 All right everybody, thanks again for being here tonight and for joining us for this webinar. We really appreciate your time. This event is being recorded and will be available afterwards for you to re-watch or share with others. My name is Brooke McMurchey and I work with the Province of BC Columbia River Treaty Team and I'm pleased to be your host for this event. I'm grateful to be joining you tonight from the territories of the Lugwungen speaking peoples, known today as the Esquimalt and Songhees First Nations, also known as Victoria BC. And I also acknowledge with deep respect the territories of the T'Naha, the Schwetmek, the Silks and the Sinaix peoples whose territories span the Columbia River Basin. It's great to see so many of you here online tonight. There's just over 160 of you and it looks like the number is increasing. So really wonderful to have so many people listening in. I feel free to introduce yourself in the chat if you'd like. Let us know where you're joining from. So I'm pleased to welcome tonight's speakers, but before I turn it over to them I'd like to take a minute and share how this session will go. So we'll go over a brief agenda. We'll start with some opening comments from the Minister of Finance who's also minister responsible for the Columbia River Treaty, Katrina Conroy. Next we'll hear from Aidan McLaren Coe who is a councillor with the village of Necusp and a member of the Columbia River Treaty Local Governments Committee. We'll then move into a session and hear about the Columbia River Treaty and current negotiations between Canada and the United States. We'll hear from Stephen Gluck who's the chief negotiator on the Canadian negotiating team and Kathy Eichenberger who is BC's lead on the Canadian negotiating team. We'll pause after that for a few questions and then we'll move into a session on updates from BC Hydro. We'll hear from Darren Sherbaugh who is manager of system optimization. And after Darren's presentation we'll turn the floor back over to questions for the remainder of our time together before adjourning at 7.30 Pacific time or rather an hour and a half from now wherever you're joining. So just to clarify how to ask your questions this evening, you please could type in your question in the Q&A function so you'll find that at the bottom of your Zoom screen somewhere there's a little Q&A box. If you click that it should open a window and you can type in your question and then hit submit. Please don't type in your questions into the chat as they will be missed. Also please to type out, please try to type out full questions so that we know what topic you're referring to. So instead of typing questions like what does that mean or could you explain further, be sure to include the topic that you're referring to. Please be respectful in your tone and your use of the chat and the Q&A function and keep your questions direct into the point. Please use appropriate language today just to note that derogatory language or negative comments towards any individuals will not be tolerated and anyone using abusive language will be removed from the session out of respect for the presenters and for others who have joined us tonight. We'll try and answer as many questions as possible aiming to address some of the common questions that have been sent to our teams and that we've seen in public forums but we will be compiling all relevant questions in a summary report after and we'll circulate it to the to everybody who's registered for this session and it'll become available publicly afterwards. So I think that's it from me. I would love now to turn it over to our panelists and first and foremost I would like to welcome Minister Katrina Conroy who as I mentioned is Minister of Finance as well as Minister responsible for the Columbia River Treaty. Katrina, wonderful to see you take it away. Thanks so much Brooke and hi everyone and thank you all for taking the time to join us this evening. I was watching the names come up on the chat as Brooke was talking and they're from all over the base and so it's really great to see you all virtually and I too want to acknowledge the territories. I'm actually in my office in Victoria so I'm on the territories of the Lekwungen speaking people the Esquimalt and Sonny's Nation and I think we're all in people's territories across the base and so thank you for all attending again. I know that in-person events are in many ways preferable to virtual ones but this way we could get so many more people to participate and also we could have the panel that we have tonight that make sure that we get all the questions answered that you want answered so again thank you to everyone for participating virtually and also for the people that are participating on the panel and I just I want to start by emphasizing how serious the situation is to me. I know it has been a really extremely challenging year for everyone in and around Arrow Lakes Reservoir and I mean I've been a resident of the area since childhood and what's happened this year is is really troubling. This this part of the world that that we're talking about is is central to my own history it's where I grew up where I grew up camping and swimming and fishing and boating on the Arrow Lakes and now my and then my family's done that and now my grandchildren are doing it with with my kids and it's it's you know the lake has been part of my life since childhood for more than half a century so like like all of you I am not pleased to see the impacts that we've witnessed this year the impacts on recreation on tourism our economy and end our fish and wildlife habitats just name a few I've shared your frustration over this past summer and into the fall and I know many of you have receiving information from BC Hydro from from my constituency office and the province's Columbia River Treaty team but we felt it was really important to bring everyone together to provide further updates and and to correct some misinformation but answer some of your questions as the minister responsible for the Columbia River Treaty and and as MLA for Kootenai West it's really frustrating to be faced with the situation that feels like there's there's very little that you can do to fix it as you can imagine and we we can't change the severe drought conditions that have affected the entire province this year and at the same time it's extremely important that we prepare to meet BC's anticipated electricity demand this winter by holding water back in the in the Kambasket reservoir and BC Hydro they'll speak to that a bit more later another key reason for the situation this summer is as many of you know or are learning it's our obligation to meet legal requirements under the Columbia River Treaty which require BC to send a certain flow of water to the United States at Pacific times of the year for flood protection and in this case of this summer power generation purposes as well as for fish so the treaty has been part of the Columbia Basin since the 1960s and there's a critical need to improve it what what worked over half a century ago it just doesn't necessarily work today and how well it worked even all that time ago that depended on who you ask for the respect of governments of the day it was no doubt an unqualified success but for the people who lost their homes and their livelihoods the communities and First Nations left out of the process and the ecosystems that were inundated and disrupted it was devastating and even though the treaty has prevented damaging floods and and supported us empowering our homes and businesses many impacts continue to this day as as you all know I don't need to tell you all that and improvements are needed that's why since 2018 Canada and the U.S. have been in negotiations to modernize the Columbia River Treaty and I just I want to point out here that that because I am BC's minister responsible for the treaty that position doesn't give me a magic wand I can't cancel the treaty or change its terms or requirements I have responsibility within the government of BC to support BC's involvement in the treaty negotiation process and the negotiations currently underway to modernize the treaty are are non-partisan I I want to make it really clear that there are no elected officials sitting at the negotiating table myself included and no one's at the negotiating table on either side I know people have always asked me you know how's it going at the table but I am not at the table and I think that's really important to clarify you know we have an excellent team of what I call our professionals working on behalf of British Columbia that is the BC Columbia River Treaty team and and you'll hear from them tonight you'll hear from executive director Kathy Eichenberger along with Canada's chief negotiator for the treaty Stephen Gluck and while I'm not part of the actual negotiating team at the table I'm in frequent contact with the BC treaty team and federal and first nations leaders to discuss what needs to change and I want to stress how seriously I take the letters sent to myself and to the treaty team as well as the photos and posts that we see on social media and and the news reports whether they are about arrow lakes or or the the treaty in general and all of this input feeds into and strengthens our negotiating positions so that we can create a modernized agreement that better supports the Basin's ecosystems and and the people who live here I I have full confidence in the negotiating team which as I said includes Canada, BC, the Tanahash, Wefmic and in Silicon Okanagan nations and they are working extremely hard to modernize a treaty in a way that benefits the BC Basin and are advocating strongly to make improvements that reduce the type of impacts we've seen on the arrow lakes this year and this process it strengthened by our close collaboration with the Columbia River Treaty Local Governments Committee who who've been a critical voice for Basin community since 2012 and by all the input we've received from Basin residents over the past 10 years since our engagement on the treaty began we have several people here this evening who can speak to various aspects of what we seen in in the arrow lakes this year and what's been done to mitigate situations like this in the future they can answer some of your questions and give you more details and context about what's what's going on and as I said previously I I wish there was an easy fix to what we're experiencing often as a government minister I'm confronted by problems and issues that are hundreds of kilometers away but for me this one hits very very close to home I mean it's in my backyard so on this issue and on other matters that that that really others that really matter to the Basin communities I'm going to continue to advocate for improvements to the Columbia River Treaty not only as an MLA in your area but also as the minister responsible but as someone who calls this place home so thank you again for being here tonight really appreciate all your participation thanks so much minister really appreciate your comments I'd now like to welcome Aiden McClaren Coe who like I mentioned earlier as a counselor with the village of Nicospe and a member of the Columbia River Treaty local governments committee and though he is neither a chair nor co-chair of the committee Aiden is the representative from the arrow lakes reservoir area and appointed by the regional district of central Kootenai so Aiden take it away thanks very much thanks very much Brooke and thanks minister Conroy for your comments earlier as Brooke mentioned my name is Aiden McClaren Coe counselor with the village of Nicospe and director on the regional district of central Kootenai and a member of the LGC the local governments committee so I'm here to talk just a little bit about the history of the committee and some of the work that we're doing the LGC was created in 2011 to ensure the voices of basin residents and local governments are heard in any discussions about the future of the treaty the 10 committee members are appointed by the four regional districts in the Columbia basin plus the village of Valemount and the Association of Kootenai Boundary local governments and as Brooke mentioned I have the honor of representing the RGCK all the work that the committee does is based on what we have heard from basin residents over the past decade of community meetings and ongoing dialogues and in 2021 the committee provided our recommendations on the treaty to the five governments involved and I'd like to bring your attention to recommendation number 13 which is titled less fluctuation in reservoir levels and it includes a couple pertinent statements it is a priority for basin residents that water levels and all treaty related reservoirs fluctuate less to reduce impacts on ecosystems tourism recreation and transportation and that a minimum summer drawdown level is needed for the arrow lakes reservoir to avoid extreme summer drawdowns in dry years as occurred in 2015 and 16 and of course this year and these dry years are expected to occur more frequently as the climate continues to change the negotiating team has indicated that our recommendations don't differ from what's being pursued in the negotiations and we appreciate the assurances that the team is strongly advocating for improvements to the treaty so that in the future the type types of impacts we've experienced this summer and fall will be reduced I think it's important that everyone understands as minister Conroy mentioned that the LGC is not represented at the negotiating table we have provided our recommendations to the team and we trust that they've incorporated them into the negotiations and we do of course respect that these negotiations must be confidential and we're not privy to the details I think one of the more interesting aspects of our work is the compilation of information about the socio-economic interests that are being included in the computer modeling of the river system which is used to support the negotiations for the arrow lakes reservoir this includes recreation and tourism interests such as beach use motorized boat and marina access as well as navigation for log towing dust storms and erosion are two additional complex factors that we have been working on including in the modeling as well and we've also had the honor of working with indigenous nations that are leading the way on compiling information about ecosystem function and the potential for salmon reintroduction basically so if you'd like to learn more about the work that the committee does or our recommendations our website is easy to find at crtlgc.ca and yep and then thanks for putting that into the into the chat there and our email is info at crtlgc.ca if you have questions for the committee so that's just a brief overview of the work and i just want to say on a personal note like minister Conroy I live in the arrow lakes valley with my family in the cusp and we have experienced this extraordinary year firsthand and i want to thank all of the residents of of my community and the valley that have taken the time to share their concerns and frustrations and ideas with me and the committee over the past several months it has been a difficult and challenging year for many for a number of reasons and democracy is a participation sport and i think it works best when its citizens educate themselves about these pressing issues and engage with directly with their elected leaders to have their voices heard just like so many of you have done and our committee has been taking your concerns very seriously and we have spoken several times over the past several months to everybody that's here tonight from the minister to the negotiators to bc hydro and i want to thank the committee and specifically our executive for supporting this advocacy on behalf of of the arrow lakes valley and the whole Columbia basin and that's it for me so i thank you for listening and for having our voice at this table and i will look forward to the rest of the conversation and any questions you might have so thanks for your time thanks very much Aiden so now i'd like to turn it over to two people who are very involved in the crt negotiations Stephen Gluck who is Canada's chief negotiator on the Canadian delegation and Kathy Eikenberger will follow Stephen so Stephen i'll pass it on to you go ahead yeah thank you brook and thank you minister Conroy and Aiden as well for your opening remarks it's it's great to be here today i've been looking forward all week to being able to speak to you about the negotiations and let you all know how we are approaching it and where we're at so far first off just the global affairs team has from the very start of this negotiations valued the perspectives and inputs of the people of the basin we have worked hard along with our colleagues from the province of British Columbia the Tanaha, Okanagan, SILTS and SWATMIC nations to view our work and our priorities for a modernized treaty to reflect the needs of the basin and the communities living there it's worth noting the involvement of the Indigenous nations as part of the Canadian negotiating team and it really highlights how different things are today from how things were 60 years ago since early 2018 representatives of the three Indigenous nations have worked hand in hand with the governments of Canada and BC develop and refine negotiating positions and strategies they are present in the negotiating room and are full participants in meetings with Canada and BC before during and after negotiation sessions and the reason I raised that right from the start is again the diversity of positions and the various views and so on that have come into the positions that Canada brings forward at the table and what we've presented and negotiated with the United States I would just like to highlight the key items that our negotiating team is advocating to include in a modernized CRT we are looking for increased domestic flexibility in treaty dam operations to enhance ecosystems, Indigenous cultural values and socioeconomic interests in the basin in the Canadian portion of the basin we are looking at updating the flood control provisions and hydroelectric benefits and we are very much focused on the need to find common ground with the U.S. on bilateral treaty ecosystem provisions and efforts to do everything from again look at the ecosystem from not just one side but a sort of one river approach as well as even efforts to look at studies for the reintroduction of salmon into the upper Columbia we are also looking at adaptive management which allow both countries to adjust to the effects of climate change including droughts and floods and other future unknowns just to provide a bit more information on some of the issues I just raised on domestic flexibility which is as I said a key priority for us we have heard from you about the negative impact suffered due to the treaty from both the building of the dams and the reservoirs as well as the ongoing operations we see obtaining a measure of flexibility for our own domestic needs as enabling us to be able to make improvements in the basin the goal will be to have decisions on this flexibility be focused on ecosystems indigenous cultural values and socioeconomic needs I will say that even though we continue to negotiate there is an emerging acceptance that a modernized CRT must include Canadian flexibility on updating the flood risk management provisions most of you know that in September of 2024 so just under a year from now the treaty shifts from an assured flood control regime to an ad hoc called upon system what this means is that under certain conditions the US can call upon Canada to provide it flood control while in theory this could provide more flexibility to Canada it may also create more uncertainty so we are looking to update the flood control provisions to give us both more flexibility while ensuring a degree of certainty for better long-term planning and the ability to maintain and use the flexibility that we are seeking also I'll add we are keen to work with the US on some of the ecosystem issues as I said earlier from the one river perspective including work on salmon and other ecosystem issues and again we feel this is an important area to both look at our own domestic flexibility for our own ecosystems as well as basin river wide I'll just quickly touch on the status of the negotiations themselves we we completed our last round in Portland, Oregon just last week and although we still have a number of gaps we need to close between us and the United States we are starting to make progress we remain hopeful that we can come to an agreement in principle in the near future from this we will come to the basin to update you and discuss where we have landed we'll keep you up to date as we get closer and look forward to coming out to the region for these discussions thank you and be happy to answer your questions once we get to that but I'll turn it over to Kathy who can help provide you a little bit more details of where we're at thank you okay well thank you um people part of this webinar may think we're repeating ourselves but it's a good thing because that means we're a lot we're aligned on on a lot of the things that we're working towards so I hope you don't sound like a broken record um I just want to thank everybody from uh for joining us during your supper hour uh and also thank you minister Conroy and councillor McCleary and co for your opening comments and and and Stephen Gluck my federal colleague he he has been working with me on the climate retreat since 2011 so very well steeped uh in all of the aspects of the treaty even though he is in Ottawa but he's actually a bc boy so um that's where his heart is so the first thing I want to say is that I really echo amplify your concerns about the impacts that we've seen in the arrow lakes this year uh I had my home in the west Cooney in the Silicon Valley actually for 10 years and I just I moved to the Coonies to to or the west Cooney to hike and and paddle the arrow lakes and and bike in the area that we're talking about tonight so um it's it's it's it's heartbreaking for me as well uh and but during the time that I lived in the west Cooney I was uh had several provincial environmental roles in the region and also working with uh ministry of environment uh so when I moved to Victoria and I was asked to lead the review of the treaty 12 years ago um it was an honour but it came with a sense of purpose a duty to make things better than they are today otherwise why would we be here so our Canadian negotiating team as Stephen said are very very aware of the devastating impacts that this year's low water levels have had on on everybody and every living thing um to communities to individuals to families fish populations and tourism and recreation that is so important to the to the area and and you know from my own experience I can appreciate how hard it is to see that day after day after day um so it's it's an incredible place and I know uh how hard it is for people who live there but also people who visit from from away who come and they don't expect what they're seeing this year so but I do want to uh can you do slide one Morgan please I I do want to um dispel some some misunderstandings around what the treaty is and it isn't so you have heard that the treaty requirements have caused uh the a significant part of the drafting or the lowering of the reservoir levels and so just wanted to start because to tell you when it was created it was to increase power generation and flood control in Canada and the West and to share the benefits equitably um and people ask well what's BC's role well Canada of course is the level of government that negotiates international treaties with other countries including the United States and it did that in 61 but uh WAC Bennett our Premier of the day he intervened and he was a driver to have Canada BC reached an agreement in 1963 to um transfer the requirements obligation of the treaty but also the benefits to the province so that's what happened in 63 and the treaty was only ratified in 1964 uh and and also the treaty is is an evergreen treaty it it doesn't end unless one or the other countries issue a termination notice nobody has issued a termination notice as Steven mentioned there's one thing that does end and its flood risk management which i'll speak to in a minute but the key is Canada and BC we entered into this treaty willingly as partners with the United States and so we're committed as the US is committed to upholding the treaty requirements why well for one it allowed for the construction of the Columbia and Cootney dams to provide electricity to just about half the province and it also prevented and prevents flooding in trail and castle gar and other communities which without the treaty dams you would have seen flooding definitely in 2012 for those who remember 2012 but at that time they did things differently nobody was consulted or very poorly consulted and and the indigenous voices were non-existent and so there's this lens of social injustice that compared to today's standard is still still raw with a lot of people so um for a slide to Morgan uh some of the key facts so Canada BC because we received on their 63 agreement the obligation to fulfill the treaty had to build three dams so Micah Duncan and Keenley side and the US was given the option to build Libby Dam which they did and it flooded uh into Canada uh and and uh so that that basically is the gist of and you see on the map where the treaty dams are and often people think Rebel Stoke is Rebel Stoke is a treaty dam but it is not it was built after Micah and and basically Micah enabled Rebel Stoke to be to be constructed um the slide three the current treaty provisions so what does it include well uh the power provisions of the treaty allows for the the management of 15.5 million acre feet to optimize power downstream in the US now what's 15.5 million acre feet well it's one acre and one foot deep times 15.5 million shared between Kinbasket Reservoir behind Micah uh Lake Arrow Reservoir and then and then Duncan Duncan behind Duncan Dam and so those are the power provisions and remember those were developed in 1961 uh also uh the US because of that have to deliver uh to Canada and BC through our agreement one half of the estimated potential US power benefits it's called the Canadian Entitlement now the Canadian Entitlement is not a dollar figure it's amount of electricity if you will that comes to the border on a regular basis and that it belongs to BC not BC Hydro not Columbia Basin Trust and it's either sold to BC Hydro for own domestic purposes or sold on the market the revenue goes into the provincial general revenue that provides services etc to British Columbia the other part of the treaty is um the flood control provisions and it's 8.45 million acre feet it's not in addition to 15.5 but it's within that and that storage for flood control is managed to prevent flooding downstream and that was bought for 60 years for 64 million dollars and that's the one thing that expires in 2024 so um what changes well depending on what is negotiated uh if there were no changes the US would have to call upon or ask for the ability to use space in Canada to prevent devastating floods in Portland and in the general area so those are the basics and on the next slide we understand that there are many people who may not have participated in our public consultation when we started in 2011 we had and 2012-2013 we started to look at the treaty uh to see whether we should continue it or terminate it or amend it and when you say amend would mean improve uh and so we in 2012 we started a consultation engagement with indigenous nations with local governments who've been uh such an important component of guiding and advising the province in what the constituents would like to see and the residents of the BC Columbia Basin to wanted to know what mattered to them and and what people want to see in a change in a treaty and so we've had and you see on the screen a lot of virtual meetings in-person meetings and the in-person meetings were one of the best experiences of my life with just plain people coming together and talking about what they like what they don't like and what they want changed and we will be doing that again but we also you know got up with the times and and use all the tools in our toolbox to talk to people and often citizens regular folks residents they're surprised because they have colony and I pick up the phone we talk about for half an hour and it's very important for me and others to hear directly from voices from the people so we also have been attending public meetings with with Canada and with indigenous nations to keep people informed about uh what's going on in the treaty negotiation process but also answer questions and hear from residents firsthand so the the also there two committees that we are working with closely and you've heard from aid and tonight about the Columbia Retreaty local government process and we've been seeking their advice for the last 10 years and there's also the Columbia Basin Regional Advisory Committee and these that that committee is citizen members and others from across the basin so people in in in Jeffrey can talk to people in in the cusp we talk to people in golden and and it's a very rich conversation and that too guides us on what we should be negotiating for the future and so you know you you can see where we've been our virtual sessions and all of that gives us opportunity to hear directly from basin residents and and there are on our website if you can go to the public consultation you're going to see a lot of information but also a report that we produced that it's a what have we heard report when we were in all of these communities and we you know we wanted to portray exactly what we heard whether or not we agreed with it and and that's a good background so you can maybe see what you are talking about and see it reflecting in that for people who weren't involved at the time um so um this this has given us a lot of opportunity to to hear people on and what they want well people want what they told us they want to include ecosystem health the environment from fish to bird to wildlife they want that to be expand the tree to be expanded to consider those things including also indigenous cultural values the people wanted to also see us work towards the reintroduction of salmon that was blocked not by the Columbia retreat dams but by grand culley decades before a decade before but there's a big push to reintroduce them I hear often about water security in Canada and adapting to climate change especially in light of more frequent floods and droughts and so that that adaptive management that is going to be very important going forward it it doesn't quite exist or is seen in the current treaty we hear and you'll hear again again tonight managing for recreation tourism and navigation and but in addition to that communities and local governments want more say in how the treaty is going to be operated or planned in the future and of course continuing to enjoy having blood protection and and hydroelectric power but also a fair share of the treaty benefits for for BC so we're going to put also a link in the chat about the Columbia River Treaty community meetings that that hopefully you'll be able to to look at what I just mentioned so what are we aiming for well you've heard Stephen and you've heard the minister and and and Aiden and so you know what you've we've heard this year is what we've been hearing all along and so you know supporting swimming and voting and minimizing dust storms and enhancing ecosystems and so people have been really consistent and that's been driving our negotiations and we've been we've been in negotiations for five years what is consistent is having those voices and that advice and guidance that we take with us to the negotiating table and it's reflected on and how we are having these discussions with the US so we we are looking at the the key changes that we want to see on the flexibility and one of the things is the flexibility we're looking for is unilateral flexibility so carving out a piece of the treaty storage operations that we can use domestically without having to have consensus or agreement with the United States that's important because it will be just focused on our own values and objectives the we're also looking at how to address managed ecosystems across bilaterally as a one river concept from headwaters to the estuary and and then we also don't want to lose benefits that we have today so these are some of the all the things that we're we're driving towards and you can when you read the communiques that come out after each round you'll see that each time we're adding more to it where there's more areas of agreement and especially and including on environmental topics which frankly 10 years ago 20 years ago weren't mentioned and certainly weren't mentioned when the treaty was was developed so we've we've so what does that mean for you now and in the future okay that's all nice what we're trying to negotiate what does that mean exactly well as the minister mentioned we need to meet our treaty obligations and to receive its benefits in bc so we we have to provide a certain volume of water to us at certain times of the year and the benefits and its public record and over the years it's been as low as 90 million and it's covering usually around 150 to 200 million last year was a good year the prices it's based on the price of power on the market and the province realized 420 million which we are sharing a portion with the indigenous nations so um but this year uh hydropower generation requirements contributed to the the lowering of the reservoir level uh and you know it's we know it's all the more hard to see when we see across the border the water levels are much higher but you know we entered into a treaty willingly 60 years ago and so that with a bad drought those are two factors that we're finding ourselves in this year so that is why we are negotiating for changes to reduce these type of impacts in the future there's a lot of research and computer modeling underway to see how would we change reservoir levels and operations dam operations so that ecosystem and socioeconomic objectives can be improved and a lot of that is led by indigenous nations and also uh Selkirk College in partnership with the Columbia Retreaty Local Government Committee so that work is contributing to river management scenario modeling to look at how can we change these operations and how to best use our flexibility or our future flexibility but first we have to conclude negotiations on a modernized treaty we can't do it now we are right now having to follow the current treaty uh once we have an agreement principle as Stephen said we're going to come back to the basin and explain all the different features and what is changing and why and get feedback from you when that has landed we'll make changes and once the treaty modernized treaty comes into effect we are going to be making changes steps to make those changes happen so you know unfortunately I know you want to know well when when will this happen and I can't give you an extra exact date but we will keep you up to date as soon as possible on each step along the way because you know we're we're we have a treaty that's lasted for almost 60 years we're really looking at uh the future the future of the environment the future of the basin and the future of you know our next generations so um I I just wanted to talk to you tonight about what we're working towards um and something we've been discussing for several years now I mean we've heard uh that you we've heard that you have read that the United States believes we can reach an agreement principle on a modernized treaty this year and and I can't predict whether it will be exactly so but we are very optimistic very optimistic but again it's not going to change the situation this year there's hope for the future though because you know we certainly can improve on a treaty that was drafted almost 60 years ago and so yeah it's you know it's taken five years to get to work today um if we were less driven by our convictions by what we've heard from you all and from indigenous nations maybe we'd have a treaty already but we're taking a strong stance to ensure that it meets our objectives but also satisfied satisfying U.S. needs otherwise we wouldn't have this this collaborative treaty so I know and I I I want to end by saying that I really understand how frustrating it is to know that this terrible situation can't change immediately but as you've heard tonight we are working really hard meeting with the U.S. on a weekly basis to to get to a place where we could mitigate you know situations that we're seeing this year for the future thank you thanks so much Kathy and Stephen I know there's lots of activity in the questions and in the chat just a reminder to folks in the chat if you have questions please put them in the Q&A box so that we can see them and I already know you know we're not going to have time to answer everything tonight but really the Q&A box will help us capture all the questions and answer them in our summary report so I think at this point we'll take a couple of questions before moving into our next presentation and then leaving as much time as we can at the end for the bulk of the questions and at this time I'd like to invite Adina Brown who has been going through the Q&As here and is a ministerial advisor in Minister Conroy's office she's offered to help us out here tonight and Adina if you want to read out a couple questions for Kathy and for Stephen I'll invite you to do that right now great thanks Brooke I have a here is the first question if there are not elected officials on the board and I think they mean on the part of the negotiation committee why would resident input be of any value well I I hope that I've helped answer that because you know we we are coming to the base and we're talking to people we're listening to you we're listening to local government committee and that all basically frames what our negotiating mandate is and at the same time so we are directly you know partnering collaborating with local government officials in the basin but also I report to my assistant deputy minister two reports and we report to the minister Conroy who is the minister responsible for CRT so up to the minister responsible but also to local governments and residents and so I hope that helps to show the connection and the other thing is when we come back to the basin with an agreement in principle we are going to show you how your input is reflected in the agreement principle and I'm looking forward to that yeah and if I can just add I mean I think you know on you know on behalf of the government in Canada I mean we are responsive to the various you know I've been out in the basin many times you know been in town hall meetings we have a negotiating mandate that is cabinet approved when we first put it together and you know part of that is really a reflection of what we heard and what we present to cabinet to get the mandate to go forward so we do have a responsibility and and second of all to and to be quite blunt you know if we were to go and negotiate an agreement and you know the various elected officials who do make various decisions at the end to ratify these things don't like what we did because we were not responsive I don't know if they would give us the you know the thumbs up the seal of approval on it so you know we're we're guided two ways you know there is the we won't get this through if it doesn't meet the expectations of the various elected officials and two we are you know what we put together and what we are bringing forward in our negotiating mandate you know comes from what we've heard and and the various inputs that we've received so I think we are very responsive to um what we've heard thanks Steven Adina maybe one more um yeah thanks the question is why are the treaty negotiations confidential yeah that's a that's a popular question that we do get um and you know we do hear it a lot um there's something in order to really have a good exchange ideas with with call it the other side um it it's important to um you know be able to have to go have discussions and exchange ideas without everything sort of being blasted out every detail because it it it's important to be able to exchange ideas exchange pressure points and all these other things um in in a in a manner that um that allows a bit more freedom of conversation I think it does look like if you know we hear pressures that they get on their on their side uh uh they hear hear ours and so on it does it does allow for you know some freedom to get these ideas out to push them forward um like I mean like I said at the beginning like Kathy said I mean this is not um you know meaning that at the end of the day we're going to have this um an agreement that's you know we're going to be in a windowless room where we've come up with the agreement and then we're going to throw it down in front of everybody it's it enables the exchange of ideas moving forward and you know as you know we've come back many many times I know we brief the local government's group and C BRAC and town hall meetings in terms of giving general updates but in terms of sort of the sanctity and the movement of the negotiations it's it's it's important not to share every little detail and who said what and what they're saying and little exchanges of ideas um but I realize that's not everybody doesn't agree with that way forward and it's you know potentially somewhat controversial but that's just a matter of how a lot of these especially international negotiations go. Yeah thanks thanks Stephen um you know there are a lot of juicy questions I I really have to uh call out the person who's calling us corrupt I mean you know we're here in good faith and we've explained and and you know I think you should hear in our voices that we're sincere to call us corrupt is frankly you know diminishes your your perspective so I encourage people to be helpful and help us guide towards good good negotiations and there's a lot of great questions if we aren't able to answer them all tonight definitely we'll be able we will answer them afterwards and it will be published. Thanks very much Stephen and Kathy and I think in the interest of time we'll move on in our agenda and I'll welcome Darren Sherbot from BC Hydro to share his presentation and uh and then we'll move into questions and see how many we can get through before the end of the evening thanks very much and Darren take it away. Thanks Brooke uh good evening everybody and thanks for the opportunity to be here with you today we've had several previous opportunities to discuss with the basin and the region on the ongoing issues and we appreciate the opportunity to continue that dialogue. On Darren Sherbot I managed the system optimization team at BC Hydro. Our group is effectively responsible for the management of our annual planning for our large reservoirs in the peace in the Columbia and the energy management to keep the lights on while balancing all our regulatory requirements. In an average year it's a somewhat enjoyable job and in challenging years like we've seen both on the flood side and the drought side it become very interesting and challenging. On a personal note over my 20 years at BC Hydro I've spent a significant amount of time in the Columbia basin both as an engineer and a fisheries biologist during the initial launch of water use planning and later of course in operations helping balance water energy Columbia Treaty River obligations and our water license requirements. My daughter was born in the Cougneys so we've spent several winters summers skiing fishing canoeing hiking there so I have a good appreciation for the Cougneys and the soft spot there. First of all I'd like to acknowledge that we know it's been a very difficult time for those that live around the Arrow Lakes basin but also came basket and Duncan reservoir. These summer and fall water levels are not something that any of you wanted and I want to be clear that it's not what we wanted either. We haven't seen these levels this low on Arrow Lakes probably since the 70s and for many years this is probably the first time you've experienced a reservoir this low in August and September. It reflects the exceptional combination of this year's low snowpack and the severe drought conditions that we've been experiencing in the Columbia but also across the province since June and May. It's under these unusual circumstances that we had to manage the system under the Columbia River Treaty obligations and we during this time explored many options with BC Hydro within BC Hydro and our partners within the Columbia River Treaty to help keep summer levels higher at Arrow than what we actually observed now. I'll be sharing some information and observations about how we got here and what we've heard from the community about impacts and observations over the course of July, August, and September so far. After this meeting if you have any feedback on our presentation or like further information please reach out to our Southern Interior Community Relations team. We're planning on setting up more meetings with the community throughout the season that's always good to engage with folks directly. I'd also like to note that we've heard from many of our employees in the region how grateful they are for your kindness and patience during this challenging time as well as your willingness to connect with us and share feedback. That feedback is important and helps drive better decisions and communications going forward. And as noted earlier BC Hydro is also deeply involved in the treaty negotiation process. It's provided advice and council to the provincial Canadian negotiated teams and leaders from Indigenous communities and local governments. So maybe I'll just start with how we got here this summer and fall. The story starts with the combination of three unfortunate events both a low snowpack coming in the spring, the local drought, and also the provincial drought. Arrow levels can probably be managed within sustainable and respectable ranges with two out of those three but it's the combination of those three things all once in a year that made this year challenging and culminated in the levels that we saw over August and into September and October. So to start as I mentioned the snowback we have to go back to winter last year. Snowpack is really important in our operations as it stores water for the spring and then under average conditions provides sort of a steady stream of inflow as it melts in addition to the summer and fall rainfall. This year two unusual things happened as we know. First of all our snowpack was below average to start within the spring so that sets us up at least for initial challenge for managing arrow levels at higher recreational targets. The second unusual thing is it melted very early and almost all of once in May. This was almost unprecedented over a record set and as we look back we had a highest amount of inflows in May and then of course followed by practically nothing June, July, August, September. Here we are in in October. It's both a recent example of extremes and infill variation that make both planning and management of the system challenging. For comparison we remember even two weeks ago we had a much higher and in fact above average snowpack and we were wearing a flooding in the spring in 2022. Seems like a long time ago. While low snowpack of course can set us up for lower than average levels it can and is often offset by the subsequent summer rains and fall rains. This year of course unfortunately was followed by a deepening provincial local provincial drought. After the rapid snow melt in May, arrow, the Columbia Basin, in fact all of BC hydro systems were subsequently deeply impacted by the dry summer and fall that fung. As you remember arrow peaked around 1440 feet about four feet below full pool in June and then quickly dropped to by most historical operations over 40 feet of the summer reaching 1400 by the end of August. It's hard to imagine but we were actually above average in mid-July still. It's the precipitous drop across July and through August it started to attenuate the summer that caught the most of the public's attention and exposed many of the issues that we saw both with environment exposure of archaeological sites and exposure of structures and debris that would normally be covered in the winter. The lack of the rain this summer was the third problematic for arrow and it's the provincial perspective. In a given year we can balance the integrated system between many of our reservoirs, the combination of our generation in the lower mainland Vancouver Island and of course in the peace. Peace in Columbia systems particularly Kimbasket, Revelstoke and Williston count for almost over 50% of our generation and when one area is in a system drought we can sometimes balance generation and mealyrite the effects of deeper reservoir drafts, a lowering of the reservoir in those situations. But the drought that we saw across the province this year was provincial wide and it didn't give us the flexibility. I'm sure as many of you know Kimbasket which is upstream of Arrow along with with Revelstoke is a major reservoir for BC Hydro. Its levels were also below this average year but what the drought did it was not afford us the ability to release more water from Kimbasket over this time to further prop up Arrow across that period through July and August. We're also seeing a similar situation in the peace region as Williston reservoir levels were also much lower than normal. As I mentioned before this accounts for about 50% of the power in the province. Going into the fall was important for BC Hydro both to store sufficient energy both in peace and Kimbasket and Revelstoke for the upcoming winter. As I mentioned before when we have unusual conditions in the Columbia basin or vice versa in the peace we can often rely on each other basin to help the other watershed out but in this case the drought was provincial wide and our hands were fettered in many different cases. Reduced inflow of course is only half of the picture the other part is about our discharges and our discharges are managed as mentioned before by Kathy and company under our Columbia River Treaty obligations. Under the treaty we're still required to send water to the estering periods of dry conditions and perhaps not intuitively the amount of water that we have to send increases relative to years when we're dealing with flood risk management. This was especially visible across July and August as the reservoir drafted at levels and at rates that we haven't seen for many decades this summer. I want to make sure that people know however that we did not send any more water than was absolutely required over this course of time and the water that was discharged was managed daily as part of infill forecasts and operation planning and reviewed both by BC and the Columbia Treaty entities on a weekly basis. Our goal over the summer and through the fall still remains to slow the drafted era reservoir and carefully balance the remaining water that we have in King basket and rebels still coming up into the winter. Perhaps pre-emptively one occurring question that has come up in many of our public consultations and forums is about the minimum discharge rates from the treaty. Although the lowest possible discharge rate is 5,000 cubic meter feet per second, this does not mean that we can choose to only release 5,000 and in fact we would only see releases down to 5,000 during extremely white conditions or flood risk management when we were hired to hold more water back for flood risk management purposes. As mentioned earlier during dry conditions we are actually required to release more water than we would in an average year and as such the related release from arrow far exceeded the inflows from arrow both from releases from Kim basket and our local inflows which resulted in that rapid draft across July and August. I also want to clarify that BC Hydro has not been exporting any power at the expense of arrow reservoir levels. Arrows be managed to keep levels as high as possible and that's hard to to fathom given that it went as low as it did across August but also to ensure that Kim basket reservoir upstream has sufficient source for the winter energy management. We need to hold water again in Kim basket and Williston to provide for the winter months and of course we'll see that generation appear in proper arrows we go through the winter. We have an obligation as utility to keep the lights on for customers and we know that the demand for generation from Kim basket and renewable stoke will only increase as the gaze get longer and colder throughout the winter. So supporting arrow levels and you know looking at the levels that we ended up down currently around 13 now and even now it's hard to understand all the work that actually went into preventing the levels from going even lower and faster. Despite the levels that we saw now BC Hydro has been and continues to work very hard both with the Columbia River Treaty entities and internally to sit there and try to moderate the effects of the drafts that we saw then and are continuing to see now through the fall. Some things that manifested was a probably about an eight feet additional offset in arrow over the summer months and that's what partly allowed us to keep the reservoir higher through to mid-July prior to that draft from July through August. Additional things that we considered were increasing flows from Duncan reservoir so those reservoir was drafted lower than would be for that time of the year and slightly offsetted the drafted arrow over the summer and more releasing across September and October we continue to negotiate successfully with the U.S. to store probably about additional seven feet of offsetting generation in arrow and again this is energy that can be kept in kin basket for the winter coming up. Despite this we still saw levels in arrow that we haven't seen from the 1970s. With the forecast currently in for the fall arrows barring very major precipitation events that we still hopefully may see through October and November levels are still likely to decline more. Approaching 1380 feet by the end of November would not be unexpected although levels that low are not necessarily that seasonally out of line with our winter drafts. What was different this year of course those deeper drafts down to 1390 and 1400 occurred during the prime recreation season where things were much more visible not covered with snow and access to those reservoir perimeters was a lot easier. It's always hard to predict what next year's levels look like it'll be combination of the snowpack that we received this year and next year's rain but we do know it often takes about two years to sit there and and moderate the effects from these big reservoir events that carry on so we'll still be managing the effects from this year's drought next year even under average conditions. This year's low levels cause all sorts of challenges environmental concerns recreation and socioeconomic concerns and usual access to arc sites that were exposed and exposure of previous structures and materials associated with the initial reservoir flooding and construction. So let me talk a little bit more about the environment and a couple topics that have been raised frequently amongst our fishery staff and with community relations. One in particular has to do with the coconut axis and their ability to viably spawn this year going forward. Every year we work the Ministry of Forests and the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program to assess and count the number of coconut spawners on Arrow Lake. In particular there was a concern that coconut spawner access may be limited by both the reduction in the local tributary inflows associated with the drought but also because the reservoir was lower making it difficult to access those said tributaries. While still preliminary nation what we've seen this year surprisingly has been very positive this year's coconut spawner return is good and access to many of the major tributaries is very good compared to recent years. There are many factors that contribute to success but it's hard to know that coconut and Arrow are resilient to this combination of both low reservoir levels and low tributary levels across the fall. Of course we've collected a lot of information this year that will help set a baseline and we'll continue to do that and this will feed into our future decision-making management and assessments. Another major challenge to us and what may be an alarming to the public many of us who aren't even fishery biologists is the increased visibility of stranding for fish in the reservoir margins along these pools. Again levels this low may occur in the winter and have in the past but at this time it's not as biologically active and those pools are covered with snow. It's hard to see an assess out there at those times. These deeper drafts across August and into September however manifested in multiple reports of stranding in localized pools for many small fish. BC Hydro initially went out and started surveying them and starting in September went out and made more dedicated inventories and began salvaging where possible and impractical. It's a monumental task like almost 500 kilometers of shoreline that needed to be assessed and identified and with those areas probably over 160 pools and 30 major sites that were evaluated. The salvaged fish were mostly small and young. Things like sculpin, stace, red-sized shenner and carp and that's not to diminish their value from an ecosystem perspective but the longer-term or larger impacts on trout, mountain white fish, kokani, things like that were not necessarily readily observed. We continue to have crews on site as the reservoir sort of attenuates down to the slower levels of 1390 and they continue to actively salvage where possible and reported. Any additional reports or sightings and areas that identify the public are appreciated and again can be reported to our community relations who can pass that on to our biologists. It's mentioned before all that information will be ruled up and help us assess and make decision-making going in and forward with respect to fish risk stranding management and how we look at managing the reservoirs. Archeology also presented new challenges for this year. Again, levels are slow, aren't typically seen until the winter and at that point the reservoir perimeter is difficult to access, covered in snow and ice. This year we had multiple opportunities to sit there and look at the reservoir in August and in September at levels that again many people have never seen before or we haven't seen since 1970s. Part of this an archeological consultant was brought on board and they completed additional assessments in low elevation areas where previous arc sites hadn't been reported or known to us before and we also revisited some of those exhaust spikes that we know about just to see if anything had changed or the erosion associated with it. Those level levels had modified the sites. Crew members included many representatives from local indigenous nations and communities. Community relations and BC Hydro continues to thank them for partnering with us and helping address that issue in real time. The preliminary results of course show that many new sites were reported with this option of seeing the reservoir without the snow and again several of the existing sites were expanded and the inventories were added to that. We also worked with the indigenous communities to mobilize guardian watch programs just to manage how the arc sites were being accessed and of course to educate the public and not manage the information with respect to disturbing or taking information from those arc sites. Of course these areas are highly significant to the indigenous communities and they're protected under Heritage Conservation Acts. Just a reminder if you see new artifacts please leave them in place but report their location to our community relations team and they'll follow up directly with indigenous nations accordingly. The summer drawdown did allow us however one opportunity that we hadn't afforded before was to take some aerial photos of the reservoir without snow and ice cover at details down to around 1390. This will provide us valuable new information both on exposure of arc sites and also where we may see debris and structures that would normally be covered in ice and snow. Last that I just said it's called with the inventory structures and materials. So what we're talking about here is original buildings, infrastructures, debris, landfill sites that were part of the original reservoir inundation and filling and perhaps not seen by many people before until you go back to the 1970s. And again while the reservoir might get to these levels in the winter they certainly have not been exposed for people to assess interview and it may be alarming to many people that were used to foreshowers at higher levels across the summer months. When the reservoir was created there were a lot of existing structures that removed or demolished but many of the footprints, foundations and existing structures perhaps landfill sites were left along the shoreline stores where old communities were located. Normally as I had mentioned before they're covered by snow but these low levels exposed them much earlier to access and we're also more visible. To many of you we appreciate seeing these structures without the cover snow may have been alarming and provides a window into what the reservoir had looked like prior to inundation. We've received multiple photos and information in the summer of different debris and hazard sites across the reservoir. A particular mayor from the village of Natus, Tom's in the Elkick, RDC director Teresa Weatherhead, Colleen Lakevoid on their advocacy and the issue of providing our southern interior communication relations teams information on where new sites and areas have been exposed. What we've done with all this information and with our own properties is cross-reference that and expanded our historical database. We now have crews that are going on and undertaking more detailed inventory of historic structures and materials. The figure was there, tagged, recorded with respect to things that we don't know and we'll also look into the environmental considerations with archaeological and heritage values as well as accessibility and public safety concerns. In some cases if it's possible we maybe would remove specific hazards and structures if they're not significant archaeological or heritage values to sit there and manage for safety purposes and in many instances it'll probably be left in place like it has been for for the decades past but we'll do our best to address this issue and approve safety moving forward in consultation with local governments and first nations. Of course the information that you provided on this vet has been invaluable helping focus and guide this process. If you have any further information about debris and hazards or safety events please again reach out to our community relations team and that information is provided on the slides and will be provided after this presentation is over. With that wrap up I'll end tonight's presentation. We didn't get into a lot of technical details about whether climate energy balance said VC-Hydro normally could do so we're happy to field those questions independently or as part of tonight's panel or just follow it up with community relations after the fact. Thanks for the opportunity to present again and for all your patients in working with us through these challenging climatic times. Thanks Rick. Yeah thanks so much Darren and thank you all again for your patience I know in some cases some of the information you're hearing tonight is a repeat. We felt wanting to set the stage and provide context and then we also make way for the new information that some of which was just shared so thanks very much Darren. I think we are going to go to questions now and I know some people have been posting questions in the chat and just remind you to please put them in the Q&A box if you'd like them considered. We've got a few questions flagged and and we have another just over 15 minutes to go through them so without further ado I'm going to pass it over to Adina to read out a question and invite our presenters to turn their cameras on so that we can answer some questions. Go ahead Adina what question do you have for us? Thanks Brooke. The question you might have here is during this summer the Columbia River was higher than usual. Looking at water levels now Grand Coulee is at 85% full, Arrow is low, Duncan is down a third and King basket is near full. It appears that Arrow was drained to save water at Duncan and King basket. Could there not have been a better sharing of water levels? It is also tough to think we are in drought when they spill water over Coulee for a light show every night during the summer. Who would like to take that question? Well perhaps I can start just on how we balance King basket, Rebel stove, Arrow levels and Duncan. So effectively there is almost 20,000 gigawatt hours worth of energy in King basket and Rebel stove which is vital for us to preserve and manage across the winter. Arrow generation is perhaps 120th of that. So in terms of sharing or managing the water in King basket had we had more flexibility across the rest of the system to generate more or rely on the piece or the lower main land of Vancouver Island across the winter then it would have afforded us the opportunity to discharge more from King basket and then conversely crop up Arrow more. But that was not the case because the drought was not only local to the Columbia but it was provincial allied. Duncan levels were higher but this year we actually drafted Duncan below its recreation targets and balanced the fisheries concerns downstream so it was operated lower than it would have been across the summer and again to offset even further deeper drafts of Arrow. A foot at Arrow is worth eight feet at Duncan so it's hard to offset Arrow levels by drafting Duncan. There's also the comparative reservoir draft so King basket over the course of the winter has the flexibility to draft almost 150 feet. Average year we might do 120 feet so Arrow was drafted 40 feet over the summer. Duncan reservoir in the course of supplying its flows for obligation strategic downstreams will probably be drafted about 100 feet before the winter is done as part of this normal operations. So I hope that sort of helps understand the importance of keeping water both in King basket and how we had tried to help balance the system. I'm wondering if someone can speak to Grand Cooley and Lake Roosevelt there's a lot of concerns clearly about why Lake Roosevelt is kept high when Arrow is suffering so monumentally and we've heard the Columbia River Treaty has requirements to send water down south. I'm wondering if there can be an elaboration on that or anything further to say. Maybe I can just start with that so Grand Cooley also has a tremendous amount of generation there so I suspect both for the fishery management purposes that Grand Cooley needs the support over the winter and for their own energy management needs that's why water was not discharged so Arrow that would have flown from water that would have flown from Arrow to Cooley and then discharged over the summer was not because they are keeping it in their reservoirs for the same set of reasons that we are for generation across the winter. The Columbia River Treaty also does not oblige the US entities to use the water in any particular way once it flows down the border so they can choose to manage it for energy purposes fisheries and navigations over the myriad of needs of the Hamptown stream. We did work with them throughout the summer to try to offset even deeper drafts at Arrow and as mentioned lightly in the presentation provided perhaps about eight feet and seven feet of additional offset of general Arrow draft this summer. Kathy do you have anything more you want to add with Ops on Roosevelt? No just to just reiterate that how the BC dams are operated is as per the current treaty to maximize power in the United States hence the water is flowing at certain rates at certain times of the years to do exactly that for which we are compensated and that is why we want to make changes to rebalance that a bit to be able to address issues like recreation low Arrow Lake reservoir levels fisheries salmon reintroduction and so but right now the current treaty has steps along the way inside the treaty that dictates when to release water under what conditions across the border and that information is you know treaty language and definitely can share I know somebody wanted to see the tree language and the steps that are followed to do exactly that. Thanks Kathy I think we'll go on to another question here Edina. Yeah will there be any initiatives to improve spawning channels on more creeks along the Arrow Lakes? We all passed that question to to Ryan because it sounds although a keen interest for me Ryan can probably speak to that. Thanks Darren yeah thanks for the question. You know I just want to start off the province is the lead on resource management so I can speak a bit on BC hydro but I just want to acknowledge that in terms of projects there are a couple large avenues to put forward proposals like that where we work together the fish wildlife compensation program does a lot of work and physical works on streams and tributaries it's also could be raised as an issue in water use planning and in the order for you so there's a couple larger avenues for those issues to be raised I do want to reinforce some stuff that that Darren mentioned just of course we're reviewing all all info to date but today again we did show that that the Kokani are accessing the main tributaries that that they're spawning out of so at this point we believe habitats not being shown to be limiting and we're fortunate in that Kokani are stray spawners as well so if they can't get into an area they will go find another one they're not tied to to to spawning in a certain tributary there's also the risk of of luring them you know in increasing access to bring them into a trip that might then dry up or have sub suboptimal habitat conditions lethal temperatures and the things so there's all sorts of things you want to consider before artificially increasing Kokani access into tributaries responding thanks thanks very much Ryan Adina another question um yeah here's another one if a more constant lake level was agreed upon in the new treaty say 20 uh foot fluctuations uh what would be the downsides as far as flood control and power generation I can I can try to ask that so that's what we're bottling right now um arrow used to uh fluctuate naturally uh more than 25 feet um and so keeping it constant is not a natural uh operation or is not a natural phenomenon but what we are looking at is uh changing the operations to fluctuate less and to see whether we can um uh operate uh the system so that flood plains are increased riparian ecosystems are increased wetlands are created and that's exactly what we're looking at and and that research and that modeling is being led by uh the Canadian indigenous nations with the participation of BC government and Canadian government uh scientists and technical people there there um some of the work has been shared uh at a during a virtual meeting and it's also on our website on what kind of values they're looking at they're also looking at um what they call um functional flows that try and and and see whether we could change operations to mimic the flows to some degree not completely the the dams are always going to be there but to mimic some of the flows during certain periods uh to to mimic what was there naturally to um support fisheries and for example equal um cottonwood uh systems so that is going that is being looked at and and it it all started actually in in the arrow lakes um when uh people all in a cusp and Burton Edgewood all wanted us to look at way back when to look at what a stabilized um arrow would could how it could benefit not only ecosystems but also keeping in mind the appropriate recreation levels so it is being modeled currently by a group that will and that work is going to be shared as I said earlier with all of the the basin residents so you can see what changes uh and operations may look like and what it will benefit thanks very much Kathy Edina another question um yeah what is the minimum lake level for full power production at the arrow dam sorry was that a question at which dam Edina you might be muted which dam was it that the question was referring to sorry it was the arrow down it's it's jelly in your it sounds like there's a question um just going to turn on my phone you're having some technical difficulties earlier so I've called in as well as I was joined on the web um maybe clarify the question is this relate question around arrow lakes hydro yeah so the question just is what is the minimum lake level for full power production at the arrow dam okay so full full power production arrow reservoir needs to be at 1420 feet and above below that the discharge capability begins to reduce because there is um certain amount of discharges that reduces as the reservoir drafts that's just following the operating requirements for the the arrow lakes uh hydro units and then by around 1400 feet um full generation needs to be curtailed because there's just not sufficient head to support generation at those levels hope that answers the question thanks Jillian can I just add some context though that the amount of generation that comes from arrow is is very small compared to the combined generation that we see through king basket and rubble stoke and of course that starts out with the stores that we have in king basket reservoir thanks Darren also add that it doesn't change the total flow that is coming out of arrow reservoir because um all it changes is that whether we dispatch it through arrow lakes hydro generation or or we spill that water through kinesite the amount of water that is required is really dictated by the columbia river treaty as Darren said earlier we we don't have this magic wand where we could send more or less water under the treaty we have to send exactly the amount that is required and there are lots of checks and balances uh with our partners in on on the treaty thanks very much uh adina another question is there a posted location where we can view updates with treaty negotiations transparency would be appreciated maybe I can answer that one uh so on the provincial government columbia river treaty website we post updates after each round of negotiations and we'll pop the link in the chat it's um for those who are listening in it's engage.gov.bc.ca forward slash columbia river treaty you can also google province of bc columbia river treaty um and the the releases the media releases that are issued after each round um might not seem like they have tons of information but if you read through them you can see the nuances of how the negotiations have changed and shifted over time um and we just released uh an info bulletin earlier this week after last week's round of negotiations um that that contains some promising language so encourage you to to seek that out thank you another question adina can keelyside dam be converted to a power generation dam which would provide incentive to maintain a higher water level in the air so that's effectively what aero lakes hydro is so keelyside dam has the original dam that was built from the treaty with its low level outlets for spilling and the spogs for spilling during flood routing and of course the navigation lock next to it aero lakes hydro called the power corporation built a facility and that provides power there the power that you get out of a dam though is more related to how much head or like how high the water is and so there's a tremendous amount of energy and potential behind revel still can can basket just given the height of those reservoirs and how those generations not so much as aero lakes hydro so that's why aero lakes hydro only provides a very small contribution to our overall generation system uh for similar question is why don't we build a generation station in duncan and again with the amount of water in the head really there it's not necessarily practical this time thanks so much darin so we have time for one more question before we wrap up today go ahead adina um if a new agreement is agreed to will it be another 60 years before it can be changed again 10 years would be rational that's a good question absolutely not and the original treaty had a minimum life of 60 years but as i mentioned it's it continues on forever unless either country issues at 10 year notice notice notice for termination um but you know this is why uh both countries canada vc and united states are looking to incorporate an adaptive management framework into a modernized treaty because things are are changing so rapidly not only climate change but new technology new new you know we look at california with their solar and enhanced battery and how it's changing up how uh power electricity is generated and stored and at what times of the day and and there's constantly uh new policy developments in both canada bc united states and as we see now people want to see changes that are broader than what the original treaty purposes were and in particular uh the recognition uh of the united nation's declaration of rights and indigenous people and the strong voice that our indigenous nations bring to the table so uh no it's it's not going to be fixed and that's why adaptive management is going to be part of the treaty going forward and it could be the other the other thing is that there's nothing to say that in the in the past 60 years that we couldn't have changed any elements of the treaty the treaty can be changed at any time as long as both uh countries want to make changes and and look for improvements thanks so much kathy um we are unfortunately at time here everyone there's some incredible questions in the q and a uh and i'm really sorry we don't have time to answer them tonight but we will reiterate our commitment to get answers out to you all uh as soon as possible um and of course this recording will be available in the next few days we'll make sure that you receive it in your email uh we also will circulate a feedback survey so you can share additional comments and let us know how tonight went we're always looking to improve these sessions um and maybe a final note that this isn't um you know this is far from the end of the conversation and many of the folks here tonight are available afterwards and we'll put contact information up at the end here before we we end the meeting please send us emails and um and continue this conversation but i really appreciate everyone's time thank you again to all of our panelists for being here tonight thank you sincerely to everybody who uh takes the time to listen obviously this has been a really um challenging it's the word of the day challenging year and uh yeah really appreciate being able to have sessions like this to continue sharing information so um with that i will say good night and thank everybody once again uh we're gonna again share some information on a slide here um and i'll leave the meeting open for a little bit so people can take note of that and then we'll wrap it up so really take good care everybody and have a good rest of your day