04:42,540 --> 00:04:52,440
So if you have any questions about that, please email me or go to the nafcpcollision.org website for more information.

59
00:04:52,740 --> 00:04:59,060
I would like to announce that abstracts for this to attend this conference are open today.

60
00:05:02,080 --> 00:05:09,540
So please, excuse me an email if you have any questions or if you need extra time to submit those

61
00:05:09,540 --> 00:05:15,280
abstracts and I can see if we can work that in. But yes, if you have any questions about

62
00:05:15,280 --> 00:05:23,480
attendance event, it's going to be highly attended. There's several topics that I think are very specific to this program,

63
00:05:23,480 --> 00:05:26,380
for example, recreation on conservation lands.

64
00:05:27,220 --> 00:05:29,620
So that should be very interesting to hear from

65
00:05:29,620 --> 00:05:32,880
what other ACPs are doing to combat that issue.

66
00:05:38,640 --> 00:05:39,280
All right, thank you, Olivia.

67
00:05:39,680 --> 00:05:42,860
So we wanted to let the implementing committee know

68
00:05:42,860 --> 00:05:46,400
that our very own Edwards Aquifer Refugia program,

69
00:05:46,480 --> 00:05:49,200
the EARP with the US Fish and Wildlife,

70
00:05:50,080 --> 00:05:53,860
won the 2023 Southwest Region Team of the Year Award.

71
00:05:54,320 --> 00:05:55,840
So they were able to travel up there.

72
00:05:55,940 --> 00:05:57,900
I believe in May to receive that award.

73
00:05:57,900 --> 00:05:59,160
It was quite an honor.

74
00:06:00,200 --> 00:06:04,060
This went to the entire Refugia program, both in New Valley and Sam Marcus.

75
00:06:04,300 --> 00:06:09,020
So we wanted to have a few of them by at the year in meeting when we have all three committees

76
00:06:09,020 --> 00:06:14,360
present, so we can congratulate them then, they'll be presenting some of the work from this

77
00:06:14,360 --> 00:06:14,820
last year.

78
00:06:15,260 --> 00:06:19,020
And we're going to run a steward news story on them, so we've been doing interviews and what

79
00:06:19,020 --> 00:06:19,520
not.

80
00:06:19,740 --> 00:06:20,980
But this is quite an honor.

81
00:06:21,280 --> 00:06:25,040
As I understand it, there's many applications from across the region each year.

82
00:06:25,040 --> 00:06:28,420
and they were able to come away victorious this year.

83
00:06:28,940 --> 00:06:34,020
So, look for that story to run sometime in July or August in the steward newsletter,

84
00:06:34,860 --> 00:06:38,800
and make sure to congratulate this group when we have members by at our year-in meetings.

85
00:06:40,060 --> 00:06:43,200
And I believe that wraps it up for the program announcements, and we're going to move to

86
00:06:44,160 --> 00:06:47,880
new brothels. They're saying markers first. Let's make it a surprise.

87
00:06:48,800 --> 00:06:49,300
They're brothels.

88
00:06:49,520 --> 00:06:50,580
I think it's new brothels.

89
00:06:51,380 --> 00:06:52,060
Thank you, Chad.

90
00:06:52,060 --> 00:06:53,480
Yes, go ahead.

91
00:06:53,700 --> 00:06:54,540
And Sarah, welcome.

92
00:07:01,400 --> 00:07:02,300
Great, thank you.

93
00:07:02,620 --> 00:07:03,140
I'm

94
00:07:06,470 --> 00:07:10,990
going to provide a quick update for New Bromvis today.

95
00:07:14,220 --> 00:07:19,380
As the picture shown earlier, indicated, the spring runs in land

96
00:07:19,380 --> 00:07:21,320
apart there, and for the command spring system

97
00:07:21,320 --> 00:07:23,540
are pretty dry right now.

98
00:07:23,940 --> 00:07:28,680
This one has no surface flow present as of July 22nd.

99
00:07:28,780 --> 00:07:31,120
And then spring run three, as you can see from the pictures

100
00:07:31,120 --> 00:07:32,960
and one shared earlier, it was running

101
00:07:32,960 --> 00:07:36,720
about at 6 to 7 CFS currently.

102
00:07:39,850 --> 00:07:41,750
Quick updates on the programming.

103
00:07:42,870 --> 00:07:47,150
The merge aquatic vegetation, restoration activities are moving along.

104
00:07:47,190 --> 00:07:50,530
A lot of maintenance and upkeep happening right now due to condition M.

105
00:07:50,690 --> 00:07:57,270
There isn't any new areas being worked on or garden riparian restoration is continuing along

106
00:07:57,270 --> 00:07:59,050
just as planned.

107
00:07:59,050 --> 00:08:11,690
And then you can see the annual or year to date species removal stats for an Africa to update that it should read June 2024.

108
00:08:18,050 --> 00:08:32,790
As far as this biofiltration system that's being designed at the moment, currently we're doing some extra work with Amatera to perform archaeological surveys that are additional archaeological surveys that are required

109
00:08:32,790 --> 00:08:40,790
for additional excavation space to be allowed for the bio filtration bed that is planned

110
00:08:40,790 --> 00:08:46,930
to those activities are planned to occur later this month or at the beginning of next month

111
00:08:46,930 --> 00:08:53,810
I should say and I should have a better plan of action by the next meeting if you guys

112
00:08:53,810 --> 00:08:55,630
on this project here.

113
00:08:57,420 --> 00:09:01,340
Lastly, I wanted to plug our annual watershed cleanup.

114
00:09:01,340 --> 00:09:05,720
the ATANUAL DOES REO SWATTER SHED CLINUP on the side of the screen there. You can see

115
00:09:07,820 --> 00:09:15,260
right here. This is Snake Peak at this year's logo for the event. To citywide annual river

116
00:09:15,260 --> 00:09:22,000
watershed cleanup this year will be held on excuse me October 12th the headquarters for the event will

117
00:09:22,000 --> 00:09:27,120
be at Prince Som's Park. Generally we have it at the headwaters facility but since they're doing

118
00:09:27,120 --> 00:09:32,950
going major construction there at the M.B.U. Headwaters facility we're going to hold it on

119
00:09:33,560 --> 00:09:38,080
City property at Prince Hans Park and it's a rain or shine event. So mark a calendar.

120
00:09:40,970 --> 00:09:41,410
Any questions?

121
00:09:45,390 --> 00:09:47,910
Thank you. Thank you.

122
00:09:51,130 --> 00:09:51,130
Thank you.

123
00:09:51,510 --> 00:09:57,080
And Mark Anderson will be presenting the update for the City of San Marcos and Texas State.

124
00:10:00,400 --> 00:10:07,080
I just wanted to provide a just an overview of some of the ongoing conservation measure work, and the same markets river system.

125
00:10:08,440 --> 00:10:14,900
With respect to aquatic veg restoration, we're continuing to move forward with this as we usually do every year.

126
00:10:15,500 --> 00:10:21,640
Our focus with this measure again is a lot of effort on controlling non-native species in the river system.

127
00:10:21,640 --> 00:10:28,080
You know, watercress, water spread, hydrolla, and hygrophila, you know, mainly to minimize impacts

128
00:10:28,080 --> 00:10:32,880
to a lot of the native vegetation and Texas wild rise that we're trying to protect and

129
00:10:32,880 --> 00:10:36,400
just trying to limit the expansion and proliferation of those non-natives of a chicken

130
00:10:36,400 --> 00:10:38,640
cause negative impacts to the native species.

131
00:10:39,660 --> 00:10:41,580
We're trying to protect our founder Habitat.

132
00:10:42,720 --> 00:10:47,800
We've done a fair amount of bulk removal this year, bulk non-native removal, primarily downstream

133
00:10:47,800 --> 00:10:53,960
of I-35 in Cape Stam, a lot of that was funded through the Texas Parks and Wildlife

134
00:10:53,960 --> 00:10:56,940
Habitat Inglar Access Program.

135
00:10:57,580 --> 00:11:02,500
I'm so grateful for that grant to kind of move efforts forward outside of the HCP to

136
00:11:02,500 --> 00:11:04,380
complement what we're doing through the HCP.

137
00:11:05,100 --> 00:11:10,500
We've also done a fair amount of planting of native SAV, aquatic vegetation primarily

138
00:11:10,500 --> 00:11:16,980
Cabamba in La Duigia, in the Sam Marcus River, again to expand the available quality

139
00:11:16,980 --> 00:11:19,220
fountain daughter habitat in the river system.

140
00:11:19,900 --> 00:11:25,200
To date, it planted close to 6,000 native plants in the river system.

141
00:11:25,680 --> 00:11:30,820
About half of that was done through the HCP, half of it was done through the TPWD

142
00:11:30,820 --> 00:11:32,000
HAP grant program.

143
00:11:33,820 --> 00:11:39,940
As of June 27th, flows in the Sam Marcus River system did decrease below 120 CFS, which

144
00:11:39,940 --> 00:11:48,280
put us under condition and restrictions, so a lot of the measures that are a little more intensive

145
00:11:48,280 --> 00:11:53,340
as far as bulk removal of non-native species and planting of natives has been basically

146
00:11:53,340 --> 00:11:58,200
suspended until flows do increase back above 120, which hopefully this rain that we

147
00:11:58,200 --> 00:12:03,640
got will kind of will see some increases in spring flow at Sam Marcus, so we can continue

148
00:12:03,640 --> 00:12:07,660
a lot of these measures that have really been limited in the last couple of years with low

149
00:12:07,660 --> 00:12:11,300
is being under condition and for an extended period of time.

150
00:12:13,600 --> 00:12:18,880
With respect to litter management, definitely this river season is no different than past river seasons.

151
00:12:19,100 --> 00:12:25,280
We have pretty heavy recreational pressure on the river system, which in itself brings litter to our rivers.

152
00:12:27,060 --> 00:12:32,180
I would say there's just a huge effort to manage litter in the same market river system.

153
00:12:32,680 --> 00:12:38,380
Whether that be city staff or city contractors picking up litter within our riverfront parks.

154
00:12:38,380 --> 00:12:43,660
or, you know, our HCP contractor that does, you know, in-channel, you know, picking up

155
00:12:43,660 --> 00:12:48,520
glitter from the, you know, better the river or from the banks, just again a huge effort

156
00:12:48,520 --> 00:12:54,280
to try to combat the amount of litter that does end up, you know, in the waterway and on the banks of the river.

157
00:12:55,520 --> 00:13:02,060
I think I've informed this group previously, but the city council has passed a disposable beverage container ban,

158
00:13:02,160 --> 00:13:07,300
that prohibits having disposable beverage containers immediately along the banks of the river.

159
00:13:07,300 --> 00:13:35,460
This is the first year of that ordinance, which is, you know, we're focusing on education this year, I will say it's been slow to get that message out to the, you know, the folks who are visiting the river, especially folks from out of town, who this is, you know, brand new ordinance, you know, they've been coming to the river saver 20 years, you know, as an example, and this is the first year that they've had this restriction, so again, the push this year has just been to try to educate river users that this ordinance is in place next year.

160
00:13:35,460 --> 00:13:37,680
we'll kind of step up enforcement, hopefully.

161
00:13:37,820 --> 00:13:39,620
Hopefully we can get more staff on board,

162
00:13:39,800 --> 00:13:41,220
park arrangers, city marshals

163
00:13:41,220 --> 00:13:44,760
to help enforce this ordinance, gain a little more compliance,

164
00:13:45,100 --> 00:13:46,240
once folks are educated,

165
00:13:46,300 --> 00:13:48,140
and we'll continue on with our education campaign

166
00:13:48,140 --> 00:13:49,220
to get the word out.

167
00:13:50,480 --> 00:13:52,500
I'd like to say it is having a positive effect.

168
00:13:52,680 --> 00:13:54,040
It's hard to tell at this point,

169
00:13:54,120 --> 00:13:55,320
because we're still seeing a lot of litter,

170
00:13:57,440 --> 00:13:59,860
but really it's you'd be expected this ordinance will take time

171
00:13:59,860 --> 00:14:01,960
to really get the message out to River users.

172
00:14:03,280 --> 00:14:05,180
I'd certainly want to give a shout out

173
00:14:05,180 --> 00:14:10,740
all the volunteer groups and all the volunteers who come out time after time to help manage

174
00:14:10,740 --> 00:14:15,560
the litter on the river system. So for instance, over the 4th of July week and we had

175
00:14:15,560 --> 00:14:21,320
several nonprofits and volunteer groups come out to the river, you know, on their Friday Saturday

176
00:14:21,320 --> 00:14:25,420
Sunday mornings throughout the 4th of July holiday, you know, getting out there at 8 o'clock on

177
00:14:25,420 --> 00:14:31,760
your weekend to help pick up litter after a busy, you know, day on the river. So, you know, that effort

178
00:14:31,760 --> 00:14:35,100
as well as every teen recurring Monday morning,

179
00:14:35,340 --> 00:14:36,420
letter cleanup effort.

180
00:14:36,840 --> 00:14:38,320
So volunteers are showing up Monday mornings

181
00:14:38,320 --> 00:14:42,040
to start picking up litter that has been left over

182
00:14:42,040 --> 00:14:43,120
as a result of the weekend.

183
00:14:44,760 --> 00:14:47,520
So while it is discouraging to continue to see

184
00:14:47,520 --> 00:14:49,680
litter left behind by river users,

185
00:14:50,000 --> 00:14:51,560
there's just a huge effort out there.

186
00:14:51,720 --> 00:14:55,180
And I think it is really helping to keep our river clean.

187
00:14:55,460 --> 00:14:57,060
After a lot of this cleanup is done,

188
00:14:58,120 --> 00:14:59,720
there's still litter accumulations out there.

189
00:15:00,680 --> 00:15:08,380
With the pressure and the amount of visitors and what do we have in the river, these efforts really are, I think, combating the amount of litter that does end up in the river.

190
00:15:10,780 --> 00:15:22,200
Again, mention this again, I think I presented the IC a couple of meetings ago on how river recreation is being managed to minimize impacts to endangered species habitat in the river.

191
00:15:22,200 --> 00:15:29,000
I'll go over that again real quick, but again, we have a HP conservation crew, it's 10-12

192
00:15:29,560 --> 00:15:34,100
part-time staffers that are basically patrolling up and down the river, educating river users on

193
00:15:34,100 --> 00:15:39,960
park rules about the endangered species we're trying to protect, so just trying to educate river users

194
00:15:41,080 --> 00:15:45,060
to have a good conservation effort in good stewardship of the river.

195
00:15:45,060 --> 00:15:52,180
So, letter management, I mentioned that, again, probably our most effective habitat protection

196
00:15:52,180 --> 00:15:56,520
measure and recreational management measure in my opinion is this river access control where

197
00:15:56,520 --> 00:16:02,060
we basically have stabilized access points where folks can access the river in between those

198
00:16:02,060 --> 00:16:02,880
access points.

199
00:16:03,180 --> 00:16:06,800
You know, we essentially have fencing that prohibits access to a good portion of the river.

200
00:16:06,940 --> 00:16:10,920
And that's both on Texas State property and throughout city riverfront parks.

201
00:16:10,920 --> 00:16:17,960
So just a huge, a huge measure that is very effective on one protecting kind of the riparian

202
00:16:17,960 --> 00:16:22,440
vegetation, but also, you know, anywhere people are accessing, there's habitat degradation

203
00:16:22,440 --> 00:16:26,320
of the aquatic vegetation and the fountain-dartar habitat, you know, in stream that we're

204
00:16:26,320 --> 00:16:27,640
protecting through this measure.

205
00:16:29,060 --> 00:16:34,520
Last but not least, the PPWD State Scientific Area Exclosures.

206
00:16:35,240 --> 00:16:39,820
So again, these are buoys that are put, you know, around stands of Texas wild rise in aquatic

207
00:16:39,820 --> 00:16:45,540
vegetation to basically prevent or limit access into certain areas that we're trying to protect,

208
00:16:45,580 --> 00:16:50,200
you know, Texas walled right stands, you know, so that coupled with signage has been a fairly

209
00:16:50,200 --> 00:16:54,920
effective tool on keeping folks out of sensitive areas. And that's one measure that, you know,

210
00:16:54,920 --> 00:17:00,380
going forward in the future that we can probably grow and extend to try to protect more area.

211
00:17:02,360 --> 00:17:08,660
I did want to give an update on some signage upgrades. They're underway for Texas state properties,

212
00:17:08,660 --> 00:17:14,640
So namely, soil park and what folks refer to as the Kirby laying area or the head of water's

213
00:17:14,640 --> 00:17:18,740
area, the upper soil area, you know, it's that area, just below the spring lake dam, upstream

214
00:17:18,740 --> 00:17:20,540
of the walker in the spring drive bridge.

215
00:17:21,680 --> 00:17:26,820
So both of those parks have existing signage that does pertain to the endangered species,

216
00:17:27,740 --> 00:17:32,400
the signs on the left or the signage signs that have been in place for some time.

217
00:17:33,700 --> 00:17:38,200
I think the messages on the signs that are existing are still pertinent, but they're just

218
00:17:38,200 --> 00:17:42,060
out of date. They don't really pop. It's just some text, you know, some of the photos are

219
00:17:42,060 --> 00:17:45,560
washed out. As you can see on that photo in the middle, I think that photo used to have

220
00:17:45,560 --> 00:17:50,200
a, you know, an image of Texas wilder ice. I think the sun has just beat that down. And again,

221
00:17:50,280 --> 00:17:57,580
good message on the existing signage. But we have been able to work with EAA's communications team

222
00:17:57,580 --> 00:18:02,960
in a shout out to Micah Myers, who works with Edward Zucker Authority, who was basically took the lead

223
00:18:02,960 --> 00:18:10,240
on taking input from myself from Christina Tolman and the EAHCP team as well as a couple other

224
00:18:10,240 --> 00:18:13,520
university departments and groups.

225
00:18:14,220 --> 00:18:18,040
So, took all of our input on what needed to be included in a sign.

226
00:18:18,280 --> 00:18:21,920
And basically put the other sign that you see on the right.

227
00:18:22,780 --> 00:18:23,920
Again, I think it pops a little more.

228
00:18:23,960 --> 00:18:27,100
Hopefully it catches folks' attention a little more.

229
00:18:27,440 --> 00:18:30,240
You know, the main message we wanted to convey is that this

230
00:18:30,240 --> 00:18:39,220
The endangered species that are present in areas, you know, if so apart in the upper spring run area, or I'm sorry the upper spring area.

231
00:18:40,620 --> 00:18:51,120
But then also trying to convey some messages, you know, not just our park rules like no glass, you know, no alcohol rules like that, but just specific messages that help to protect habitat.

232
00:18:51,380 --> 00:18:59,400
You know, do not disturb wildlife aquatic vegetation or remove rocks in the river, you know, all of which can impact, you know, the endangered species.

233
00:18:59,400 --> 00:19:04,020
the Texas Walderized directly or the Fountain Darden or the St. Marcus Salamander.

234
00:19:04,280 --> 00:19:08,440
So, again, we have that language there in English and Spanish and then also some icons

235
00:19:08,440 --> 00:19:11,220
that basically reiterate what the wording says.

236
00:19:11,460 --> 00:19:16,280
Try not to trample a aquatic vegetation, don't pull a aquatic vegetation out, don't make

237
00:19:16,280 --> 00:19:18,320
the rock care and so they're rotten dans in the river.

238
00:19:19,280 --> 00:19:24,580
So, trying to get this message out to river users, we've got final approval from Texas State,

239
00:19:24,580 --> 00:19:27,860
the powers to be a Texas state to install this signage,

240
00:19:28,040 --> 00:19:31,100
so we'll be working with a resort for a authority team

241
00:19:31,100 --> 00:19:33,120
in Texas state to get these signs in the ground.

242
00:19:33,740 --> 00:19:38,200
I would hope that we can have them in place by the end of August.

243
00:19:38,300 --> 00:19:42,260
I was wanting to have these in May before the recreation season

244
00:19:42,260 --> 00:19:44,640
began, but nonetheless, the process is taking some time.

245
00:19:44,840 --> 00:19:46,900
And all the better we've got a lot of input at these signs.

246
00:19:48,240 --> 00:19:49,960
And I think you would agree with me these signs,

247
00:19:50,120 --> 00:19:51,080
I think, are a good addition.

248
00:19:51,240 --> 00:19:53,460
We're looking to put five of these signs in school park,

249
00:19:53,460 --> 00:19:57,600
get all the entries into the park, and then one at the, the, at the, at the, at the head

250
00:19:57,600 --> 00:19:58,160
water area.

251
00:20:04,300 --> 00:20:06,680
One more slide here.

252
00:20:09,860 --> 00:20:37,120
All right. Last but not least, I presented on this before, but the Army Corps of Engineers has basically sponsored the Sam Marcus River aquatic ecosystem restoration project. So they've over the last couple years have been putting forth a lot of resources to remove non-native species from the banks. Really are riparian area, removing non-native species and planting native species. So as far as they're non-native removal efforts, it's been targeted towards

253
00:20:37,120 --> 00:20:41,080
of Lagustrum, Chinese, Palo, China berries, and Elefineers.

254
00:20:41,280 --> 00:20:42,120
So over the last couple years,

255
00:20:42,240 --> 00:20:43,320
they've been doing a lot of treatments

256
00:20:43,320 --> 00:20:44,760
of those non-native species.

257
00:20:46,160 --> 00:20:47,900
Primarily downstream of 35,

258
00:20:47,980 --> 00:20:51,940
where the HCP program work has not yet extended for the most part.

259
00:20:52,560 --> 00:20:55,940
And so recently, they've been doing some follow-up

260
00:20:55,940 --> 00:20:58,980
Elefineer treatment downstream of 35 in Cape Stam

261
00:20:59,520 --> 00:21:01,380
to kind of hit some still prolific stance

262
00:21:01,380 --> 00:21:03,320
of Elefineers downstream of 35.

263
00:21:04,700 --> 00:21:06,580
The work that they still have left

264
00:21:06,580 --> 00:21:11,000
includes just subsequent native planting, which they've been doing of the last couple of years,

265
00:21:11,180 --> 00:21:14,260
but they'll be doing a couple of rounds of native planting along the river banks.

266
00:21:14,820 --> 00:21:18,800
This fall and next spring, and after that it'll kind of conclude this project.

267
00:21:19,740 --> 00:21:25,100
After their finish here, through the HCP program, we aim to kind of maintain some of these areas

268
00:21:25,100 --> 00:21:27,480
that have been worked through this project.

269
00:21:31,120 --> 00:21:33,600
And that's all I have for you. Any questions on

270
00:21:33,600 --> 00:21:37,320
happenings in San Marcos. Questions from Mark?

271
00:21:39,950 --> 00:21:41,110
Seeing none. Thank you, Mark.

272
00:21:44,640 --> 00:21:47,680
So without we'll move on to approval of our meeting

273
00:21:47,680 --> 00:21:51,760
minute from the May 23rd, 24 implementing committee meeting.

274
00:21:52,580 --> 00:21:55,280
And I will need a motion for approval of those minutes.

275
00:21:57,920 --> 00:22:01,660
Given lack of quorum, can we approve minutes?

276
00:22:03,640 --> 00:22:06,960
No, we're not able to do that, I see. So

277
00:22:07,840 --> 00:22:10,520
Well, we'll punt the minutes, he's still next meeting.

278
00:22:14,650 --> 00:22:15,890
Thank you, Roland, for catching that.

279
00:22:23,340 --> 00:22:31,600
So with that, I believe we'll move on to a presentation by Lucas Bear in relation to the Spring

280
00:22:31,600 --> 00:22:34,540
Flow Simulation for the initial take assessment.

281
00:22:50,790 --> 00:22:53,490
Hello, everybody. Lucas here. Can you all hear me?

282
00:22:56,500 --> 00:22:56,800
Yes.

283
00:22:57,660 --> 00:23:00,220
Great, and the screen is up, I presume?

284
00:23:01,500 --> 00:23:02,840
Yes, we see the presentation.

285
00:23:02,840 --> 00:23:06,620
Fantastic. I'll get started then.

286
00:23:08,880 --> 00:23:15,820
So as was noted earlier last at the IC meeting in May,

287
00:23:16,620 --> 00:23:24,840
we discussed the climate modeling and Springflow projections completed and Paul vertediate

288
00:23:24,840 --> 00:23:33,220
present in those results. And then we talked about moving ahead and into the next phases of the

289
00:23:33,220 --> 00:23:41,380
permit renewal, which include starting in on the initial take assessment. So I'm going to continue with

290
00:23:41,380 --> 00:23:45,580
that information sharing in next steps today.

291
00:23:54,220 --> 00:23:57,760
Let me make sure I can get my slide to advance.

292
00:24:00,160 --> 00:24:09,460
Here we go. Okay. So in overview here what I'm going to cover, I'll briefly talk about where

293
00:24:09,460 --> 00:24:16,800
we are in the permanent renewal process. And then I'll do a recap of the temperature

294
00:24:16,800 --> 00:24:24,440
and precipitation future projections, a brief recap just to set some context here. And then

295
00:24:24,440 --> 00:24:28,580
I'll continue to talk about why the take assessment is needed for the permanent renewal

296
00:24:28,580 --> 00:24:48,820
And what the purpose of this initial take assessment is at this stage, and then I'll go into talking about considering spring flow simulations for this initial take assessment, including the consideration of the 1947 to 76 simulation and comparing that with forward simulations, and then wrap up with some next steps.

297
00:24:55,540 --> 00:24:57,880
They've already seen this earlier today.

298
00:24:58,760 --> 00:24:59,980
This is the overall...

299
00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:24,420
Schedule of the permit renewal available on the permit renewal website. And we are in the analyzing sign-off phase, where we're developing the key elements of a technical nature for the permit renewal. And this phase goes through the beginning of 2025.

300
00:25:26,340 --> 00:25:33,280
after which we'll go into the document phase where we'll actually start to prepare the renewed

301
00:25:34,840 --> 00:25:38,980
HCP and the Incental Take Perman Application that will be submitted to the U.S.

302
00:25:38,980 --> 00:25:45,700
Fish and Wildlife Service at the end of that document phase, which we anticipate to be around the end of 2025.

303
00:25:46,840 --> 00:25:53,640
And then of course there's a draft review period by the service as well as a public review period

304
00:25:53,640 --> 00:26:01,620
through the National Environmental Policy Act or NEPA that will run through 2027 when we anticipate

305
00:26:02,300 --> 00:26:06,480
in Q3 the permit decision by the U.S. Fish Wildlife Service.

306
00:26:14,690 --> 00:26:20,150
This is a more zoomed in look at where we are in the analyze and sign off phase.

307
00:26:22,030 --> 00:26:30,110
The sort of the middle track with the blue arrows is corresponds to our proceeding through

308
00:26:30,110 --> 00:26:36,690
phase here and you can see we've we've done preliminary biology goals and objectives and we have

309
00:26:37,690 --> 00:26:47,770
done climate change and Springflow modeling and so the the next step in this process is an

310
00:26:47,770 --> 00:26:53,770
initial habitat suitability analysis and impact assessment

311
00:26:56,810 --> 00:27:03,130
and after this thing

312
00:27:03,130 --> 00:27:10,150
or step I should say, we will then move ahead into considering changes to the conservation measures

313
00:27:10,930 --> 00:27:18,110
as well as monitoring, and then we'll move into the documentation phase of the amended

314
00:27:18,110 --> 00:27:24,710
EHCP, and you can see the various steps along the way that have committees reviewed

315
00:27:24,710 --> 00:27:28,370
draft of technical memo, these various components.

316
00:27:31,260 --> 00:27:40,290
And just to note that this initial take assessment is not the final take assessment that

317
00:27:40,290 --> 00:27:45,570
would go into the amended HCP and the internal take permit application.

318
00:27:46,410 --> 00:27:53,270
That really won't come until the conservation measures are and really holistically the conservation

319
00:27:53,270 --> 00:28:04,130
strategies is completed and that actual HCP is submitted to the service at the end of that documentation phase.

320
00:28:10,120 --> 00:28:15,060
We're just talking about an initial take assessment at this point.

321
00:28:16,200 --> 00:28:22,180
And I'll talk more about why we want to do that at this step in the process here and later in the presentation.

322
00:28:22,180 --> 00:28:23,100
But

323
00:28:28,220 --> 00:28:33,020
I'm just going to switch gears a little bit to talk about a recap of future temperature

324
00:28:33,020 --> 00:28:34,600
and precipitation projections.

325
00:28:35,460 --> 00:28:40,060
And again, this is a wealth of information that's been presented really over the last

326
00:28:40,060 --> 00:28:46,120
probably 18 months through various committee's meetings, but I'm going to just give a little

327
00:28:46,120 --> 00:28:52,840
recap to make sure that the proper context is set for the topic of discussion today.

328
00:28:52,840 --> 00:28:54,160
So,

329
00:28:57,700 --> 00:29:05,140
the EAA, and as Scott mentioned earlier in the stakeholder meeting, the Casc, the

330
00:29:05,140 --> 00:29:11,340
Cell Central Climate Adaptation Science Center, developed customized statistical down-scale

331
00:29:11,340 --> 00:29:14,200
global climate models for the Edward Dock for Regent,

332
00:29:16,340 --> 00:29:17,260
those were selected,

333
00:29:21,540 --> 00:29:22,360
they selected

334
00:29:22,360 --> 00:29:24,260
high and intermediate,

335
00:29:26,380 --> 00:29:30,880
and the intention there was to capture a spread of projected change

336
00:29:30,880 --> 00:29:33,040
due to climate change in the region.

337
00:29:35,360 --> 00:29:37,420
It's really to get an idea of what the possible outcomes

338
00:29:37,420 --> 00:29:46,860
are from these global climate models downscale to our area of interest. And all those simulations

339
00:29:46,860 --> 00:29:49,480
project temperature increase consistently,

340
00:29:52,520 --> 00:29:54,560
but they are more variable when it comes to

341
00:29:54,560 --> 00:29:59,960
precipitation, some simulations, predicting a drier or...

342
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:02,640
Excuse me, a wetterfuture and others, a dryerfuture.

343
00:30:05,830 --> 00:30:09,710
So looking more closely at the predictions

344
00:30:10,180 --> 00:30:18,390
out of that 19 model scenario, that is the 19 global climate model selected across two emission

345
00:30:18,390 --> 00:30:30,430
scenarios. First at precipitation, and we're looking from 2030 through 2059 in terms of the projections

346
00:30:30,430 --> 00:30:30,890
here,

347
00:30:34,850 --> 00:30:43,290
and both in the middle scenario of emissions and the high, the mean value of these

348
00:30:45,490 --> 00:30:52,370
19 models suggest a slight a drying trend in the region across most of the region except

349
00:30:52,370 --> 00:30:55,010
for that southern tip of the noise is basin.

350
00:30:58,240 --> 00:30:59,900
Now that's not to say some models don't predict

351
00:30:59,900 --> 00:31:05,880
wetter but if you're to take a look at them all you see a slight drying trend which which may

352
00:31:05,880 --> 00:31:12,440
suggest that a slight drying and precipitation across across the Edward's region maybe more likely.

353
00:31:25,070 --> 00:31:31,030
As I mentioned earlier temperature much more consistent across all of the models.

354
00:31:31,670 --> 00:31:36,630
All models predict warming. 2030 that's through 259.

355
00:31:39,830 --> 00:31:41,310
Warming is supposed to be

356
00:31:42,610 --> 00:31:46,470
greater under the high emission scenario, which is what we would predict.

357
00:31:47,510 --> 00:31:56,250
So under the middle or mid emission scenario, we're looking at more in the two and a half to

358
00:31:56,250 --> 00:32:07,710
three, maybe upper end three and a half degrees Fahrenheit increase, whereas in the high emission scenario,

359
00:32:07,710 --> 00:32:17,610
we're looking more into the 3.3.5 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit increase with warming being

360
00:32:17,610 --> 00:32:20,510
greatest in the north-western portion of the Edwards Arc for region.

361
00:32:25,340 --> 00:32:28,280
Those are the general trends in precipitation and temperature.

362
00:32:31,520 --> 00:32:37,560
We also looked at throughout in a couple different ways, being that that's really important

363
00:32:37,560 --> 00:32:42,480
component to consider in the the permit renewal process as it relates to conditions in the

364
00:32:42,480 --> 00:32:43,840
brings for covered species.

365
00:32:45,920 --> 00:32:59,000
So, we looked at drought by first comparing it to a 1981 to 2020 historical period to the future period of 2021-2060.

366
00:33:01,310 --> 00:33:12,730
And what we did is we looked at the future projections, and we binned the drought periods from 1 to 1,

367
00:33:12,730 --> 00:33:15,110
two, three, four, and seven and a half years.

368
00:33:17,900 --> 00:33:20,680
And then we looked at the precipitation totals

369
00:33:21,300 --> 00:33:25,820
in those dry period durations

370
00:33:25,820 --> 00:33:28,720
and compared that to historical period.

371
00:33:33,470 --> 00:33:35,930
So what we found is lowest precipitation

372
00:33:35,930 --> 00:33:39,810
totals projected to decrease for most drought durations

373
00:33:39,810 --> 00:33:42,690
except for the one and seven and a half year droughts.

374
00:33:42,730 --> 00:33:45,430
This has compared to again, 1981 to 2020.

375
00:33:49,750 --> 00:33:56,150
So we're seeing a range here, and again, this is because we see a real high variability

376
00:33:56,150 --> 00:33:57,530
in precipitation prediction.

377
00:33:59,370 --> 00:34:06,050
So for drought lengths of two to four years compared to that 1981 to 2020 period, we're

378
00:34:06,050 --> 00:34:12,190
seeing when compared to future, a slightly drier period over droughts of that span, but when

379
00:34:12,190 --> 00:34:18,130
we look at single year droughts or the longer drought of seven and a half years we're

380
00:34:18,130 --> 00:34:21,670
a slight increase in precipitation or droughts of that period

381
00:34:27,270 --> 00:34:29,010
and just to emphasize there's

382
00:34:29,010 --> 00:34:32,770
a high uncertainty between climate models on the magnitude and direction of these trends.

383
00:34:39,770 --> 00:34:46,970
So, I talked about comparing future to this more recent 1981 to 2020, we also wanted to

384
00:34:46,970 --> 00:34:53,050
look at what comparing to a period that includes the drought of record would look like.

385
00:34:53,750 --> 00:34:59,450
So, the way we did that is in order to capture that longer period of record.

386
00:35:00,000 --> 00:35:06,900
Anyway, international airport weather station that has precipitation records that go back to 1950 that

387
00:35:06,900 --> 00:35:12,220
capture that drought or record. And so we did a similar exercise with that historical

388
00:35:12,220 --> 00:35:19,740
observed data set. We looked, we compared that data to the future projections. And what

389
00:35:19,740 --> 00:35:26,140
you see there is projections for drought, for drought precipitation at the San Antonio

390
00:35:26,140 --> 00:35:31,560
international airport weather station indicate that precipitation tunnels may increase for all drought

391
00:35:31,560 --> 00:35:32,120
scenarios.

392
00:35:34,520 --> 00:35:41,300
In other words, the drought of record was really, really quite dry. And if you include,

393
00:35:41,300 --> 00:35:46,240
you know, comparing a period that includes that drought of record with the future projections,

394
00:35:46,600 --> 00:35:52,260
you're not seeing precipitation as low in the future as what was experienced in that

395
00:35:52,260 --> 00:35:53,640
throughout a record time period.

396
00:35:56,960 --> 00:36:00,740
But again, what you're seeing on the chart is, you know,

397
00:36:00,920 --> 00:36:07,700
wide uncertainty. And so, just want to remember that we do have some, some,

398
00:36:08,300 --> 00:36:09,680
wide uncertainty with these predictions.

399
00:36:16,280 --> 00:36:20,700
So conclusions, the Edwards Arc for Region is more likely

400
00:36:20,700 --> 00:36:25,220
to experience drying trends through 259 relative to recent history.

401
00:36:27,240 --> 00:36:28,300
The magnitude of future

402
00:36:28,300 --> 00:36:32,360
precipitation trends vary by model, due to uncertainty in climate model

403
00:36:32,360 --> 00:36:34,000
predictions for precipitation.

404
00:36:35,840 --> 00:36:39,300
The models are consistent when it comes to temperatures, which are predicted

405
00:36:39,300 --> 00:36:42,860
to increase and may lead to increased risk of drought in the future during

406
00:36:42,860 --> 00:36:45,200
period of anomalously low precipitation.

407
00:36:45,560 --> 00:36:50,360
Obviously, temperature and precipitation as they're associated with drought

408
00:36:50,360 --> 00:36:50,900
are related.

409
00:36:51,760 --> 00:36:57,180
And so you hire temperatures will increase the chances of drought during

410
00:36:57,180 --> 00:37:02,980
low precipitation periods. However, downscale, the downscaled ensemble of global climate models

411
00:37:02,980 --> 00:37:07,760
does not project a period with lower precipitation than the drought or records occurring

412
00:37:07,760 --> 00:37:09,100
by 2060.

413
00:37:18,280 --> 00:37:23,940
So that concludes the recap of our climate and our excuse me, our pre-sip and temperature

414
00:37:23,940 --> 00:37:35,460
projections. And now I'm going to shift this back to the take assessment where we are in the

415
00:37:38,780 --> 00:37:50,020
The HCP must specify the, quote, impact that will result from the taking to covered species in order to meet endangered species access

416
00:37:50,020 --> 00:37:51,460
and 10 permit requirements.

417
00:37:52,500 --> 00:37:55,460
So that's straight from the statute there.

418
00:37:56,300 --> 00:38:04,640
The HCP will, therefore, calculate the amount of take to occur to each covered species over the proposed permit term for the next 30 years.

419
00:38:04,640 --> 00:38:11,040
The ECP also then needs to describe the impact of the taking to the species considering

420
00:38:11,040 --> 00:38:13,580
context intensity and duration.

421
00:38:17,590 --> 00:38:22,890
And the reason the ECP needs to do this is because the service considers impact of the

422
00:38:22,890 --> 00:38:26,850
taking in relation to its permit issuance criteria.

423
00:38:27,590 --> 00:38:29,670
Two of those are listed here below.

424
00:38:29,770 --> 00:38:33,730
This is not all the permit issuance criteria, but the two that are specifically relevant

425
00:38:33,730 --> 00:38:34,970
to impact of the taking.

426
00:38:34,970 --> 00:38:41,990
And those are that the applicant will, to the maximum extent practical, minimize and mitigate the impacts of such taking.

427
00:38:42,710 --> 00:38:48,950
And that the taking will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild,

428
00:38:49,110 --> 00:38:51,190
which is also known as the jeopardy standard.

429
00:38:55,920 --> 00:39:04,180
So that's where this take assessment fits into the instantile take permit renewal process from a regulatory context perspective.

430
00:39:06,040 --> 00:39:09,960
So, what's the purpose of an initial take assessment at this stage?

431
00:39:10,120 --> 00:39:15,080
As I said earlier, we're not considering any type of final take assessment here.

432
00:39:15,660 --> 00:39:20,300
That won't come into later until we know what the conservation strategy is going to be.

433
00:39:21,600 --> 00:39:27,860
But we want to do this at this stage because what we can do is we can establish methods for

434
00:39:27,860 --> 00:39:37,940
estimating take. So interestingly, in the current HCP, the take assessment was actually done

435
00:39:37,940 --> 00:39:42,460
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the current Insult Take Permit that is not

436
00:39:42,460 --> 00:39:49,500
in any way standard. Current practice is that the service expects the applicant to provide

437
00:39:50,340 --> 00:39:56,560
a estimate of take, which of course the Fish and Wildlife Service has to concur with and stand

438
00:39:56,560 --> 00:39:58,920
but it's definitely the role of the applicant.

439
00:40:00,000 --> 00:40:05,340
That information. And that's what we intend to do in the permit renewal process.

440
00:40:07,520 --> 00:40:12,960
So it will allow us to establish methods for estimating take, something we can make progress on now.

441
00:40:14,700 --> 00:40:26,180
It will also help us estimate the amount of take with the existing EACP conservation measures to serve as a point of reference, as we move ahead to consider changes to those conservation measures.

442
00:40:31,560 --> 00:40:49,260
But as I mentioned, the ultimate amount of take requested in the permit renewal application will be calculated after all proposed conservation measures are determined for their renewed EHCP, which really won't happen until even the end of the document phase before the ITP submittal.

443
00:40:58,800 --> 00:41:08,920
So, we created a model 1947 to 76 spring flow simulation, and I'm going to talk a little

444
00:41:08,920 --> 00:41:10,300
bit about why we did that.

445
00:41:12,620 --> 00:41:18,780
So, we presented on this back in, during the May and Permanent Committee meeting.

446
00:41:21,910 --> 00:41:26,910
The forward spring flow simulations developed from the 19 down-scaled global climate models,

447
00:41:26,910 --> 00:41:32,390
created 19 different spring flow simulations that had very very

448
00:41:32,390 --> 00:41:38,950
characteristics. So Paul talked about this in May, but we saw, you know,

449
00:41:39,270 --> 00:41:44,170
some being highly variable in amount of spring flow, some having, you know,

450
00:41:44,270 --> 00:41:51,790
more consistent or less variability. Certain projections had much lower long-term

451
00:41:51,790 --> 00:42:01,070
flows while others were subject to more spiky predictions or very, very low short duration

452
00:42:01,070 --> 00:42:02,090
minimum flows.

453
00:42:03,970 --> 00:42:11,590
But in looking at all those, those 19, none of them, no forward simulation, contained

454
00:42:11,590 --> 00:42:14,350
a long-term drought as severe as the drought or record.

455
00:42:17,060 --> 00:42:22,520
So the existing HCP is based on planning for a repeat of the drought or record.

456
00:42:22,520 --> 00:42:29,600
And we looked at the effects of climate change on Springflow and we didn't find a forward

457
00:42:29,600 --> 00:42:33,100
simulation that looked worse in terms of a long-term drought in that drought record.

458
00:42:36,040 --> 00:42:45,590
So what we wanted to do then was we created a 1947-76 model simulation to create a 30-year

459
00:42:45,590 --> 00:42:48,170
Springflow simulation that includes that drought record.

460
00:42:49,030 --> 00:42:55,490
And that allows us to, for Apple's taples comparison of Spring Flow Simulation over the

461
00:42:55,490 --> 00:43:00,610
Drouter Record with those Ford simulations, and it creates a 30 or hydrograph for using

462
00:43:00,610 --> 00:43:01,750
in the Tate calculations.

463
00:43:11,820 --> 00:43:13,980
These are what the, I'll start with Komal.

464
00:43:14,020 --> 00:43:22,300
This is what this 1947-76 model Spring Flow simulation looks like with the EAA Critical Period Management

465
00:43:22,300 --> 00:43:24,960
and EACP Spring Flow Protection Measures.

466
00:43:24,960 --> 00:43:32,220
So again, this has the existing conservation measures or spring flow protection measures, I should take in it.

467
00:43:32,600 --> 00:43:40,160
And you can see the draw to record in the really that 1947-48 through 56-period

468
00:43:42,980 --> 00:43:45,420
CFS for Kamal Springs.

469
00:43:46,240 --> 00:43:48,720
And then looking at St. Marcus similarly,

470
00:43:51,600 --> 00:43:57,780
you have a period of long period of low spring flow

471
00:43:57,780 --> 00:44:06,880
from 47 all the way to 57 and then you have more variable spikes of increased spring flow,

472
00:44:07,080 --> 00:44:12,100
but also some low spring flows as well through 76.

473
00:44:25,380 --> 00:44:30,840
As I mentioned this, creating this simulation allows for comparison with the forward simulations.

474
00:44:34,380 --> 00:44:42,500
And so we did a little bit of that and what we found is that minimum average spring flow for timeframes from 1 to 10 years.

475
00:44:42,500 --> 00:44:49,380
are lower in the 47 to 76 simulation than any of the forward simulations.

476
00:44:56,040 --> 00:44:58,920
So, you see that in the tables below where you have...

477
00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:01,420
766 simulation

478
00:45:03,760 --> 00:45:20,380
with minimum 1 year average, 2 year average, 3 year average, 5 year average and average and 10 year average. You can see how those are lower than any than the lowest of the forward simulations, the lowest average of the forward simulations.

479
00:45:28,610 --> 00:45:37,150
So estimated spring flow with future projected temperature and precipitation does not indicate a drought impacting spring flow as severely as the drought record.

480
00:45:38,110 --> 00:45:41,130
Over these time periods, and the drought of record remains

481
00:45:41,130 --> 00:45:44,470
can serve the conservative worst case to assess effects

482
00:45:44,470 --> 00:45:46,690
of covered activities and conservation measures

483
00:45:46,690 --> 00:45:47,990
to the covered species.

484
00:45:58,360 --> 00:46:01,400
A couple of other notes in comparing the historical simulation

485
00:46:01,400 --> 00:46:02,840
to these forward simulations.

486
00:46:03,460 --> 00:46:06,640
There are some sub-annual minimum spring flows

487
00:46:06,640 --> 00:46:10,160
in the one to nine-month time periods

488
00:46:11,900 --> 00:46:14,260
that are lower.

489
00:46:14,260 --> 00:46:25,420
so then the historical. So to put that conversely the 47 to 76 simulation has lower minimum

490
00:46:25,420 --> 00:46:30,300
spring flows than 18 out of the 19 forward simulations and

491
00:46:32,950 --> 00:46:34,930
the 47 to 76 simulation has

492
00:46:34,930 --> 00:46:38,510
lower minimum spring flows than 17 out of the 19 forward simulations.

493
00:46:43,210 --> 00:46:45,330
So again,

494
00:46:45,330 --> 00:46:50,010
come all two percent markets that have those these lower sub-annual in a

495
00:46:50,010 --> 00:46:56,110
mums. And then note that the ASR was not triggered in the simulations in these

496
00:46:56,110 --> 00:47:00,090
four insimulations with sub-annual minimums lower than the 47 to 76

497
00:47:00,090 --> 00:47:04,850
simulation. And that's because these minimums occurred without triggering the

498
00:47:04,850 --> 00:47:09,210
10-year 500,000 acre-fit rolling average for the ASR.

499
00:47:18,880 --> 00:47:21,400
Okay, conclusions here to start

500
00:47:21,400 --> 00:47:32,060
wrap-up. The 1947-1976 simulation has lower minimum average spring flow for timeframes from

501
00:47:32,060 --> 00:47:39,320
one to ten years than any of the forward simulations with forecasted temperature and precipitation

502
00:47:39,920 --> 00:47:41,540
through 2058.

503
00:47:44,590 --> 00:47:50,690
The 1947-76-76 spring flow simulation has lower sub-annual minimum average

504
00:47:50,690 --> 00:47:55,670
inflow than the majority of forward simulations, but there are a few forward simulations that

505
00:47:55,670 --> 00:47:58,330
have lower sub-annual in a mums.

506
00:48:01,720 --> 00:48:05,020
Long-term drought is a greater threat to covered species than

507
00:48:05,020 --> 00:48:13,540
sub-annual minimum spring flows. That is droughts along over multiple years are a bigger threat

508
00:48:13,540 --> 00:48:20,880
than short-term droughts with those sub-annual minimum spring flows.

509
00:48:24,150 --> 00:48:25,570
So we conclude that

510
00:48:25,570 --> 00:48:30,350
the drought a record remains the most conservative drought period from which to base an initial

511
00:48:30,350 --> 00:48:31,450
take assessment.

512
00:48:41,590 --> 00:48:48,190
So next steps are now July through October to move ahead to conduct an initial

513
00:48:48,190 --> 00:48:54,190
habitat suitability analysis and take assessment and that would mean that in October there

514
00:48:54,190 --> 00:49:03,090
would be a draft technical memo for review that would provide this information and focus on the

515
00:49:03,090 --> 00:49:12,140
methods for this initial take assessment and then moving ahead from October through March

516
00:49:12,140 --> 00:49:19,320
of next year, we'll have that initial take assessment and also then we'll be able to use that

517
00:49:19,320 --> 00:49:22,400
to evaluate effects of considered changes to conservation measures.

518
00:49:33,790 --> 00:49:35,050
So the President action

519
00:49:35,050 --> 00:49:40,530
then would be the implementing committee directive to proceed for using the 1947-76 Spring

520
00:49:40,530 --> 00:49:44,930
simulation as the basis for an initial take assessment in the permit renewal process.

521
00:49:46,830 --> 00:49:51,570
And I believe that is the last slide I have before questions.

522
00:49:55,230 --> 00:49:57,750
Make sure my screen is such that I can see people.

523
00:50:01,490 --> 00:50:17,370
All right. And just for the purpose of clarity and to catch you up to speed, Deluca said, the fact that we don't have quorum today and are not able to vote on actually accepting and recommending this to move forward.

524
00:50:17,370 --> 00:50:23,730
until we have a full quorum that may affect some of the calendar there as you showed there at the end.

525
00:50:24,390 --> 00:50:31,610
But that's something I guess it will still need to be, you know, worked through until we can get a formal vote of proving this.

526
00:50:33,510 --> 00:50:35,110
Yes, understood. I heard that Tom.

527
00:50:37,180 --> 00:50:37,180
Yeah.

528
00:50:37,740 --> 00:50:45,220
Well, we could take this time to, you know, answer any questions or of the presentation and it may be happy to do that.

529
00:50:45,220 --> 00:50:53,600
Right, and we are able to discuss and ask questions and, you know, get further information on this, we just can't take a formal action one way or the other on this today.

530
00:50:55,900 --> 00:51:01,400
With that or there are any questions or discussion with Lucas on this.

531
00:51:10,870 --> 00:51:12,230
Have some genuine else volunteering.

532
00:51:13,510 --> 00:51:21,750
I do have a couple of comments that I would make, and I did have some communication with the Texas state and they did have a comment or two.

533
00:51:21,750 --> 00:51:27,550
they asked that I indicated I could share today, you know, on this topic.

534
00:51:30,890 --> 00:51:35,430
You know, this, this one's a, this one's a tough one because I think the information that we've received,

535
00:51:36,090 --> 00:51:41,870
at least for my perspective, the information we've received and we've received an awful lot of information in relation to climate,

536
00:51:43,070 --> 00:51:49,870
and how that's going to downscale to our area, and how that will affect flows going forward.

537
00:51:49,870 --> 00:51:51,490
we've seen a lot of modeling results,

538
00:51:51,790 --> 00:51:54,090
and we've been given a lot of information about this.

539
00:51:54,370 --> 00:51:57,750
Unfortunately, as often the case with a large amount of data,

540
00:51:57,950 --> 00:52:01,930
not necessarily all of that indicates the same trend

541
00:52:03,830 --> 00:52:09,530
or same set of circumstances may be the best under a future scenario.

542
00:52:10,870 --> 00:52:12,390
The data, at least in my mind,

543
00:52:12,470 --> 00:52:15,590
seems to kind of go both ways in relation to the drought

544
00:52:15,590 --> 00:52:23,750
record. I very much appreciate the period we're looking at here being inclusive of that in relation

545
00:52:23,750 --> 00:52:28,590
to our analysis. Those are some comments that we had made earlier that are may not have

546
00:52:28,590 --> 00:52:35,470
been enough focus early on in relation to conditions there in the draw to record being considered

547
00:52:35,470 --> 00:52:39,510
and moving forward with a renewed ITP.

548
00:52:42,500 --> 00:52:46,480
But we've actually now included information that in

549
00:52:46,480 --> 00:52:51,200
corporations, you know, the situation regarding draw to record and the flows that we saw then.

550
00:52:51,340 --> 00:52:57,320
I do think, you know, EAA and Lucas for the additional work that's been done in relation

551
00:52:57,320 --> 00:52:58,380
to that.

552
00:52:58,640 --> 00:53:03,620
However, I guess the concern that I have, you know, I mean, it still comes down to we're saying

553
00:53:03,620 --> 00:53:11,420
that the future modeling with higher temperatures and lower precipitation related to climate

554
00:53:11,420 --> 00:53:16,800
change that we would not in the next 30 years expect to see a repeat of the drought

555
00:53:16,800 --> 00:53:22,320
record. And, you know, recognizing, and I mean, we've restated today in a couple

556
00:53:22,320 --> 00:53:27,060
different cases, you know, the high uncertainty in relation to a lot of these models

557
00:53:27,060 --> 00:53:35,200
and a lot of the information. And I guess the ultimate question in my mind is, is, is, is

558
00:53:35,200 --> 00:53:41,380
relying on not having a drought or record condition over the next 30 years that we would

559
00:53:41,380 --> 00:53:49,220
to have this ITP. Are we being conservative enough when we're looking at the climate changes

560
00:53:49,220 --> 00:53:53,980
that we're witnessing going forward? And I think that's the thing that I've struggled with

561
00:53:53,980 --> 00:54:00,660
most in relation to this is for a 30-year period and recognizing that models are models.

562
00:54:01,020 --> 00:54:06,680
I think the information is very useful. I think it is basically scientifically on what has happened

563
00:54:06,680 --> 00:54:12,920
before. On the other hand, we know there's a huge amount of variability in weather and we know

564
00:54:14,100 --> 00:54:19,600
that in many cases the modeling isn't correct and we're only going to be sure on what's

565
00:54:19,600 --> 00:54:27,160
correct after it's actually transpired. I think in relation to this I'm encouraged on the one hand

566
00:54:27,160 --> 00:54:35,600
that the data is showing this could be a reasonable basis to calculate take based on and apparently

567
00:54:35,600 --> 00:54:38,680
And Lucas, I'll ask this question of you.

568
00:54:38,740 --> 00:54:41,840
I think you'd send an email to me earlier this week

569
00:54:41,840 --> 00:54:48,900
that in response to a question that I had asked in relation to that.

570
00:54:49,180 --> 00:54:53,880
If you would share what you'd sent the email on earlier this week

571
00:54:53,880 --> 00:54:58,340
with the group, I think that would help show additional information

572
00:54:58,340 --> 00:54:59,400
in relation to this.

573
00:55:00,210 --> 00:55:20,130
Sure. And just one point of clarification, based on what you said there, Tom, is we are, so we looked at future projections, and we didn't see a long-term drought period affecting spring flow as severely as the drought or record.

574
00:55:20,130 --> 00:55:28,770
So our direction now is not to plan for one of those future simulations that doesn't look as bad as the drought or record.

575
00:55:28,950 --> 00:55:43,310
What we're saying is, no, we're going to maintain the drought or record as the planning scenario, I'll call it, to be conservative, because that's what we think could happen.

576
00:55:43,310 --> 00:55:48,110
So we're not deciding to plan for something less severe than the drought a record.

577
00:55:48,370 --> 00:55:56,370
We are saying, let's continue to maintain the assumption that a drought of record could

578
00:55:56,370 --> 00:56:05,530
repeat over the next 30 years, even though the global climate model ensemble is not showing

579
00:56:05,530 --> 00:56:06,930
something as severe.

580
00:56:06,930 --> 00:56:14,810
So that's the one one point of clarification the other one I I wanted to to note or upon your request

581
00:56:14,810 --> 00:56:16,990
Tom is that

582
00:56:16,990 --> 00:56:19,590
We did meet with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on

583
00:56:20,650 --> 00:56:22,530
July 11th and

584
00:56:22,530 --> 00:56:22,990
presented

585
00:56:23,730 --> 00:56:25,890
the service with the same

586
00:56:25,890 --> 00:56:29,070
information that I've provided today in discussing

587
00:56:29,750 --> 00:56:32,370
a path to move forward in

588
00:56:32,370 --> 00:56:36,910
conducting this initial take assessment and the service was supportive at this stage

589
00:56:36,930 --> 00:56:43,430
of continuing to use the drought of record in that assessment, and therefore to use the

590
00:56:43,430 --> 00:56:51,930
this 1947 to 1976 modeled simulation as the basis for an initial take assessment.

591
00:56:55,750 --> 00:56:56,950
Thank you, Lucas.

592
00:56:58,490 --> 00:57:04,590
In relation to your first comment, I understand and agree with what you've said as far as,

593
00:57:04,590 --> 00:57:06,190
I have full understanding of that.

594
00:57:06,190 --> 00:57:13,010
I think the point I'm making is not that that we're considering not using the

595
00:57:13,010 --> 00:57:14,710
draw-to-record at all.

596
00:57:15,310 --> 00:57:20,750
I think the point that I've been making simply is that are we comfortable enough that

597
00:57:20,750 --> 00:57:28,630
the draw-to-record is the most concerning, most severe draw that we could see within

598
00:57:28,630 --> 00:57:30,090
this next 30-year period.

599
00:57:30,090 --> 00:57:36,790
That's the real, I think, crux of this as weather in a situation where we've already

600
00:57:36,790 --> 00:57:42,550
had a broader record occur in a situation where we didn't have the factors associated

601
00:57:42,550 --> 00:57:47,590
with climate change that we're currently wrestling with being developed at that point in

602
00:57:47,590 --> 00:57:48,310
time.

603
00:57:49,170 --> 00:57:53,810
Obviously, going forward, I think, the question this simply is, you know, we knew we had

604
00:57:53,810 --> 00:57:58,610
a broader record when we didn't have the climate change issues and the temperatures warming

605
00:57:58,610 --> 00:58:05,270
to the degree we've had and expected to continue and the question simply is is the modeling

606
00:58:05,270 --> 00:58:09,910
indicates that we shouldn't expect a repeat of that in the next 30 years. I'm just simply

607
00:58:09,910 --> 00:58:14,170
saying is that a conservative enough thought given the fact we've already had a rather

608
00:58:14,170 --> 00:58:18,890
draw to record when we didn't have the higher temperatures and the lower precipitation numbers.

609
00:58:19,750 --> 00:58:28,590
So I mean those two things seem to kind of run, you know, not in parallel, but they're they're

610
00:58:28,590 --> 00:58:34,630
us at some point in ways of deciding what we're comfortable with and approaching this.

611
00:58:35,350 --> 00:58:39,830
So I did understand that we weren't rejecting or changing from the draw to record and

612
00:58:39,830 --> 00:58:41,650
that's the proposal that you're bringing forward.

613
00:58:41,970 --> 00:58:49,830
I'm simply saying that given what we've seen in the climate change science, are we comfortable

614
00:58:49,830 --> 00:58:56,170
enough with that looking forward that we couldn't have a more severe drop when there are

615
00:58:56,170 --> 00:59:00,150
other things that were aware of certainly to indicate we've had historic

616
00:59:00,150 --> 00:59:02,730
crowds that were worse than a drought record even.

617
00:59:03,950 --> 00:59:08,530
So I think that's my concern, and that's basically what I wanted to

618
00:59:08,530 --> 00:59:09,790
voice today.

619
00:59:11,410 --> 00:59:14,350
You know, I mean, I think we need to make sure we've got enough safety

620
00:59:14,350 --> 00:59:18,590
margin built into this that we think we're going to have a realistic

621
00:59:18,590 --> 00:59:22,050
chance of calling this correctly.

622
00:59:22,050 --> 00:59:25,050
because the effects of being wrong on the modeling

623
00:59:25,630 --> 00:59:27,710
of, you know, it's not an academic exercise.

624
00:59:27,890 --> 00:59:29,890
After we build this program around it,

625
00:59:31,050 --> 00:59:34,010
and, you know, try to work through 30 years of,

626
00:59:34,010 --> 00:59:36,190
you know, all the pressures on these systems

627
00:59:36,190 --> 00:59:38,030
under the climate change scenario.

628
00:59:41,240 --> 00:59:43,680
Yeah, if I would chime in with,

629
00:59:43,820 --> 00:59:47,220
I think that our benchmark for this or goal

630
00:59:47,900 --> 00:59:50,100
is to renew the incidental take permit.

631
00:59:50,280 --> 00:59:52,220
And if I'm hearing what Lucas has saying,

632
00:59:52,220 --> 00:59:59,200
And if U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has indicated that this is conservative enough.

633
01:00:00,210 --> 01:00:27,910
I don't want us to lose sight of the fact that our goal is to get an incidental take from it for the next 30-year period. Period. Now, if there are, to Tom to your point of your saying, you know, is this, say, built-in safety enough, I think that's why we have the refusia, why we've invested in that. In the event, everything all goes to hell. You know, we've, we've got that in play as well.

634
01:00:27,910 --> 01:00:35,790
But I would say that if fishing wildlife service is okay with it, then I'm going to feel comfortable with it.

635
01:00:38,480 --> 01:00:42,220
Thanks, and that's one reason I asked Lewis specifically shared that information.

636
01:00:42,580 --> 01:00:49,660
I'd asked for it to last meeting whether we'd approach fish and what the method on that would be.

637
01:00:50,320 --> 01:00:57,120
It is good, and I think that is good information to have, and I think it is reassuring to some extent that fish is willing to accept that.

638
01:00:57,120 --> 01:01:02,280
I don't think that absolves us of the responsibility of making that decision independently though.

639
01:01:06,510 --> 01:01:07,030
Patrick?

640
01:01:08,850 --> 01:01:16,970
Yeah, I just want to say usually when I'm asked to fill in or sit in on this panel that I see.

641
01:01:17,650 --> 01:01:24,130
I jot down a number of things that I'm thinking about as I've seen this presentation probably three to four times.

642
01:01:24,130 --> 01:01:37,170
And, like everyone else, obviously critical kind of in the beginning and then get more comfortable as I see it multiple times and see the science or, you know, the information behind the modeling.

643
01:01:38,790 --> 01:01:53,350
So, I kind of want to start with one of the points I wrote down, which was like my last point actually, is again, an initial permit, and I know I'm not going to take a lot of time because we're not making a policy decision today, but if you'll just give me a couple minutes.

644
01:01:54,290 --> 01:01:58,210
We made a lot of decisions in good faith.

645
01:01:58,710 --> 01:02:03,770
We've made a lot of investments from different partners across the region.

646
01:02:04,370 --> 01:02:06,110
I mean, I just want to remind people of that.

647
01:02:06,170 --> 01:02:07,910
There were obviously placeholders.

648
01:02:08,250 --> 01:02:09,090
We put in place.

649
01:02:09,710 --> 01:02:11,570
You know, as we took that endeavor,

650
01:02:12,790 --> 01:02:16,570
I have to say, we could be in the repeat of the drought or record.

651
01:02:17,110 --> 01:02:19,190
We were all watching the trends.

652
01:02:21,030 --> 01:02:28,170
They have went up a bit and conditions are probably different today than they were in the 50s.

653
01:02:28,390 --> 01:02:32,770
So that uncertainties always going to be with us as we're making decisions or policy decisions.

654
01:02:34,530 --> 01:02:41,270
This is a kind of an area too where for me, you know, having been with saws for, you know, a big portion of my career.

655
01:02:41,270 --> 01:02:48,910
the planning that we do, all of us, is iterative, we just released our water management

656
01:02:48,910 --> 01:02:50,590
planning, it's out for review for the public.

657
01:02:51,690 --> 01:02:58,130
The investments we make, whether it's adhering to the critical period, changing our conservation

658
01:02:58,130 --> 01:03:05,510
roles, adding an enforcement, adding in all of these other items across the region, you

659
01:03:05,510 --> 01:03:10,550
know, are for the benefit of what we're trying to accomplish, which is minimum continues.

660
01:03:10,550 --> 01:03:13,550
sprinkle in protection of the species in their habitats.

661
01:03:14,830 --> 01:03:17,630
I just think we have to keep reminding ourselves of that.

662
01:03:18,010 --> 01:03:21,510
As we make policy decisions, there's going to be some give and take.

663
01:03:21,750 --> 01:03:25,510
I mean, one of the major considerations that I think about

664
01:03:25,510 --> 01:03:29,590
is the commitments that have to be made

665
01:03:29,590 --> 01:03:35,470
that are actually kind of physical part of the agreement.

666
01:03:35,470 --> 01:03:47,090
You know, a sauce cuts back beyond the 44% with an engineered solution that is not necessarily understood by everyone or easy to operate unless you're part of our organization.

667
01:03:47,970 --> 01:03:53,270
We operate that ASR system outside of even the depth of drought.

668
01:03:53,810 --> 01:04:01,430
Today, something I heard that was a really interesting and Lucas's presentation I really appreciate it is that deep drought threat.

669
01:04:01,430 --> 01:04:04,650
because I keep hearing, well, one of the observations

670
01:04:04,650 --> 01:04:07,930
against statistically off the highly uncertain data

671
01:04:07,930 --> 01:04:10,410
is when the aquifer isn't being mined,

672
01:04:10,550 --> 01:04:12,370
there was a trigger that was worse,

673
01:04:13,030 --> 01:04:15,970
which is now calling for, I think, some folks

674
01:04:15,970 --> 01:04:18,670
to think that, well, you just operate the SR quicker,

675
01:04:19,210 --> 01:04:22,490
or faster, or on a shorter rolling recharge.

676
01:04:23,150 --> 01:04:26,490
But that's not necessarily how it works, if you look

677
01:04:26,490 --> 01:04:30,390
at hydrographs, you can see the effects of rainfall,

678
01:04:30,390 --> 01:04:35,710
even in the past, as it slowly starts to climb and crescendo again,

679
01:04:36,270 --> 01:04:39,410
too bad we spent too much time in that lower period sometimes,

680
01:04:39,930 --> 01:04:43,550
but you've said it, we don't know exactly what it's going to do.

681
01:04:43,910 --> 01:04:48,770
But what this information has told me is that the best information that's out there

682
01:04:48,770 --> 01:04:55,410
tells us what we know today and that's what we're going to have to make a policy decision with at some point.

683
01:04:55,410 --> 01:04:59,970
And I'm just kind of, again, I jotted these down as I was preparing for this.

684
01:05:00,000 --> 01:05:02,960
More times, I wasn't always 100% comfortable.

685
01:05:05,500 --> 01:05:10,500
I know, as you guys consider it and figure out how to move forward, we'll keep that in mind.

686
01:05:13,400 --> 01:05:31,600
Thank you, Patrick. I think those are very good comments. I will share what Robert Mays had had, you know, discussed with me briefly in relation to something that may help in relation to, you know, considering this 30-year period.

687
01:05:31,600 --> 01:05:39,140
of the permit and some of our uncertainties around what we may or may not actually experience

688
01:05:39,140 --> 01:05:46,900
in relation to climate change and the associated effects on our systems.

689
01:05:50,110 --> 01:05:58,710
In Robert and looking at this, I mean, you know, he feels that rather than having a single

690
01:05:58,710 --> 01:06:06,150
30-day period, 30-year period, I should say, for the new permit that it may make sense to build in,

691
01:06:06,170 --> 01:06:11,750
similar to what we had, I guess in the first incidental take permit, where we had phasing,

692
01:06:12,310 --> 01:06:17,930
you know, approached in that, that we may, in the 30-year period, take a look at building in,

693
01:06:18,950 --> 01:06:24,870
adaptive decision points to where we take a look at what we've experienced in relation to climate

694
01:06:24,870 --> 01:06:32,350
change, and that 10 year period versus what we expected, and decide whether we need to make

695
01:06:32,350 --> 01:06:37,610
any changes in the program at that point in time to build that into the program at front

696
01:06:37,610 --> 01:06:45,230
so that we have to actually consider that question a couple of times over that 30 year period.

697
01:06:45,770 --> 01:06:52,310
We're going a lot longer than we went in the first permit, double the length of time.

698
01:06:52,310 --> 01:07:00,690
We've learned a lot in the period of time that we've actually, you know, been involved with the program now since 2013.

699
01:07:01,330 --> 01:07:12,950
But we also haven't seen every conceivable, you know, a circumstance, and certainly not all the weather, you know, situations that we could under climate change.

700
01:07:12,950 --> 01:07:21,190
But he thinks that if we built in those decision points or at least double checks in relation

701
01:07:21,190 --> 01:07:26,730
to where we're at in the program, you know, he understands and I think I understand too.

702
01:07:26,830 --> 01:07:31,210
I mean, because of the great degree of uncertainty and predicting some of these future

703
01:07:31,210 --> 01:07:36,070
occurrences in relation to weather and precipitation and temperature, none of us are ever

704
01:07:36,070 --> 01:07:37,470
going to guess those right.

705
01:07:38,270 --> 01:07:41,990
And you're not sure when you're trying to make a decision 30 years in advance, whether

706
01:07:41,990 --> 01:07:48,690
you're actually hitting the right spot in a decision or not, simply because it's very difficult

707
01:07:48,690 --> 01:07:53,890
to predict the future that way. This would be a way for us to build in something that we're

708
01:07:53,890 --> 01:07:58,990
pretty familiar with. We've already done the first go round and in terms of the permit.

709
01:07:59,790 --> 01:08:04,190
And that would give us a chance to take a look at this issue a couple of times over the course of

710
01:08:04,190 --> 01:08:08,990
this next permit right now if we try to figure out, we're not going to be able to guess what the right

711
01:08:08,990 --> 01:08:14,190
answer is on this. And science isn't going to tell us what the right answer is. We may have

712
01:08:14,190 --> 01:08:19,550
a lot of models with the point is we're going to have to make decisions, you know, now,

713
01:08:19,610 --> 01:08:25,690
if we try to debate that and figure that out in relation to working through this schedule for

714
01:08:25,690 --> 01:08:37,550
ITP renewal, I mean, we could burn a lot of time here and, you know, potentially not be in the

715
01:08:37,550 --> 01:08:43,110
may not know all those answers perfectly up front and make sure we build in something that makes

716
01:08:43,110 --> 01:08:47,610
us focus on that again so we can, you know, validate that as we go through that period.

717
01:08:48,270 --> 01:08:51,710
So that was his suggestion that we consider at some point.

718
01:08:51,830 --> 01:08:54,230
I don't know that it's appropriate for today.

719
01:08:54,330 --> 01:08:57,210
Obviously, they'll be much more work on this.

720
01:08:57,210 --> 01:08:58,010
Yes, Patrick.

721
01:08:59,210 --> 01:09:01,050
Three more minutes for me.

722
01:09:02,030 --> 01:09:04,910
Kind of in response to that, I wish you were here to hear it today.

723
01:09:04,910 --> 01:09:10,230
It's just a different offering I'm making, is that it's not the third of your permit that scares me.

724
01:09:10,450 --> 01:09:17,230
It's again, if we go through this process, I'll probably be sitting in the audience or listening online next time.

725
01:09:17,610 --> 01:09:21,290
As Donovan has to hash this out across with all of you guys.

726
01:09:23,070 --> 01:09:29,450
I'm just saying that there are other ways to approach it, as we do this preliminary assessment.

727
01:09:29,950 --> 01:09:33,830
You know, we still have to get through the Spring Club protection measures, which Roland

728
01:09:33,830 --> 01:09:39,550
and kind of alluded to, everybody has to get those back in place to get the protectiveness

729
01:09:39,550 --> 01:09:41,410
that we're seeing under the current permit.

730
01:09:43,130 --> 01:09:47,870
And so I'm not opposed to saying that once we know what those are and we see how they are,

731
01:09:48,110 --> 01:09:52,610
that there aren't, like kind of, bi-modal, we're seeing bi-modal things that we have to do

732
01:09:52,610 --> 01:09:54,850
with drought and non-drow as water planners.

733
01:09:56,190 --> 01:09:58,270
But what I heard and what I saw today.

734
01:10:00,000 --> 01:10:16,640
So the three or four times I've seen this presentation is again, your planning is for what you can do and then there are times that you may have to adapt a bit and be a little more aggressive, but it doesn't mean that your triggers have to always be aggressive.

735
01:10:17,760 --> 01:10:24,040
So, you know, it's not that the third year scares me or the 15 or how many check-ins we have with it.

736
01:10:24,040 --> 01:10:30,440
It's just getting, again, that potential adaptive need during the focus period, correct.

737
01:10:31,820 --> 01:10:36,480
So, I would add to that, I guess I assumed, and I think it's more than assumption

738
01:10:36,480 --> 01:10:41,280
that this next incident will take permit, we would continue to carry forward the opportunity

739
01:10:41,280 --> 01:10:45,360
to have adaptive management as a standard part of that process.

740
01:10:46,100 --> 01:10:51,520
And so long as we maintain an adaptive management process within the HCP, I think it helps

741
01:10:51,520 --> 01:10:59,100
satisfy what Roberts concerned may be because absent any arbitrary check-in I think we're

742
01:10:59,100 --> 01:11:02,880
going to be because just as we did during this first state incidental type permit we're

743
01:11:02,880 --> 01:11:07,580
going to be continually monitoring and reporting and analyzing whether the thing is working

744
01:11:07,580 --> 01:11:12,780
and whether we need to modify something and that's what the adaptive management program is for.

745
01:11:13,960 --> 01:11:21,460
So while I mean in principle I agree with the Robert that we may need to have a need

746
01:11:21,460 --> 01:11:24,260
to look at it, midstream.

747
01:11:25,120 --> 01:11:28,800
I don't know that an arbitrary check-in period achieves that

748
01:11:28,800 --> 01:11:31,380
as much as having an adaptive management process

749
01:11:31,380 --> 01:11:33,740
clearly identified in the HCP because,

750
01:11:33,980 --> 01:11:36,000
but that's just my, today, that's just my thought.

751
01:11:40,800 --> 01:11:44,280
So, yes, I just had, I guess, some questions regarding

752
01:11:44,280 --> 01:11:46,880
the adaptive management because that's what was in my mind

753
01:11:46,880 --> 01:11:49,360
as we were talking about this and maybe Lucas or others,

754
01:11:49,480 --> 01:11:51,620
you know, what changed conditions provisions

755
01:11:51,620 --> 01:11:55,280
are in this ITP and what do those triggers, I guess.

756
01:11:55,280 --> 01:12:04,580
Roland look like maybe that we would consider on this look back because, you know, obviously our

757
01:12:04,580 --> 01:12:08,700
sensitivity is a little different than everybody else is at the table, but Leis Patrick was saying,

758
01:12:09,560 --> 01:12:14,520
it's minimum spring flow and species protections, so on that minimum spring flow side,

759
01:12:14,620 --> 01:12:20,060
you know, that's obviously where my sensitivity kind of comes in in this conversation at this table.

760
01:12:21,120 --> 01:12:28,140
And so I feel a little better that the drought of record is still the drought of record.

761
01:12:29,060 --> 01:12:34,400
I can't believe I believe it, you know, and I think that level of uncertainty has

762
01:12:34,400 --> 01:12:36,780
those all questioning that, you know?

763
01:12:36,900 --> 01:12:42,420
And so again, I guess really my question is what Lucas or others, what change conditions

764
01:12:42,420 --> 01:12:48,220
trigger or adaptive management provision would we be looking at in our minds moving forward

765
01:12:48,220 --> 01:12:51,560
when things get worse on a sub-annual level

766
01:12:51,560 --> 01:12:55,020
because that's where our sensitivity's also, you know.

767
01:12:55,180 --> 01:12:57,180
Well, and I would go back to again,

768
01:12:57,820 --> 01:12:59,400
to Fish and Wildlife Service,

769
01:12:59,980 --> 01:13:02,020
what will fish require of us?

770
01:13:02,180 --> 01:13:03,220
And if they're telling us,

771
01:13:03,220 --> 01:13:06,740
no, we want you to have these periodic checkings,

772
01:13:06,740 --> 01:13:08,160
if we're gonna issue an incident,

773
01:13:08,480 --> 01:13:10,040
they don't take permit for 30 years,

774
01:13:10,680 --> 01:13:12,880
I think that trumps everything.

775
01:13:14,020 --> 01:13:17,880
But short of that, I guess we would establish

776
01:13:17,880 --> 01:13:26,360
those trigger points ourselves as we, as we contemplate moving forward. I would think I don't

777
01:13:26,360 --> 01:13:29,100
all differ to Lucas and see what he has to say.

778
01:13:31,180 --> 01:13:40,500
Yes, I would agree with you, Roland, that some of this will come down to negotiation with

779
01:13:40,500 --> 01:13:46,280
the Fish and Wildlife Service and making sure they feel comfortable with the conservation

780
01:13:46,280 --> 01:13:53,780
measures that are described in the, in the, in the HCP as they relate to spring flow protection.

781
01:13:56,320 --> 01:14:01,840
To answer Jonathan's question, I will say I can't answer that yet, but I did bring up the,

782
01:14:01,840 --> 01:14:08,020
the flow chart to indicate where we're going to be taking the hard look at monitoring an adaptive

783
01:14:08,020 --> 01:14:15,760
management at towards the end of this analyze and sign-off phase in 2025, where we will

784
01:14:15,760 --> 01:14:22,680
closely consider the adaptive management program, especially as it relates to climate change

785
01:14:22,680 --> 01:14:29,960
effects. And listening to the implementing committee members discuss the matter, I think you all

786
01:14:29,960 --> 01:14:37,680
have clear everybody, I'm hearing everything everybody's saying, and it's all making sense

787
01:14:37,680 --> 01:14:43,360
to me as things that will address through this permutinal process, adaptive management being

788
01:14:43,360 --> 01:14:51,800
really one of the primary tools that the Fish and Wildlife Service instruct applicants to

789
01:14:51,800 --> 01:14:58,120
consider when addressing the effects of climate change because they are so uncertain and we

790
01:15:00,000 --> 01:15:06,060
The climate change, you know, as we move forward through this permit term, so we have to be adaptive in our management.

791
01:15:09,440 --> 01:15:24,640
Thank you, Lucas. I think the only real difference in between, you know, what Robert had suggested, you know, as a potential item that we should look at versus what roll ended had, you know, discussed in relation to it.

792
01:15:24,700 --> 01:15:31,220
You know, I think adaptive management is going to need to be in their regardless, you know, I think on the specific topic of climate change.

793
01:15:31,220 --> 01:15:37,000
The only difference here is that I think what Robert's saying is that we should build in up front.

794
01:15:37,060 --> 01:15:55,880
You know, rather than waiting for something that we can clearly, like right now, we'd use adaptive management if something falls off the cliff and we can see in the systems that there's some new significant problem that we have to deal with that actually the program as it sits right now would not successfully address.

795
01:15:55,880 --> 01:16:01,660
That's what adaptive management was, and anybody, if I'd misstated that in any way in terms of the intent.

796
01:16:02,140 --> 01:16:07,240
Like that was the intent of having it end there in the first place was to be able to address those things that were,

797
01:16:07,240 --> 01:16:10,400
you know, became known to is during that process.

798
01:16:10,880 --> 01:16:15,020
I think the only difference here is that we're recognizing, I think with Robert's comment,

799
01:16:15,120 --> 01:16:21,120
he's recognizing the climate change issue, there's enough uncertainty associated with and enough unknown

800
01:16:21,120 --> 01:16:37,240
And then at over 30 year period, we should build in up front the thinking that we should take a look at this because of the level of uncertainty with it, and not wait for do we actually have something fall off the cliff first, you know, as the triggering incident to do it.

801
01:16:37,360 --> 01:16:50,980
He's just saying, build that in because we know we're making a decision, we don't have, you know, necessarily, you know, the best forward view on simply because there's so many unknowns about the weather and other things that occur there.

802
01:16:50,980 --> 01:16:58,620
So, in my point is, I would want us to be careful that we're not negotiating against ourselves

803
01:16:58,620 --> 01:17:04,140
before we even get to negotiations with fish, because ultimately it's legal protection

804
01:17:04,140 --> 01:17:11,280
for the region that we're looking for, and I mean, I know Robert from a scientific perspective

805
01:17:11,280 --> 01:17:16,920
is probably looking at it a little differently that, you know, from his understanding of water

806
01:17:16,920 --> 01:17:23,280
management and such and his experience historically. But at the end of the day, this is

807
01:17:23,280 --> 01:17:27,680
we're looking for legal coverage for the region so that we can continue to use the

808
01:17:27,680 --> 01:17:32,160
Edwards. So I just remind people of that.

809
01:17:35,840 --> 01:17:38,680
Thank you. I don't think any of us have lost sight of that.

810
01:17:40,020 --> 01:17:41,500
Tom, can I make a comment?

811
01:17:43,000 --> 01:17:49,760
Yeah. I'd like to make a few comments. This analysis is the best available science.

812
01:17:49,760 --> 01:17:55,120
And this coming from expertise from people that are way smarter than everybody in this room.

813
01:17:55,400 --> 01:18:01,760
And I've just got to make this point as a program manager because the skepticism that I've heard is not warranted.

814
01:18:02,580 --> 01:18:06,760
It's not warranted. It's not fair to the staff. It's not fair to this team.

815
01:18:07,200 --> 01:18:12,580
And I'm frustrated with it as the program manager because we understand that there's uncertainty.

816
01:18:12,580 --> 01:18:21,400
but to say that we don't have an adequate review of the data and an adequate analysis at this stage,

817
01:18:21,800 --> 01:18:28,880
I think is not being quite correct with what's happening and another comment is,

818
01:18:29,140 --> 01:18:34,040
I don't think we're going to fall off the cliff because adaptive management is also helped us be predictive.

819
01:18:34,640 --> 01:18:39,380
We have experience as a 12-year-old program and we don't fall off cliffs.

820
01:18:39,380 --> 01:18:44,300
we anticipate through monitoring programs that we're having an issue.

821
01:18:44,820 --> 01:18:48,240
We anticipate through program implementation that we're having an issue,

822
01:18:48,240 --> 01:18:52,800
but we don't fall off cliffs and I don't think we're going to fall off a cliff based on the analysis.

823
01:18:53,120 --> 01:18:57,140
Because we're using the most conservative information available,

824
01:18:57,520 --> 01:19:01,120
best technology, best science on the team that we've hired.

825
01:19:01,380 --> 01:19:02,860
And this is what we're going to use.

826
01:19:03,160 --> 01:19:05,020
We're not going to use something more conservative.

827
01:19:05,100 --> 01:19:06,760
We're going to use this as our baseline.

828
01:19:06,760 --> 01:19:10,560
as the program manager making it clear, this is what we're using.

829
01:19:13,670 --> 01:19:16,910
I think in relation and I don't want my comments mischaracterized.

830
01:19:17,550 --> 01:19:21,670
I'm not saying that the science is faulty in relation to this.

831
01:19:21,670 --> 01:19:23,670
I'm saying there's a lot unknown about it.

832
01:19:23,910 --> 01:19:27,130
I think the only point I've made in relation to some of this modeling

833
01:19:27,130 --> 01:19:31,590
and I think the concern that Dr. Mays may have and I'll let him speak for himself

834
01:19:31,590 --> 01:19:36,430
but there have been many models done in Texas in relation to the effects of climate change

835
01:19:36,430 --> 01:19:41,610
And in relation to those models, other than this one,

836
01:19:42,030 --> 01:19:46,410
they say that there will be drops that are more severe

837
01:19:46,410 --> 01:19:48,090
than the drop of record had been.

838
01:19:48,550 --> 01:19:51,290
Our findings in relation to the modeling that we've done

839
01:19:51,290 --> 01:19:52,230
differ from those.

840
01:19:52,390 --> 01:19:56,510
That's the only point that Dr. Mase has really focused on here,

841
01:19:57,670 --> 01:19:57,990
not saying...

842
01:20:00,000 --> 01:20:04,940
Seeing that this effort hasn't been good or that the scientists and folks working on this with

843
01:20:04,940 --> 01:20:09,440
EA and the others have not done a good job. I don't think that's the issue at all. I think

844
01:20:09,440 --> 01:20:16,980
the issue is there is a difference in results between many, many of these models. We don't

845
01:20:16,980 --> 01:20:22,800
know which ones of these will be the most accurate in terms of producing, and matching what

846
01:20:22,800 --> 01:20:28,700
the future conditions will actually be. We'll know that after the fact. But I think what Dr.

847
01:20:28,700 --> 01:20:35,520
Mesa simply had pointed out is that some of the modeling results that we are relying on

848
01:20:35,520 --> 01:20:37,840
are not born out by other models.

849
01:20:38,680 --> 01:20:40,260
And I think that's typical in modeling.

850
01:20:40,280 --> 01:20:42,300
I don't think there's any big surprise in that.

851
01:20:42,380 --> 01:20:44,140
I think we've all worked with models before.

852
01:20:44,360 --> 01:20:47,780
I think that's the thing that I believe we're trying to focus on here.

853
01:20:47,840 --> 01:20:50,060
It's not a criticism of the work that's been done.

854
01:20:50,560 --> 01:20:56,260
It's not a criticism of EA staff or a VCF or of any of the scientists working on this.

855
01:20:56,260 --> 01:21:00,420
Like it's simply just looking at there are a lot of different models out there.

856
01:21:00,620 --> 01:21:02,300
There's a lot of different information on this.

857
01:21:02,780 --> 01:21:07,260
We want to make sure we do make the best decisions we can using the best available science.

858
01:21:07,360 --> 01:21:11,340
I think that's what this inquiry and these discussions are aimed at.

859
01:21:11,540 --> 01:21:14,160
It's not trying to be the best science for the region.

860
01:21:14,740 --> 01:21:16,900
It's being done by our team.

861
01:21:17,060 --> 01:21:23,500
The best available science as being done at the statewide perspective is the statewide analysis.

862
01:21:24,100 --> 01:21:29,840
As far as regional what is impacting the Edwards Aquifer and the stakeholders and the

863
01:21:29,840 --> 01:21:33,020
permitties is being done by our team, I would offer.

864
01:21:33,560 --> 01:21:39,300
I think when we go statewide, we use that data that's important as a reference point.

865
01:21:39,620 --> 01:21:45,160
And we've gone back as a team and we've analyzed the reports that Robert has requested us

866
01:21:45,160 --> 01:21:45,860
to look at.

867
01:21:46,040 --> 01:21:50,140
And I don't know if Lucas might want to share some of that analysis, but it might help

868
01:21:50,140 --> 01:21:56,720
provide some context to what Robert's comments were made during the last meeting, and things

869
01:21:56,720 --> 01:21:58,220
he asked his thoughts.

870
01:21:58,700 --> 01:22:07,360
Yeah, I can speak a bit to that, and they are important points.

871
01:22:08,780 --> 01:22:17,060
So if anybody's thinking about this and wondering, okay, so what did our work show as it relates

872
01:22:17,060 --> 01:22:24,180
to springflow projections versus what folks might be hearing or reading for future climates

873
01:22:24,180 --> 01:22:32,120
in Texas or beyond. There are some key points to keep in mind. So, one is how long into

874
01:22:32,120 --> 01:22:40,540
the future are you looking? So, or is the analysis considering? So, in this work, we're just

875
01:22:40,540 --> 01:22:51,360
looking to 258. A lot of the climate modeling or climate planning efforts look beyond that

876
01:22:51,360 --> 01:22:58,040
through the end of the century, 2100. And what happens or what starts to happen in mid-century

877
01:22:58,040 --> 01:23:05,500
right around the mid-2050s is climate models really do start to diverge quite a bit. So your

878
01:23:05,500 --> 01:23:11,840
level of uncertainty really starts to increase a lot, your severity of effects especially in high

879
01:23:11,840 --> 01:23:18,580
emissions scenarios get drastically worse. So that's an important point to think about.

880
01:23:18,700 --> 01:23:25,520
You can't just look at one climate assessment through 2,100 and compare it to in 1,2,20,

881
01:23:26,100 --> 01:23:32,260
58 or mid-century and compare those apples to apples, they're different. The other thing to think

882
01:23:32,260 --> 01:23:41,600
about as we start to consider various climate projections or planning efforts is what, you know,

883
01:23:41,620 --> 01:23:43,020
what are the questions being asked?

884
01:23:44,200 --> 01:23:53,400
So in our work, we focused on spring flows, because that is the most important question

885
01:23:53,400 --> 01:23:59,360
that we have to answer as it relates to the listed species that we're looking for to get

886
01:23:59,360 --> 01:24:01,140
up a permit renewal for.

887
01:24:03,320 --> 01:24:07,700
But a lot of other climate assessments look at a whole host of potential

888
01:24:07,700 --> 01:24:14,620
effects. And specifically as it relates to drought, there are different ways to measure drought.

889
01:24:15,380 --> 01:24:21,220
So a lot of drought is measured through water balance metrics or you probably have all heard

890
01:24:21,220 --> 01:24:27,800
of the Palmer drought index, which those deal with soil moisture. And they are very important

891
01:24:27,800 --> 01:24:30,620
drought metrics, but they're not the same as Springflow.

892
01:24:32,040 --> 01:24:37,360
And in our work, we looked at, and I'm saying, are, but really, if EIAs and the

893
01:24:37,360 --> 01:24:45,380
casts and Pauls looked at, okay, what are the effects of Recipant Temp on Springflows?

894
01:24:46,300 --> 01:24:52,040
And really, what came out of that is that precipitation is a very important forcing agent

895
01:24:52,040 --> 01:24:59,960
on spring flows. And that was born out through the recharge model that the EAA did, where they used, you know, artificial intelligence.

896
01:25:00,000 --> 01:25:08,580
Intelligence to align projected sprinkles with the U.S. G.S. Historical Methods and show that

897
01:25:08,580 --> 01:25:16,620
temperature is really important. So again, I just want to emphasize the point that you know,

898
01:25:17,000 --> 01:25:22,140
and I think it's related to what you're saying too, Tom. There's a lot of different models out there,

899
01:25:22,140 --> 01:25:26,220
and there's a lot of different questions that you can ask as it relates to climate change.

900
01:25:26,220 --> 01:25:30,600
and our works focused on through the permit period,

901
01:25:30,700 --> 01:25:33,380
so 2058, and looking at spring flows.

902
01:25:33,960 --> 01:25:36,420
And so if you're looking at other climate assessments,

903
01:25:36,500 --> 01:25:40,760
just remember that you don't want to be comparing

904
01:25:40,760 --> 01:25:43,640
apples to oranges and there's different questions

905
01:25:43,640 --> 01:25:45,460
being asked in some of those.

906
01:25:49,210 --> 01:25:50,090
So, thank you, Lucas.

907
01:25:52,170 --> 01:25:52,850
Other comments?

908
01:25:53,950 --> 01:25:54,330
Discussion?

909
01:25:55,370 --> 01:25:56,110
I definitely have a comment.

910
01:25:56,730 --> 01:26:01,170
I think one thing I'd like to say too is that for the implementing committee we are here to

911
01:26:01,170 --> 01:26:07,250
provide that input and to voice our opinion. And so it's again not to say that we don't have

912
01:26:07,250 --> 01:26:12,650
confidence in what we're receiving, but we do have a rule to voice our opinions as well.

913
01:26:13,670 --> 01:26:17,230
I do feel more comfortable with the presentation on the second hearing of it after hearing

914
01:26:17,230 --> 01:26:22,570
that U.S. Fish and Wildlife was comfortable with using the drought of record as kind of the bottom line here for us to look at.

915
01:26:23,850 --> 01:26:30,170
I do hear the voice and the concern too that I mean, just my gut reaction is like, is the

916
01:26:30,170 --> 01:26:33,750
drought of record really going to be a drought of record forever?

917
01:26:34,230 --> 01:26:39,470
I mean, probably not, but I appreciate the science that we've received so far that says this

918
01:26:39,470 --> 01:26:40,990
is what we can look at moving forward.

919
01:26:41,390 --> 01:26:47,070
Sounds like this is a launching point for us, and so we can kind of get through the next steps

920
01:26:47,070 --> 01:26:52,550
and start evaluating how this data kind of bounds up to what we're looking at.

921
01:26:53,590 --> 01:27:08,670
So I guess one of my questions is, like, what is this process look like if we get through these next steps and we see that some of the data we're receiving today doesn't work well with some of the conservation measures and stuff like that that we've started putting into discussion.

922
01:27:09,570 --> 01:27:11,670
I'd like to respond to you.

923
01:27:11,790 --> 01:27:17,550
I'm not saying that you all don't have a role in making your opinions, but I do feel that

924
01:27:17,550 --> 01:27:22,410
it was important that I stand up for the work that's been done, because this is the best

925
01:27:22,410 --> 01:27:23,950
available science.

926
01:27:24,330 --> 01:27:30,130
This is the best available technology that's been utilized for this aquifer and for the

927
01:27:30,130 --> 01:27:31,550
species and spring flow.

928
01:27:31,750 --> 01:27:35,350
There's no one else that's done anything close to this.

929
01:27:35,350 --> 01:27:42,110
And so we've compared it, you've heard some additional contextual feedback, but I just want to

930
01:27:42,110 --> 01:27:47,890
make it clear that that's where it is. I'm not criticizing that you don't have a role in a voice,

931
01:27:48,430 --> 01:27:53,510
but as the program manager, I do have a place where I do need to step in and make sure that everybody

932
01:27:53,510 --> 01:27:59,990
understands where we are, what we're using, and what we will use going forward. That's where I am.

933
01:28:07,220 --> 01:28:09,540
Any other comments? Questions?

934
01:28:10,380 --> 01:28:30,960
I think just a day. Responding. I think if Lucas could chime in on the question of, if we get over the next couple of steps here and we go through the conservation measures and we compare then to the take analysis and all that and we realize that we need to, you know, revisit some things. How does that look like in the process?

935
01:28:30,960 --> 01:28:32,140
Yeah,

936
01:28:34,170 --> 01:28:42,410
it's a good good question, Roland, and I think I would just answer it simply with, you know,

937
01:28:43,190 --> 01:28:48,930
as we move through designing any potential changes to conservation measures,

938
01:28:50,470 --> 01:28:57,650
and then those will need to be going through review with this with committees and approval

939
01:28:57,650 --> 01:29:02,110
approval in terms of conservation measures with this implementing committee or

940
01:29:02,110 --> 01:29:08,490
directive to proceed, I should say, then we'll go through looking at monitoring

941
01:29:08,490 --> 01:29:12,710
an adaptive management, they'll be review of that as part of the adaptive management phase.

942
01:29:12,730 --> 01:29:17,610
Then we get into the documentation phase, and that's where all of this comes together.

943
01:29:19,410 --> 01:29:25,310
And in an administrative draft, HCP, and at that point in the process, they're very well

944
01:29:25,310 --> 01:29:30,790
maybe some negotiation that needs to happen with the Fish and Wildlife Service and amongst

945
01:29:30,790 --> 01:29:42,330
the permatees, and I would just note that, you know, we can take, you know, we can

946
01:29:42,330 --> 01:29:48,350
always look and adjust the take assessment to make sure it reflects best available information

947
01:29:48,350 --> 01:29:54,150
as if it becomes available and make sure that, you know, all permatees are comfortable with

948
01:29:54,150 --> 01:29:59,830
whatever's submitted to the FishWall live service and that, you know, there aren't any

949
01:30:00,000 --> 01:30:06,060
Crisis from the Fish and Wildlife Services side, because they will have been working with us

950
01:30:06,060 --> 01:30:16,080
along as we go. So I think to sum up, I would say, we're out of about, yeah, I think someone

951
01:30:16,080 --> 01:30:22,700
said we're out of a launching point with this, and there's more work to come, and anything that

952
01:30:22,700 --> 01:30:29,700
would directly relate to a change in a conservation measure that would be reflected in the

953
01:30:29,700 --> 01:30:35,600
and I'll take permanent self would be very clearly communicated to all permitties and carefully

954
01:30:35,600 --> 01:30:39,220
considered before that's brought forward to the FishWild Service.

955
01:30:45,820 --> 01:30:46,400
Thank you, Lucas.

956
01:30:48,830 --> 01:30:49,990
Anything else?

957
01:30:52,890 --> 01:30:55,930
All right, well thank you very much and appreciate your comments.

958
01:31:00,050 --> 01:31:02,470
So I guess we, I'm sorry.

959
01:31:03,770 --> 01:31:04,390
Yes,

960
01:32:11,570 --> 01:32:15,930
I won't speak for either Mark Hamilton or Paul Bertetti. I'll ask them to come to

961
01:32:15,930 --> 01:32:25,570
and elaborate. But I don't think we're ever done. We're never done so it's there was we had a

962
01:32:25,570 --> 01:32:31,270
modeler who always like to use the word that it's all iterative and so we learn and then we build

963
01:32:31,270 --> 01:32:37,170
upon that and then you learn some more and then you build upon that. So to your point I don't think we're

964
01:32:37,170 --> 01:32:44,670
ever done refining the data and the modeling capabilities but Paul I don't want to speak out of

965
01:32:44,670 --> 01:32:44,970
here.

966
01:32:48,230 --> 01:32:56,910
So I think that's particularly difficult kind of question to answer. Certainly we would

967
01:32:56,910 --> 01:33:02,870
want to continue developing an understanding of the system, revising things based on new

968
01:33:02,870 --> 01:33:03,530
information,

969
01:33:06,170 --> 01:33:12,090
and you know, reassessing our ability to understand what might change into the future,

970
01:33:12,090 --> 01:33:13,610
what's changing now.

971
01:33:14,730 --> 01:33:17,610
But this process is also finite.

972
01:33:18,850 --> 01:33:22,330
You can't continue to work on stuff

973
01:33:22,330 --> 01:33:27,090
while you have a deadline and need to get information pulled together

974
01:33:27,090 --> 01:33:32,830
and assembled for review as part of a licensing application process.

975
01:33:33,190 --> 01:33:35,950
If you do that then you're in 2030

976
01:33:35,950 --> 01:33:38,290
and you're still working on the latest data.

977
01:33:38,290 --> 01:33:58,170
And so, you know, there are decisions that had to be made to, you know, collect a number of models that we could process in a reasonable timeframe, develop this recharge model, get the model runs done, in tongue name for people to look at it, make some decisions about what's best and go forward with that.

978
01:33:58,170 --> 01:34:00,790
And so, you know, the models do show

979
01:34:00,790 --> 01:34:02,570
repeat of the drought of record.

980
01:34:03,990 --> 01:34:07,190
The point is, some don't, and some do.

981
01:34:07,670 --> 01:34:09,730
The issue is, drought of record seems like

982
01:34:09,730 --> 01:34:13,010
a reasonable approach based on what we know

983
01:34:13,590 --> 01:34:16,310
for analysis of a 30-year period,

984
01:34:16,650 --> 01:34:19,910
because the drought of record is 70 years ago now.

985
01:34:20,370 --> 01:34:23,510
And so, you know, I think we're in the right time frame.

986
01:34:23,870 --> 01:34:25,570
So what I would say is,

987
01:34:26,450 --> 01:34:35,090
Yeah, I'd love to run 100 models, working on with everything that we know, developing a new

988
01:34:35,090 --> 01:34:36,530
sort of system approach.

989
01:34:37,350 --> 01:34:42,150
But in a practical sense, we had to be able to get to a point where we can assemble an

990
01:34:42,150 --> 01:34:48,310
application, put together our best effort in terms of what that means, put it in front

991
01:34:48,310 --> 01:34:55,550
of Fish and Wildlife for them to review and for us to do the analysis, and it kind of

992
01:34:55,550 --> 01:34:59,430
point, you have to, you know, get to the practicalities of how you're going to implement.

993
01:35:00,000 --> 01:35:06,260
And then take the opportunity once that's in place to revise that as necessary, going forward.

994
01:35:07,180 --> 01:35:15,040
No, we don't know what the future will hold. We could have the drop of record seven times before we get to 2050.

995
01:35:16,500 --> 01:35:29,640
None of us really know that. What we do know is, based on everything that we've seen, the drop of record still seems like the best scenario for us to evaluate

996
01:35:29,640 --> 01:35:35,040
in terms of worst case conditions, could it be worse historically, has it been worse

997
01:35:35,040 --> 01:35:41,160
properly? But we're not looking at 100 years, or 200 years, we're looking at about a

998
01:35:41,160 --> 01:35:45,960
three-decade period in which we can make some assumptions of what's going on, using the best

999
01:35:45,960 --> 01:35:53,200
available models that we have, and as many as we could process in the time that we were given to do that.

1000
01:35:53,200 --> 01:36:07,380
And so, we have every intention of continuing with our understanding, developing better sets of models coming up with a new set of groundwater flow models that might help us better understand a better predict spring flow.

1001
01:36:08,400 --> 01:36:17,240
But in a practical sense, we also need to have a target for assembling some data in an application to move the process forward.

1002
01:36:18,020 --> 01:36:19,460
So, that would be my responsibility.

1003
01:38:09,190 --> 01:38:14,370
I understand that, but I'm certainly not the person to answer that question, so yeah.

1004
01:38:16,450 --> 01:38:24,190
I think I understand where you're going with that, but it's, I view it as almost

1005
01:38:25,430 --> 01:38:32,280
the car before the horse or whatever other tailwagging the dog.

1006
01:38:32,940 --> 01:38:38,100
I think that our modeling program, our science program with the EA, is going to continue to evolve

1007
01:38:38,100 --> 01:38:49,180
And we're going to continue to put the appropriate resources in place so that we know as much as we can know about the system and how it works and how we can mitigate negative impacts to it.

1008
01:38:50,960 --> 01:39:03,740
So I would hesitate to put a timeline on it in the sense that there are so many other issues that hand right now in this region from a water supply perspective.

1009
01:39:03,740 --> 01:39:10,140
We have entities across the region that have done a great job of diversifying their water supplies and their

1010
01:39:10,140 --> 01:39:18,980
Edwards supplies are becoming they're better able to manage that through droughts, but then we have other areas like to the west where

1011
01:39:19,780 --> 01:39:27,840
the Edwards remains a soul source, and so we're working in that respect to shore up the Edwards as a water supply

1012
01:39:29,000 --> 01:39:33,120
and so some of our efforts scientifically and modeling

1013
01:39:33,740 --> 01:39:39,660
are going to naturally take into account all that that's happening.

1014
01:39:40,640 --> 01:39:46,280
So it's not just about this effort, but it's a little bit broader.

1015
01:39:46,460 --> 01:39:47,560
It's a little bit more global.

1016
01:39:48,080 --> 01:39:51,900
But as we do that wherever those efforts fit into

1017
01:39:51,900 --> 01:39:57,180
solidifying and showing up to HP, we're going to do that because that's naturally also.

1018
01:40:00,000 --> 01:40:09,320
So that's not really a hard answer for you or like just to say that it's happened not to overuse the

1019
01:40:09,320 --> 01:40:16,600
word iteratively, but that's kind of how science works. And so we've done that in this first

1020
01:40:16,600 --> 01:40:22,940
permit as we've learned. I think we've enhanced the science that's there and certainly we've

1021
01:40:22,940 --> 01:40:27,740
enhanced the resources within our organization. And I think that's going to continue to happen, at

1022
01:40:27,740 --> 01:40:34,820
that's my intent. I will not be the general manager for the next 30 years. I can tell I

1023
01:40:34,820 --> 01:40:43,600
that I can tell you for sure. But in the time that I'm here, that's going to be a focal point.

1024
01:40:44,020 --> 01:40:44,780
I don't know of that.

1025
01:40:58,420 --> 01:41:03,920
So I think it's important to make sure that those assurances are documented going

1026
01:41:03,920 --> 01:41:13,020
forward, in particular as these positions change with the EHCP participants and those involved.

1027
01:41:13,600 --> 01:41:18,000
So I think it's more just looking, making sure that there is a strong assurance for those moving forward.

1028
01:41:18,300 --> 01:41:23,140
Yeah, and so to that point, what I would defer to our science group is, you know, they have

1029
01:41:23,140 --> 01:41:28,140
a research plan and a science plan and it'll be important that they have that for the future

1030
01:41:28,140 --> 01:41:32,040
And in that sense, that captures what their goals,

1031
01:41:32,040 --> 01:41:36,960
our goals are for the next five, 10 years beyond that.

1032
01:41:37,440 --> 01:41:41,920
And so, but those plans could change as we learn things.

1033
01:41:41,920 --> 01:41:45,260
So that's where I say that's kind of an iterative process,

1034
01:41:45,920 --> 01:41:50,700
but no, the commitment is there how we capture that commitment,

1035
01:41:50,900 --> 01:41:56,140
I guess, is what you're asking, and we're certainly always wanting

1036
01:41:56,140 --> 01:41:58,940
to demonstrate that in whatever way we can.

1037
01:41:59,740 --> 01:42:00,260
Thank you.

1038
01:42:00,540 --> 01:42:03,920
Yeah, so maybe even an update on what those plans are

1039
01:42:03,920 --> 01:42:07,400
in terms of the kind of a near term in the long term

1040
01:42:07,400 --> 01:42:09,400
with the science group and the modeling efforts,

1041
01:42:09,540 --> 01:42:10,660
I think, would be really helpful.

1042
01:42:12,300 --> 01:42:13,020
Thank you.

1043
01:42:17,280 --> 01:42:17,820
Daryl?

1044
01:42:18,360 --> 01:42:22,620
Carol Patterson and I chair the Research and Technology Committee

1045
01:42:22,620 --> 01:42:24,640
for the Edward Talka for Authority.

1046
01:42:24,640 --> 01:42:36,880
This Tuesday, we approved a greater than $1,000,000, $3,000 annual contract with USGS, especially

1047
01:42:36,880 --> 01:42:43,260
to collect spring flow information that is a major portion of it.

1048
01:42:43,740 --> 01:42:51,240
And that is ongoing, and has been ongoing for 45 years, that contract with USGS, and every

1049
01:42:51,240 --> 01:43:00,720
year, it's looked at again. We also approved a contract. I had to miss the meeting, so I'm

1050
01:43:00,720 --> 01:43:06,920
speaking out of turn, because I'm sure we approved it, but I wasn't there. With San Antonio

1051
01:43:06,920 --> 01:43:15,100
River Authority to look at the impacts of water quality on civil oak creek and what's

1052
01:43:15,100 --> 01:43:19,640
and how that will be affected by future development.

1053
01:43:20,740 --> 01:43:27,100
And I think that incorporated in that is a collaborative beyond just the water quality

1054
01:43:27,100 --> 01:43:33,080
that EAA will be participating with their staff and getting help from helping them

1055
01:43:33,080 --> 01:43:36,680
and getting help from them on what's happening in water quality.

1056
01:43:36,940 --> 01:43:44,200
We have a field research park where we are looking at future ways to start at the top

1057
01:43:44,200 --> 01:43:52,140
the watershed but to quantify the benefits of how you can absorb more water into the ground

1058
01:43:52,140 --> 01:43:58,860
so that you both temper the droughts and temper the floods for everybody from the top of

1059
01:43:58,860 --> 01:44:06,720
the watershed to the coast. But I also know that our scientific staff has such integrity

1060
01:44:06,720 --> 01:44:12,060
that they will not tell you or even venture, I guess, as to the outcome at this point.

1061
01:44:13,720 --> 01:44:15,280
So, thank you for that, Carol.

1062
01:44:16,320 --> 01:44:18,000
Thank you for letting me sound all.

1063
01:44:21,140 --> 01:44:23,720
Are there any other comments or questions in relation to this item?

1064
01:44:28,320 --> 01:44:28,960
Thank you.

1065
01:44:33,800 --> 01:44:41,580
So, we won't be taking a formal action on that today, but I believe that will be shown on the next agenda for action.

1066
01:44:44,640 --> 01:44:49,200
With that, we're at the future meetings and items for consideration item,

1067
01:44:49,200 --> 01:44:57,320
And I did ask that wording this change a little bit this time so we don't just speak about what the date for the future meeting is but this would also

1068
01:45:00,000 --> 01:45:09,100
Would like to see any additional information, this would be a good place to ask for a future agenda presentation or information in relation to that.

1069
01:45:09,100 --> 01:45:17,440
I just wanted to make sure we had an area that we could ask for additional information on and capture that at these meetings.

1070
01:45:18,020 --> 01:45:24,360
So with that, our next meeting is scheduled for the 19th of September.

1071
01:45:26,980 --> 01:45:32,220
And I don't think there's any other items that I have at this point in time I'd ask for an addition to that.

1072
01:45:33,680 --> 01:45:35,180
So any other thoughts?

1073
01:45:36,800 --> 01:45:37,160
All right.

1074
01:45:38,340 --> 01:45:41,860
With that, Damon, do we have any questions or comments from the public?

1075
01:45:43,500 --> 01:45:45,100
We do not have any comments online.

1076
01:45:45,520 --> 01:45:48,000
I'll ask for one last time if we have any comments in the room.

1077
01:45:48,000 --> 01:45:48,640
Thank

1078
01:45:50,660 --> 01:45:57,120
we're good. Seeing none. I think we're at the item for adjournment. If I could have motion to adjourn.

1079
01:45:57,140 --> 01:45:57,940
So moved.

1080
01:45:58,920 --> 01:46:00,680
I'll second that in the objections.