 All right, everyone, thank you once again for joining us tonight on this town hall for the Columbia River Treaty. My name is Brooke McMurchey and I work with the province of British Columbia's Columbia River Treaty team and I'll be your facilitator for tonight. Just in case there's any questions this is a picture of the lovely headwaters of the Columbia River behind me here. It's so great to see many of you online because we are running this session by Zoom webinar. You all won't be able to see the list of attendees but I can see the number ticking up. And we've got about 125 so far and that number is rising so there's lots of you out there listening in. Thank you so much for taking the time to join us. I'm sure that there are folks from both sides of the Canada US border joining us. There's likely folks from the Columbia Basin and elected officials. There may be some folks from the indigenous communities. And no matter where you're joining us from, pardon me from, we thank you very much for taking the time tonight. And since many of us are joining from different locations, we want to acknowledge with respect and gratitude the traditional territories of the indigenous nations across BC and beyond, especially those whose territories are in the Columbia Basin. So this is our second public Zoom session. And though we've done everything we can to ensure that the session runs smoothly, as I'm sure everybody has experienced there may be some technical glitches. If there are, we ask for your patience in advance as we work them out. If you are definitely open to any and all feedback on this session, you can email it to us at Columbia River Treaty at gov.bc.ca, or you can fill out the survey that will become available to you after this session. If it's not emailed to you automatically then you can find it on our website we'll be posting a link to it there. As you may notice that we are recording this session for tonight and we'll be posting it on YouTube after the fact. So for those who are not able to join us right now they'll be able to listen in another time. So at this point I'd like to take a minute to introduce our esteemed panel of speakers for this evening, and invite them to turn their video on and give a little wave as I as I mentioned their name. So we will start the evening off with a few words from our BC minister responsible for the Columbia River Treaty minister Katrina Conroy welcome. We have Sylvain Faby who is Canada's chief negotiator for the Columbia River Treaty welcome Sylvain. Thank you. Kathy Eichenberger is joining us as BC's lead on the Columbia River Treaty negotiating team. What you is representing this equipment nation on the Canadian negotiating delegation. Welcome Nathan. Thank you. Jay Johnson is also on the line Jay is representing the silks Okanagan nation on the Columbia River Treaty negotiating team. We also have Bill Green who is representing the Chinaha nation on the Columbia River Treaty negotiating team. We also have Linda Warley and Cindy Pierce both from the Columbia River Treaty local governments committee Linda is the chair and Cindy is executive director. Thank you everybody. We're looking forward to hearing from all of our speakers tonight. But before we dive in I wanted to take a little bit of time to explain the process. As I mentioned we'll hear from Minister Conroy shortly and then we'll hear from Nathan Matthew to say a few words to start us off for the evening. We'll then move into the panelist session where we will hear an update from each of the panelists, and they will also be able to answer some of the questions that we received in advance of this session. So thank you very much to those who submitted questions will be addressing those throughout the session. If you have any questions that you want to ask during the session, you can do so two ways. You can either type them into the Q&A box. You should see a little button at the bottom of your screen that says Q&A, you can type in your question there, and there will be a choice to submit it anonymously if you'd like. The way to ask a question is to use the raise hand function. For some of you it might be at the bottom of the screen others it might be tucked into the right hand bottom right hand corner of your participants list, or not the participants list sorry the bottom right hand corner of your screen. In both cases with the Q&A function and the raise hand function. We're going to address those questions at the end of the panelist session so we're going to spend the first bit answering the questions that we received in advance. And then after that we'll be able to answer the questions that you type in, and we'll be able to let folks who have their hands raised speak a little bit. We're going to try our very best to answer as many questions as we can tonight. We have just over two hours here and we are prepared to stay a bit longer if we need to. Any questions that we're not able to answer tonight will be included in a summary report that we'll be posting on our website afterwards. I guess one more thing to say about asking questions when you've raised your hand. Please try and keep your questions succinct in the interest of time and out of respect for others who may want to ask questions. And also please keep in mind, having some respect for the folks who you're asking questions of. And finally, if possible try to not ask questions that have already been asked. So, sometimes it's useful to have a little bit of a reminder of exactly what it is we're talking about. So, wanted to share the Columbia River Treaty for those who might be new to it is an agreement between Canada and the United States ratified in 1964 for the purpose of reducing flood risk along the Columbia River and increasing the power generation. Under the Columbia River Treaty Canada was able to build three dams, the Duncan Dam which created the Duncan Reservoir, the Hukili side dam which created the Arrow Lakes Reservoir and the Micah Dam which created the Kimbasket Reservoir. The treaty also allowed the United States to build Libby Dam in Montana, which many of you may know created the Cucanoosa Reservoir, which crosses the border and extends into Southeast BC. The treaty has no end date. To what some people may think the treaty can go on forever it's an evergreen treaty. However, the flood control management portion ends in 2024 and it changes from an assured flood control to a more ad hoc regime called called upon. 2024 is also the first year that either country could issue a termination notice providing 10 years written notices given. So because of the importance of that date of that year, both countries in 2011 to 2013 did a review of the treaty to figure out if it was worth continuing if it should be terminated or if there were changes that could be made to it. And both saw value in the treaty but certainly saw room for improvement. So in 2018 Canada and the US began negotiations to modernize the treaty. The treaty has definitely brought benefits to both countries it's also brought impacts, in particular to the BC portion of the Columbia Basin. And in addition, when the treaty was first signed there was little to no consultation with indigenous nations or basin communities. Since the province in particular has started to look at the treaty again in 2011 we've committed to engaging with indigenous nations and basin local governments and communities to make sure that modernize treaty reflects their needs. So it's a very, very short condensed version of kind of what's brought us here today. If you're interested in learning more we invite you to go to the provinces Columbia River Treaty website there's lots of information there. But now I would love to pass the mic over to Minister Katrina Conroy who will say a few words to kick us off this evening. Thank you minister. Thank you, Brooke and good evening everyone I'm really pleased to be able to say a few words to kick off tonight's event and in the past as the provincial minister responsible for the Columbia River Treaty I've had the privilege of joining many of you at the meetings in your own communities and that's just not possible in the current situation but I'm really grateful to have this chance to speak to you remotely from my home just outside of Castlegar on the traditional territory of the Columbia Basin indigenous nations who call this land home. Last November I was sworn in as BC's new minister of forest lands natural resource operations and rural development and I was also really honored to have the premier asked me to return to my role as minister responsible for the Columbia Basin Trust the Columbia River Treaty things that we like to call all things Columbia. So as many of you probably know I'm a long time resident of the Columbia Basin then and I understand what the Columbia River Treaty means to people in this region I, I know very well the impacts on the lives of livelihoods and the cultures of the people here in the basin. I grew up here as a kid I remember seeing houses being moved the basin being flooded but hearing those stories from people who were profoundly affected and and it stayed with me for for many many years and I, I also understand the opportunity we have today to make changes and to move forward, much more inclusively and with greater awareness of things that were just not considered when the treaty was first created. And, and doing that means engaging with those who are affected by the treaty and in particular the indigenous nations and community residents right across the Columbia Basin. It means connecting with you as we're doing today and because we, we haven't been able to hold in team person community meetings over the past year. Our provincial treaty team felt it was really important to connect virtually with basin residents and anyone else who has an interest in the treaty. And tonight you will hear the latest updates from our Canadian negotiators the indigenous nations representatives and local governments who are involved in the process to modernize the treaty and you'll also have a chance to ask questions as has been said as Brooke has said and, and I just I want to take this moment though to thank all those folks for the incredible work they are all doing on our behalf you know. So that and Kathy as you know you lead our negotiating team and they're doing an incredible job the representatives from the indigenous nations who have just added such a wealth of information really valuable information to the process into the negotiations. And to the local governments committee who are really involved in the process and who have made sure that people from the municipalities the local governments from right throughout the basin have had their voices heard and you've done an incredible job with that so again thank you to all of you for the incredible work that you've done. In addition, you're also going to hear about work that is happening outside of the Canada US negotiations to seek improvements throughout the basin, really important improvements, because whatever is happening at any given time in terms of negotiations. There, there's always important work that the province, Canada and indigenous nations can do to address concerns and many concerns related to the treaty. And I just want to end by thanking everyone who has logged on to the zoom when I last look Brooke it was at 100 and almost 200 was at 195 I think. There's people really care about this issue there they're passionate about it and so again thank you to all of you who've logged into zoom or or phoned in to be part of the meeting and, and those of you who sent questions in advance or will ask questions this evening and, and those who just want to listen and learn more your commitment and engagement is is what makes this process meaningful and our government is doing all we can to engage and to listen in a way that that just didn't happen when the treaty took more than half a century ago, but our efforts that wouldn't mean much with without your engagement so thank you again for taking part and I know you're all looking forward to tonight's discussions I know it's going to be good. So, thank you. Thanks for. Thank you so much minister. That was great. And now Nathan Matthew I'd like to invite you to say a few words. Welcome to the panelists, anything. Hi. Good evening. Hello. It is really great to be here. And honor to welcome individuals in our way to to this session. Usually we're face to face person to person and things are we welcome. Welcome people to a particular physical space. And, but tonight of course like a lot of things lately is we're doing it virtually. So it's a, it's my honor you to my honor to welcome you virtually to this this session. We trust that we recognize that the, these discussions are with respect to the, to the Columbia River basin, which is situated on the lands of the Tanaka, this web, and the Seals people. And we're so pleased to participate in events like this, where we share information, develop knowledge and an understanding of the Columbia River and how together we can work in a good way to make a better place for, for humans and, and our environment, and other species and in the Columbia basin and work together to make the strongest possible case position that can be placed on the Canada United States Columbia River Treaty negotiations. And so much of this work is, is important in doing that without, without input from people that are impacted by the Columbia River Treaty. It's very, very difficult to carry on this, this task. So virtually, welcome to the evening. Thank you very much, Nathan. Hello, how very true. So now, we can, we'll start with our panelists with Sylvain Faby, who is the chief negotiator for Canada's Columbia River Treaty team. So then I'll pass it on to you to share an update on the Columbia River Treaty negotiations. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Brooke. Good evening, everybody. Can you see me well, because I can't see myself. You just fine. Perfect. It worked. Now I can see. Yeah. So hi everyone. Great to meet with you this evening. And as people before me have said, albeit virtually, and it's certainly better than a phone call. I've done a lot of these in the last months. You know, I think we've managed to make these meetings work as well as we want. And I hope all of you, of course, and your loved ones and your families are keeping safe and healthy. And as we continue to cope with the second and even perhaps an eventual third wave of this pandemic across Canada and in the US where I'm located now and indeed around the globe. So, and a big thanks to Minister Conroy. You know, thank you for your consistent support for this long process to modernize the Columbia River Treaty. We're so pleased that we as a members of the team but but I as the chief negotiator so very pleased that you are continuing to be the minister responsible for the CRT. I felt really good that day when when Kathy told me. And thank you Nathan for your words of welcome for us all and and mentioning the importance of these meetings. You always have something pertinent to say and is no exception. So, but but I'd like to begin by introducing my team, who are staying up late for that for us tonight in in cold and snowy Ottawa. Many of you may be familiar with that but some of you may not. I've been involved in community consultations sessions before that took place around the basin, for example, in the fall of 2019. So we have Steven Gluck, who is my deputy director for the Columbia River unit, and Lynn Panaya, who is the senior advisor working on that committee. So I'm very happy that that they're there. And the next issue I'd like to raise is that many of you may know by now is I have now assumed the role of Consul General of Canada at our consulate in Denver, Colorado. So I'd like to make it clear that my new responsibilities will complement the work of the Columbia River negotiation process. I remain the CRT chief negotiator for Canada. And, in fact, I look forward to being geographically closer to the action. So to speak, and hopefully being closer at the same time, all of you geographically will also mean that I can visit the basin, often and sometimes at least in the near future, whenever it's to do so. One of the things I wanted to raise with you is that right now we're at the juncture of a new and exciting moment in Canada US bilateral relations. Yesterday, all of you probably know why now that yesterday, Prime Minister Trudeau and President Biden held their first bilateral meeting as heads of government. It was like us a virtual, a virtual visit. And one of the things they agreed upon is what they call the roadmap for a renewed US partnership. And this roadmap establishes a blueprint for quite an ambitious and whole of government efforts against the COVID-19 pandemic, and on addressing climate change on global health security, on defense and security, and share commitment to diversity, equity and justice. And a lot of people will say, ah, this roadmap is only words on paper. Well, I disagree. The first thing, first is that this, and this is hard to disagree with this blueprint that sets a new constructive and progressive tone to what is by switch to be far, our most important relationship. And also, I can tell you that this roadmap, for me, as Council General of Canada in Denver, that'll be my Bible for the next four years. It'll be the guideline for everything I and all my colleagues in the federal government do with regards to our relationship with the United States. It's very important. And I encourage people to read it. There was some good overviews of that roadmap, and it'll give you a pretty good idea of where both countries intend to go and to grow our bilateral relationship. And of course, given this renewed path, we can see that several elements of our bilateral relationships are becoming increasingly important, particularly on climate change and the environment. It's still early, and it remains to be seen how this renewed cooperation, this roadmap will impact the CRT negotiations. But I think we can safely say that it sets a good foundation for a good path forward. Now, about the negotiations. Many of you know that Canada hosted virtually again, the last round of the CRT negotiations round 10 with the US, which was held from on June 29 and 30 2020 last year. And for that round, Canada, working as a team with BC and our indigenous nation partners, we developed and presented a proposal to the US, which is comprehensive and covers a wide range of CRT related issues, including those issues of priority to you, the base in residence. Since our last round in June, we haven't received any formal response nor indication from the US on next steps, right. However, with the transition to the new administration and the time needed to get themselves prepared. First to hold the election and get themselves there. We expect that by now we will be in a position to proceed reasonably soon. I personally have kept in regular touch with the US chief negotiator my counterpart, and I know that the US is keen, and they have said so publicly to complete this treaty negotiation. At this point, we are taking a wait and see approach, which doesn't mean, as you'll see later on during our session tonight that we're sitting idle. One thing I'd like to do now is briefly mentioned the range of issues being discussed in the negotiations and the topics that Canada included in its first comprehensive proposal topics that we had raised before separately in the previous rounds. So in our proposal to the US, the comprehensive Canadian proposal covered a range of issue, including of course, the two key main issues of the existing treaty, which, which remain important issues. There is a flood risk management and power generation, but an issue that we've, we have been pushing really hard for in our work with the US and it was included in our proposal is a dimension on ecosystem function. Also, we've included in the themes that we want to discuss and negotiate is the Libby coordination and gaining a more substantive role for Canada in that Libby damn coordination and another thing that we've presented to the US, and that's a very important element of our proposal, especially to address ecosystem functions is we have included in our proposal increased flexibility for Canadian operations to address issues in Canada. So we, we want to gain an element, a part of flexibility that we could use for our own benefits without having to go to the US. That's a very important and and I would say novel element that that we're discussing with us. So, one last thing I wanted to say is, as a negotiator, I'm really pleased that the community remains active on the modernization process, and no things have been quiet for some time and will remain so for a little bit longer, but not too much. And, and we all need some patience as, as we wait for the next steps that the US is planning, but thank you for your continued commitment to keeping both myself and BC on track to getting the best possible agreement for basin residents and for BC, trying to extract as much as we can for your benefit from this negotiation. So with that, these are my comments that I wanted to make tonight and I'll be happy to take your questions, either now or once all our presentation. So, back to you. So, and actually we do have a question that was sent to us before tonight that is related to negotiations, somebody was hoping to have some light shed on what the US is hoping to see change in the treaties terms and conditions so wondering if you could speak to that at all that what the US interest may be in the treaty negotiations. Okay, thanks. So it's good. It's kind of a little bit of a segue to what I said because I've mentioned just before now, the elements that we as indigenous nations BC and Canada want to have in the new treaty, obviously, US interest, I will not surprise you when I say that flood risk management for them remains a very important issue, you know, like the main reason the streetie, you know, was was negotiated in the 1960s. One of the main reason was to establish a regime that would avoid. It does provide flood risk protection in Canada but it was also to avoid flooding catastrophic flooding that happened. One of them in the 40s, if I'm not mistaken flooding and completely erasing the city of van port. They wanted to have a some sort of a system, a regime that would help prevent these catastrophic flooding. This is still a big issue for them and we should not be surprised. Right. Today, there's even more to protect in the US part of the base from flood risk management than there was 60 years ago. So that was first thing. Of course, the, the power electricity element of the treaty is still important to the US. I can. This is one of the few things I can talk about publicly because they have made it themselves. People public for the last over the last years, they, we, they think they pay too much for their electricity. They've said so many times. I'm not divulging any secret, which, which I would have to because there's always an element of keeping the negotiations between ourselves as possible, but there is a desire for them to reduce what what the compensate Canada with in the power benefit that they get. While the ecosystems and environment environmental components were put forward by Canada. I know that there's a, there's, there is receptability, receptability on on their part of this and, and frankly, if we just read the newspaper and based on what I just said about the, the new roadmap that that the president and the Prime Minister agreed upon yesterday, they, they, the element of climate change and environmental protection are pretty upfront and important in that roadmap. So, you know, addressing through that treaty some, some environmental issues could become more important to them than it was before, based on what they've said publicly. So, these are the key elements that that are important to to the US, of course, and, and, and, and these are not surprising, because they've spoken about it extensively publicly. So I hope that answers your question. Thank you so much so they, that's great. So we do. We do have a few more questions related to negotiations that have come in but I think we'll move on to to Kathy first and hear from her and then we'll circle back to some of the questions that have been asked after that so Kathy why don't you go ahead. Thank you. Thank you so much for joining us today and Brooke, and thanks for everybody who's online. That's hundreds of people that's that's amazing. Very happy that people can join us and especially from the comfort of your home. I was excited about this because it gives us a chance to hear from everyone across the basin. You know I do miss our annual series of community meetings when we go to 1213 14 communities. It's a face and nothing can replace that but this is different and it's also exciting in a different way and I also want to welcome all the folks across the province who are interested in in the treaty, and I know there are many who could, who could join now and through, you know, physically in the past, and also a welcome to our friends to the south in the United States I recognize area codes from Washington DC from Portland. I'm glad to have everyone share and listen into what people have to say. I absolutely want to thank Mr Conroy for her long standing dedication to improving the Columbia retreat. And I know she takes it to heart having seen the construction of the dams and the effects that it has but I also want to really appreciate and thank her from her staff over many years, and a special shout out to Dean of Brown who's been marvelous and it's been a real community contact for folks in the basin out of castle guard to answer people's questions. And as survey mentioned, you know, BC, Canada, the Tanahash Grapham and silk token ag and we all work really hard to collaborate on the development of the first Canadian proposal, our initial proposal. And, you know, despite the challenges of COVID-19 and that was new to us at the time and we were, you know, this was March, we were coming back from DC we were in lockdown and we had to learn how to collaborate through through zoom Skype, whatever. And, but you know, it we we adapted and hopefully it'll work again tonight I already got kicked off. My internet connection went down even in Victoria you don't have to be in Meadow Creek to lose your connectivity. But anyway we put a lot of a great deal of time and effort to make sure that this initial proposal, which everyone contributed to was supported by the representatives of all five governments. And that in my in my books is a great accomplishment. And as said, it was presented to us delegation last June through a WebEx meeting. And yeah, the virtual meeting, it was effective, but you know it doesn't it can replace being in the same room with the delegations together and having a back and forth and I really hope that we can bring together in person the two delegations and in 2021. Some of the questions we received a prior to this town hall was about the timelines and I just want to remind folks there's no definite timeline to complete the negotiations. On the other hand, we really do look forward to regaining the resuming the momentum that we had and and making real progress. And people are curious about being notified for the next session of the next session. As we've done through the first 10 each time there's a session negotiating session as planned, we make we informed the public through our social media etc etc so when there is an accession scheduled then you will all be advised of it. At this time, we continue to collaborate with all of our partners to refine the best approach to seeking improvements within the treaty, and, and even to address issues outside of the treaty in domestic issues in the basin and, and you'll be hearing a lot about that this evening. But one of the tools that we're using to inform the negotiations is this is an expanded modeling initiative. So that we have a negotiation advisory team that is representative by all five levels of government again BC Canada silks open up and show them to know and, and this is not negotiation advisory team is working on an important project to examine the different scenarios and how the treaty dams could be operated to meet the base and interest. So a subgroup of the negotiation advisory team they're modeling the system operations, the reservoir levels the flows to take into account, all of the objectives that were established for ecosystems for indigenous cultural values or flood risk management for hydropower generation and other social and economic values. And this indigenous led ecosystem function subcommittee is developing those performance measures for ecosystem in particular and indigenous cultural values. So part of that team provincial and federal agency technical staff, as well as an environmental non government organization scientists they're all contributing to this work led by the indigenous nations. But also, the Columbia retreating government committee is leading the development of performance measures for socio economic interest and they will tell you more about it later this evening. One of the things I want to make sure people understand is this work is ongoing. And but it is not delaying hasn't delayed and currently not delaying and will not delay the negotiations with the United States. This is all work that will contribute to not only informing the tree negotiations are the Canadian delegation, but over the longer term, when we implement adaptive management over time. I received the question about the commitment that we've made in the past and I think there's another question about seeing the proposal. And the question was, the BC government has previously committed to consulting with basin residents before making final decisions on a modernized treaty. Do you have a sense of how much detail about pending international agreements you'll be able to share in this forthcoming consultation. Our commitment is that people of the basin will clearly understand what is in a modernized treaty that would be proposed before it's agreed to before it's finalized there will be no surprises, not like in 1961 and ratifying 64. We, the US and Canada have tabled initial proposals, obviously in a negotiation we don't share each iteration publicly that that is confidential negotiations but prior to the the once we get closer to an area a range of zone of agreement that we will be coming to the basin to share with you the progress that we've made and we did that in 2013. When we prepared a recommendations for cabinet on the future of the treaty and and at that time we consulted broadly within the basin so we commit to doing no less for a modernized treaty. Switching gears a little bit on from the negotiations. One of the things that people have asked about is whether indigenous nations, local elected officials basin residents, will you have will they all have a voice in the future decisions regarding treaty planning and operations in fact, one of the questions that we got a prior to this town hall was, it was been widely suggested that accompanying governance reforms to treaty entities and committees that implemented treaty are needed. Can you share any information about what the governance structure of a modernized treaty might look like. How does the need for reconciliation with indigenous peoples influence this what kind of mechanisms for public engagement will the modernized governance system include. So I wanted to thank. Graham for that question. It's a very, very timely question because the net, which includes again the representatives of the five governments has have directed that a consultant be hired to look at potential governance options different governance models for a modernized treaty. And to be clear, this is for the Canadian domestic CRT governance on how decisions that are made in Canada feed into the treaty planning and operating processes. So this, this process was just kicked off this week and the net governance steering committee is working with the consultant group to refine the process and and the work plan. And but I can confirm that one of the fundamental principles underlying this process is that the proposed governance models will be consistent consistent with the United Nations declaration of the rights of indigenous peoples. And what I can say right now is that the process will be rolling out in stages and it will take time. We want this to be a collaborative process. And as we do that will be consulting with of course indigenous nations. We will be consulting with the local governments committee, Columbia based and regional advisory committee, and we will be transparent. And I know people are chopping at the bit to know more, we will provide more information in the near future. I want to talk just very briefly about some of the projects that the Columbia River Treaty team is working on to address issues interests related to the treaty, but are not the subject of the negotiations. And these, these issues that these interests have been raised, you know, why the basin residents over the last many many quite a few many years. So, even while the discussions with us are ongoing there's a number of these, these projects that we are wanting to move forward with and addressing and right now we have about 12 on the go. Some are specific to communities like the cost veil mount Preston and others looking at benefiting the whole basin and I'll just give you a few I want to otherwise take the whole evening. One of the key messages we heard throughout the last number of years is the need to acknowledge what was lost and to enhance what remains. And so, during the 2019 community meetings, we shared one way to make an acknowledged that acknowledgement. And that's the Columbia Retreaty Heritage Project and that is a proposed touring route linking a series of information stops at key locations throughout the Columbia Basin. This is a community driven initiative that's being guided by a steering committee with representation across the basin this is not a BC government top down thing. This is the grassroots thing. And we've secured funding for the first phase, and the engagement and having an engaged an implementation team to move it forward. And so the stories for this project for these key locations, these stories will come from the basin communities, indigenous and non indigenous, and the community engagement is expected to begin in in late spring and early Another project that's a long time coming is that we're working with the village of veil mount and the Ministry of Environment and climate change strategy on an air quality data review project to better understand if and how dust events are associated with low water levels in the King basket reservoir finally getting to looking at the data and then figuring out what the next steps would be Another one that's near and dear to my heart is is working, making progress significant progress working collaboratively with the six Crescent Valley Diking authorities and Yakinuki We have a community regional district of central Kootenai in the town of Crescent to find a way forward on on the long standing issue of how to maintain and repair the Diking system in the Crescent Valley and I know that when I started with government and out of Nelson 30 years ago. That was an issue that was unresolved and and we're finally making progress on that so so that is great. On the agricultural side we heard across the basin that agriculture was impacted by the treaty and needs support. And so we're working with some of the agricultural communities in the basin we're working like the Ministry of Agriculture. We're looking at the programs and initiatives and identifying where there are gaps. And that is ongoing. And of course, you know, we definitely heard concerns about the water levels at Cookinosa reservoir especially during the very important recreation season June to September. And we commissioned a study to assess the feasibility of building a dam near reservoir and we'll, we are now we have received feet we had a town hall or first town hall. But on on the Cookinosa dam and we are now evaluating the feedback, and we'll be producing a report and next steps in the next little while. So, there's lots of things going on. If you want to know more about it. Please sign up to our kilometer treaty newsletter. No, that tension. Oh, great. Okay, I'm almost finished. Okay. I'll leave it for now, but happy to answer more questions later in the evening. And thanks for taking the time and, you know, whether it's a treaty negotiations or work happening outside the treaty process. I really count on your involvement and your engagement your advice to inform to work that we do and we, you know, we've been doing that for the last 10 years and knowing the people in the communities. I wouldn't expect anything less so I'll stop before the fire alarm goes off. Thank you. Thanks very much Kathy what did I say about technical challenges I think most people are used to being interrupted by their kids and their pets these days not while they're at the office fire alarm test so. I would like with that Kathy hopefully it doesn't last too long because we would love to ask some more questions from you later on. Just to note that we are monitoring the questions that you guys are submitting in the q amp a box. I know some have or will be addressed by the speakers as we carry on, but we will come back to asking them as many as we can. So thank you to the panelists are done and where possible, interject with a few clarifying questions so thank you for submitting them please continue to do so. For those who are having technical difficulties I am so sorry, my only suggestion is to maybe sign out sign back in again things seem to be working okay from our end. And if, for some reason, your issues are not able to be fixed and we just encourage you to either listen if you can, or check out the recording of this after the fact. We're open to any and all feedback so again send us any challenges that you might be having by email. Now I'd like to turn the floor over to Nathan Matthew to share his thoughts and perspectives on the the treaty modernization process as a representative from from the shipment nation. So Nathan go ahead, thank you. Hello game. Yeah, thanks for that. In terms of our perspective on, and I think I'm speaking on behalf of the three nations that I am from the sublimation. Because we've decided to work together as nations to to represent our interests in the in the treaty negotiations. But I guess the one of the first perspectives that we have is, is that the creation of the, or the signing of the original Columbia over treaty, and the implementation of the terms with respect to the, the building of the dams and, and the changes in the, the water, water courses comprise that the biggest infringement on our on our way of life or the rights that we have to to exist in the basin. So there's a very huge disruption with respect to our ability to carry on our ways of living our rounds to fishing and hunting gathering our medicines are spiritual places have all been negatively impacted by by the system being put in place. So the perspective we had on that we want that recognized by Canada, and the province of BC, and we want to have them that attended to and responded to. And like, like so many other residents in the base and originally we weren't consulted with respect to any of this. And so our voice was not heard then. And this time we're really determined to have our voices, our voices heard. As I mentioned, our perspective one of the perspectives is we, we could get more done by working together, rather than as three separate nations and that's what we've been. We have being organized and having commitments made by the province and Canada in the way that we're involved. That's another perspective. We, we want to be we don't didn't want to be just on an occasional basis, but we wanted to full involvement in the Columbia River Treaty negotiations. So we've been able to do a big part of that. So far, we've been able to establish a framework agreement where Canada BC and three nations have decided to work together and that we've agreed to collaborate, respect each position or perspective to communicate in consistent ways and transparency. We can share information and request information and so we can be fully engaged in all matters related to to the renegotiation. And that's happened as a result of the signing of that that agreement. And I guess these perspectives are quite, quite a bit related, but we, we wanted the whole piece to be seen as part of that reconciliation between First Nations province and Canada, and that that could only be done through cooperation, working in partnership, and in the ways that we structured under the framework agreement. And to see this as a as a real step in, in that transformation of the relationship. And certainly we've we have our voice heard now we are we have a seat at the table as observers to the main you Canada US negotiations, and we participate in all the committees that are part of the information gathering and strategy making with regard to moving the negotiations forward. And a big part of that, and it's already been mentioned by Sylvain and Kathy, is that we've taken a leadership role in ecosystem research and cultural values research. So that's been a quite a challenge, but we feel that the two are really important to us. And that that work, I think it's been described will will provide recommendations on how the operations of the system can most appropriately increase the, the values related to ecosystem functioning and the improve the, the values and interests of First Nations people in the in the basin as well. And the, the research is well underway and I think Bill Green, J Johnson and others will will will describe that in a lot more detail, but that's the, I think the perspectives are are very significant. And at the end of the day we, we fully expect that these interests will be recognized understood and dealt with in in in positive ways, government to government, and that we can see a better relationship coming out of it, and a better place for First Nations, in terms of being able to participate in creating a better place down the road with respect to how the Columbia River system under the Columbia River Treaty works. So that's a, those are a couple of perspectives. And we know that it's a challenging environment as we as we go forward, and dealing with some of these issues to simply in terms of ecosystem, climate change and those kind of things that are truly complex, but we're certainly pleased and happy to be engaged in in developing the solutions to those particular issues. Thanks. Thanks so much, Nathan. That's great. Jay, we'll pass it over to you Jay Johnson representing this open agonization. Go ahead Jay, and you're muted Jay go ahead and unmute yourself. Thank you. There's always has to be someone muted so that is will take the honors. Good evening. My name is Jay Johnson. I'm the chief negotiator and senior policy advisor to the silk silken agon nation alliance and the chief executive council. I grew up in the basin, and I've been working with the silks nation for about 20 years now in a variety of roles, including on some pretty critical files on the land and in relationship to, to the governments and industrial users on on the territorial landscape, the unseated lands of the silks nation. Maybe I just wanted to sort of highlight a few things that were talked about already today and give you a sense of how far we've come. As I'm sure many of you will understand that the, the treaty of course was something that not only basin residents inherited from the outside largely. The indigenous nations, the first nations of the basin and its entirety in Canada also were forced to live with the consequences of the, of the Columbia River Treaty and, and in many ways the industrialization of the, of the river system. The leadership of the chiefs and the ancestors before them worked very hard for, for decades to try to resolve and insert themselves in the interest of their communities into the center of, of the Columbia River Treaty its management decisions and, and to seek to restore some of the damages and the impacts that have occurred as a result of the treaty and as a result of many other industrial developments along the river. And that approach has come from a position of understanding that the river is inherently and from a common sense perspective, an ecosystem, and is inherently one river, regardless of international border and sometimes that tends to be something that is a challenge in a management regime when it crosses an international border. And so we're always striving for everyone to recognize, although jurisdictions might vary to recognize that this is in fact a river with integrity and, and a unified system with many complex ecosystems and micro systems along the way so. Again, our, our leadership's pursuit of addressing the to me and the tomorrow, the land and the water and the resources and the all living things and the connection of all living things we, we have sought to pursue this unique time in, in, in history where we have both the federal and provincial government in Canada that are focused on trying to resolve and address the concerns and challenges of governance with indigenous nations and the marginalization of indigenous communities for for generations. And so with both the federal liberal government and the provincial NDP government we've successfully managed to ensure that the voice of indigenous nations are in fact within the treaty. And in fact we're participating within the negotiating process itself as observers, but also leading an area of keen interest to to the nation to all the nations which is ecosystem function and an understanding of the environmental needs. of the river and of all those along the river, and all those that may not have a voice. And in that regard we've been ensuring that we've, we are also talking about climate change we're talking about modeling different water levels we're looking at how cultural values can be inserted not only in our negotiating process and our relationships, but also within the needs of what the river management system should look like. And we're seeking the guidance of knowledge keepers and and traditional ecological knowledge in that process. And of course we've heard a little bit about governance governance is a critical component of all this it's a critical component of reconciliation. It's, it's another reason why we have inserted on drip and, and now the provincial drip out legislation and it's intense into our agreement with the, with the nat. The negotiation advisory team to ensure that we're, we're meeting in and the expectations of free fire prior and informed consent. And maybe I just wanted to say a few words about salmon. And of course is a critical concern of, of all three nations. It's likely a critical concern of many of the residents throughout the, the whole river system. And, and as many of you know for nearly 80 years we've had not had salmon up into the Canadian portion of the Columbia River. And the salmon have not been able to reach the spawning grounds and all the way to the headwaters. So, to that effort we've been able to negotiate with the two federal and provincial governments and the remaining three governments in in in Canada, the Canada First Nations governments. Salmon recovery. Columbia River salmon recovery initiative when we're calling it bringing the salmon home. And, and we've got a new website that I'll plug at the, at the end of this. And we're really what we're trying to do is it's an indigenous led initiative. We're trying to bring the salmon back up into the upper Columbia, and ensure that we have a sustainable run, hopefully in the millions in the future. And we're working together to identify what, what kind of technical work needs to occur for that to happen and to ensure that we've got the right information to approve that the physical feasibility of this is a sound and just and appropriate table. So I guess maybe just to conclude. I'd like to say that we're, we remain very hopeful to the outcome. We're keenly involved in this process. This is, we've set, we're aware that we've set some international precedents with our participation and when I want to thank both levels of government for that. That's some keen leadership all around the table to ensure that that occurred. And hopefully that'll pave the pathway for future generations and indigenous nations around the world to participate in international treaty discussions that affect and impact their, their territorial lands and their livelihood in their future so we're, we're very excited about what we, what we're going to be doing in the future and we encourage the US government to do its best to ensure that the US travel partners and our relatives in the US are also as active in their negotiations on their side as well. So. Thanks so much Jay and bill yet you're up, go ahead Bill. Okay, okay. Okay, Bill green. And I got to start by saying wow, 200 people that is very impressive from a lot of perspectives, and I thank all of you for for this when I go through the list of participants I see many many names I recognize from previous in person meetings over the years, and just amazing to see so many people dedicated to and interested in the future of the Columbia River Treaty and, and this wonderful water system that we live with. And I also see a number to not have people participating to people that I work for. Thank you. I'll start with what I'm sure many of you have heard many times that water is deeply sacred for many indigenous nations. And I think it certainly is for the Tenaha nation. And I've had the honor of working for the Tenaha nation as well as the other nations going back 26 years. And it has, I've been directed to work to make things over that whole time to work to make things better for the water for the fish for all living things. Indeed, in large measure working with the hydro system so the CRT, the Columbia River Treaty renewal work is incredibly important to all the nations as, as you've heard. I will say despite 26 years, uplifting time. It remains a very steep learning curve steep and exciting learning curve. And it's a pleasure to continue to learn a lot about and understand the cultural values, the knowledge systems and the worldview. So, between 2012 and 2014. We did internal work within the nation communities engaged in the nation communities and citizens. And out of that process came up with a set of eight defined key interests and principles that the nation. wanted to achieve through negotiations. So that set our mandate very clearly to work towards realizing those principles and achieving those interests. We also through that time we also worked with BC to identify how can the Tenaha nation and the other nations and the other governments work together to identify how those principles can be advanced. So, right now I feel very happy I've been able to report to the Tenaha Nation Council that reasonable to good progress is being made towards achieving all of the principles. And that's quite remarkable. And I think there's some good reasons why which some others have spoken to but starts with a strong Tenaha Nation Council team. Nathan and Jay have spoken about, you know how incredibly valuable the collaboration between the three nations has been. I don't think we would have been able to make nearly as much progress without the three nations working together in in this way. I'll mention as well the R word reconciliation. I think it has been. It came at the right point in time where we had largely had new provincial federal governments. Both governments moved to fully endorse the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous people. You know in terms of the CRT negotiation process and their collaboration or work with the federal and provincial government to that time that really shifted the ground beneath us in a positive way. And not only was it the governments at the highest levels that their endorsement and under it and subsequent actions like the 10 principles from the federal government. Declaration on the rights of indigenous people act on the provincial level it was a staff from federal and provincial government that really embraced reconciliation as a foundational principle for moving this work forward. And so that has led to really strong and effective collaboration between the five governments and hero bring us to and Sylvan and Kathy both spoke about the first comprehensive negotiations proposal that was developed by the Canadian team. And presented in late June to the US. And that was very challenging time it was very hard work but all parties were trying to find strong common ground and we got there and that was a remarkable achievement and I think we can keep the five government. I think the five governments will continue to work together and advance the work in a very positive way. So that's it for my comments on that area and do you want me to move straight into the technical work or take a chance for some questions. Yeah, maybe. So I've seen a few questions that you might end up addressing in the next session. So maybe we'll scroll through to bill is going to share an update on the ecosystem function work, which will also lead into the salmon restoration work. I saw a question asking for more details on how climate change is being addressed as part of negotiations. You know there's there's also been questions asking how the indigenous nations are involved in negotiations and I would hope that hearing from Nathan J and Billy you've got a better sense of the level of depth that they are all involved. And as part of the negotiating team as contributing to all aspects of negotiations. It's quite unique and groundbreaking and as everybody is voiced a lot of effort has gone into that. You know, both both hard work and emotional effort as well if I can venture to say so. Maybe with that bill I'll let you continue on and share your update on the ecosystem function piece. Thanks so much. Can I see my screen. Not quite yet. It might show up soon. So you all will get a break from strictly our faces bill has a few slides to show you as well as he's been to them. We can see them now Billy you can go ahead. Thanks. So from a tenor perspective this starts with the foundation of Thomas copy cups in all living things and it's a profoundly as I've come to learn to profoundly important principle to the tenor and it indeed embraces all living things and includes humans within the concept of all things not separate from. And so that those are all living things we brought forward into the English concept of ecosystem function. Kathy told you about the negotiation advisory team and the subcommittees on a variety of topics, including ecosystem function. The ecosystem function work has had a subcommittee for a little bit more than two years now involving the three nations working together but as well as environment climate change Canada, fisheries and oceans Canada, forest lands natural resource operations and rural development and the upper Columbia basin environmental collaborative and so that has been in a strong team, strong and knowledgeable team to move this work forward. The first thing we did was, there's a lot of information out there that's been generated over the years, some of the sources include from what he's planned studies, but a variety of other sources that speak to how the hydro system affects ecosystem processes ecosystem processes and so we that was all reviewed and generated synthesis reported called all that information together and then identified knowledge gaps. And so to fill those knowledge gaps. We identified 13 priority ecosystem function studies funded by principally by the BC government, and recently added to that. The ecosystem function study pertaining to the Kootenai and Duncan River flood plains upstream at the south and north ends of Kootenai Lake, and the work that's spoken about has been led by the indigenous nations but involves the other governments outside consultants and academics so brought together really strong team. I'll quickly stroll scroll through the slides which identify that there's three slides identifies the studies and the status of those studies are not going to speak to them. There is this set which were general ecosystem function studies which provided a foundation for all of the other studies. A set of studies and people have asked a question well how are you dealing with, or is the CRT work addressing nutrient status nutrient cycling nutrient retention within the system. And, and that in turn speaks to the productivity ecosystems. And so we've had this work around in three different areas, reservoir river and terrestrial productivity. A strong focus around floodplain repairing and wetland ecosystem. Some people have asked about how, how is CRT work addressing wildlife needs and I think this is a principle way that we're doing that. A set of five aquatic studies outlined there and a number of people have asked about what about the way the flows function or operate downstream of the dams and rapid changes to low levels at some point and so that that question is being very comprehensively addressed in the riverine flows study and this speaks to where so these. That's just a quick summary of the set of studies. Next thing I'll speak to briefly and this gets into a bit of techno geekery which I'll try to minimize, but each of the studies one of the key tasks is not only a report but also what we call performance measures. And a performance measure is how we measure how a particular way of operating aero reservoir or can basket reservoir Duncan reservoir or indeed Cougarousa, how that will affect a specific value. So the values can be in the themes of ecosystem function cultural value but also hydropower and flood control and recreational values and social economic values, all can have performed within each of those there's can be a set of performance measures, and the whole idea is, we have to have a way when we are looking at different ways of operating the system, we have to have a way of knowing whether it's better or worse for a particular ecosystem value or other value and so performance measure is simply how we measure better or worse for each of the each of the ecosystem function function and other values. And not only tells us is it better or worse but it also tells us how much better or how much worse. What we want to make is that I expect. We are working to getting this done over the next two to three months, but we then anticipate, we will be seeking public input on the work that has been done so that with the basin indigenous nations that we work for citizens of the indigenous nations can be confident that we have a good way of evaluating potential changes operational changes through the Columbia River Treaty. Kathy spoke a bit about the modeling, the modeling work and part of that is developing scenarios and a scenario is just up what if. What if we change the operation of the system this way what if we change the operation that came inside dam over the course of the year, you know, in a way to, you know, lots people talked about it to create a more stable reservoir. So, the work in the scenario walk workshops is to develop what ifs that might what if scenarios that would be better that we think might be better for ecosystem function but also indigenous cultural values, but then that work needs to take the next steps I should say to find scenarios that are better across as much as possible better across the board for a broad set of values. And just want to conclude that the ecosystem function process has been fascinating and challenging I think it's a it's unique and precedent setting. So when we when we've seen studies of this type before and the development center of performance measures and models that's been done by a big consulting firm BC hydro and this has been a very different process that engages all five governments engages, a wide range of measures and it's hard work, but it has been collaborative and and very effective in that regard so at the end of the day we want to have want to achieve strong and widespread support for the performance measures and and for the potential scenarios. And final wrap up that really appreciate the support of the BC government for this work, and the support from both Canada and BC to very meaningfully address ecosystem considerations into a into a new treaty. So, thanks. And, Brooke, I look to you for advice about what you want to do about questions things were beyond time for this session. Thank you, Bill. And I think so we were going to speak a little bit about salmon reintroduction, and I'm not sure if you want to lead into that right now. And then we can answer questions after what do you think. I'll take to that briefly. Thanks. And I note that Jay has already spoken about that so I don't, I don't need to add very much but salmon restoration is being addressed in parallel in two different venues to different processes. And then the Columbia retreat because there are factors and issues related to salmon restoration that need to be addressed within the treaty context can't be addressed outside of it. And then there's a whole another set of issues and factors that really aren't directly impacted by the Columbia retreat so habitat, what are appropriate donor stocks, what are the risks associated with it. So that work is going on within the Columbia river salmon restoration initiative, Jay spoke about that briefly and I think Kathy did as well. And, but it's really important that the work between the Columbia river salmon restoration, which I will say is also going. All five governments are really committed to trying to make the Columbia river salmon restoration initiative work this is for me very exciting to see the five governments. Working so hard and collaboratively on this, and making making good progress on defining and working through some of the technical issues through the call cursory on the river salmon restoration initiative as well as you know where we're needed addressing treaty related salmon restoration issues within the treaty process. And I think Jay spoke about and maybe we can put it in the chat, the link to Columbia river salmon dots CA I believe. No, we look to a time. So the cursory, the salmon restoration initiative is had a three year timeframe that started in July of 2019. So we're a year and a half, a year and a half in, and we have a year and a half to go. A lot of work to accomplish over the next year and a half in particular, putting doing the work that's necessary to answer people's questions and answer decision makers questions about what is the way forward, how much is going to cost to do this. And so we can do the work to achieve the funding to keep the salmon restoration initiative moving forward. So I don't okay if you want to add anything to that, but it's a brief summary of that work. Thanks Bill. No, I appreciate that and I just encourage everybody to have a look at that website. We just got it up so there might be a few tweaks but still still to come. You'll notice that on May 10 and six to the 16. We're going to be engaged in a series of events that culminate in essentially in a salmon recovery festival. And there'll be a variety of things to be announced throughout the basin, and hopefully encourage, encourage community members and, and, and youth and, and everyone interested to come out and participate in some of those events as you'll know, COVID friendly of course. So some details still to come but they'll be announced on the website so have a look at that there's lots of great work being done there and it's, it's a heck of an initiative and it's taken a long, long time to to to implement we'll be reaching out and we're in the early early stages of reaching out across the border to our to our US cousins and relatives and friends to to try to work collaboratively as as we best we can to ensure that we have success in the long run. And we get to a place where we've got sustainable salmon runs of variety salmon species into the future and not only is this great news for for the ecosystem and and everyone along along the river system and in the basin in Canada, but it's fantastic news internationally as well. So big thumbs up to all those involved in everyone that supported us along the way. And we just look forward to renewing that three year commitment to into the future as soon as we can. So limit. Thanks everybody. Thanks so much Jay and thanks so much bill. I know folks I see people asking in the q amp a box about the website, and it is Columbia river salmon dot CA. There, I'm not sure how to put that up on the screen here for you guys to see at this at this point but I've typed it into the chat box, Columbia river salmon dot CA. Great. I think, Bill, if you are comfortable with it. There were a couple of questions sent in advance of the session that perhaps you can answer. There were a number, obviously to do a salmon that hopefully you and Jay have addressed. Bill, are you comfortable answering some of the questions and would you like me to read them out or would you like to take it from here. Yes, I spoke. Yeah, I see. I hope we've covered a lot of the salmon related questions. One of the questions I'll speak to briefly is arrow lakes fluctuations and the specific question was, what efforts are going to be made to keep the water levels consistent along the arrow lakes. Through the ecosystem function work in particular and the development of performance measures and scenarios we're looking very closely at that question. And obviously there's a lot of work being done in the past, about a more stable arrow scenario. And so the ecosystem function studies, for example, pertaining to restoring floodplain wetland and repair and water systems speaks to the air reservoir in particularly the upper reaches what benefit could be achieved if the reservoir was operated in a more stable way what benefit could be achieved for floodplain repairing and wetland ecosystems, and for the wildlife associated with that and the human use associated with that and the stabilization of banks that some people have also asked questions about. And so here is we're trying to quantify what operational change would be required to achieve some degree of restoration of ecosystem function or sorry floodplain repair in the wetland function, and then to build that into a what if scenario, and say okay what are the, if we operated the area reservoir in this way, what are going to be the benefits and what are going to be the impact so that all comes to the modeling that Kathy spoke about where we look at what those scenarios, and, and look at a wide range of performance measured and said okay across the board this looks like it could be better than what we currently have or not. So that's the kind of work that's being done and it's not just about ecosystem function, it's around, it speaks to his work within the social economic values realm around that and hydropower flood control, etc. So that's it for that question, I hope to do is there another one or should I take on another one. Yeah, yeah, go ahead go ahead sorry how about you take on one more, and then we'll we'll move on. And again just a reminder to everybody, we're looking at the questions and we'll answer those that have been entered into the Q&A box at after our panelists are done. And she's one more question that we received before this meeting to answer. Thank you. Okay, thanks, Brooke. And so this question was on the theme of flow changes downstream of Hugh Keenley side and the question was, will the section of the Columbia River below the Hugh Keenley side dam be able to have less dramatic flow changes under the new CRT. The flow changes are set in a weekly basis and can see drops of water levels of up to one meter over a 24 hour period. If this was done over a three day time period there would be much less damage to the aquatic entomology the bugs that thrives along the 43 kilometers shoreline. To answer to that, one of the slides I presented spoke about riverine flows, and it is very focused on the question that that the question erased. And so it is about what flows are required to sustain the productivity in the bottom of the river and in the river, and to support key history functions of different fish species and of bugs in the river system. So sometimes refer to this as functional flows, what are the elements of flow patterns downstream of the dam that are really important ecologically. And then we have to generate performance measures that to speak to that and tell us when a particular flow operation would actually be an improvement. And when it would be when it would have adverse consequences so we can look at, when we look at any scenario be it a hydropower related scenario or a flood control or a scenario or combined scenario. How will that affect functional flows and the various components of functional flows in that river reach and indeed in other river reaches experience similar things. Thanks. Thanks so much, Phil. And I know that there were lots of other questions asked about relating to ecosystems, but there's also questions that are being raised in other areas of the treaty as well so we want to get to those before the end of the night. So, before we move on I know we've been going for about an hour and a half now and I'm hoping those of you joining us from home have been standing up and stretching maybe grabbing something from the fridge who knows. Our next speakers are from the local governments committee and what they have to say links into, especially the scenario modeling that's been talked about. So maybe I will ask our speakers if they are ready to continue on or if they would prefer short break to stand up and grab a glass of water. Linda and Cindy, how are you feeling you want to carry on or should we take a minute to stretch your legs. And you both may be muted. Oh, oh hi Linda. Hello. I think it's important for folks to be able to have a moment or two just to stretch and move around a little bit so that they can listen and understand what we're saying without thinking about cramping legs. That sounds great Linda. Okay, so with that, we're going to pause right now for let's say, you know, two minutes. We don't want to lose too many of you, and certainly want to leave enough time to answer questions so we'll take a couple minutes here to pause and come back for more in a couple of minutes. Thank you all. All right folks I think we can bring ourselves back. I hope everyone had a chance to stand up and move around a little bit. If you haven't been already. So now I'd like to pass it over to Linda Warley who's the chair of the Columbia River Treaty local governments committee welcome Linda. And invite Cindy I believe you've got some slides to share so whenever you're ready to do that you can go ahead. And there we go. Linda I'll pass the mic over to you. Thanks very much. Thank you very much Brooke and I just first want to recognize and respect that our committee and we live and meet within the unceded territories of the Columbia Basin Indigenous Nations peoples. And thank you to everyone for making time for the this event this evening and it's important that as basin residents we continue to be fully engaged in discussions about the treaty. Thank you to the BC CRT team for the invitation to participate in tonight's town hall. I want to recognize the committee's vice chair stand oil from area B of the RDEK and other committee members who joined us this evening, as well as other local provincial and federal elected officials who have joined this evening for this meeting. On behalf of the committee I want to acknowledge and share our support for the addition of the indigenous nations to the negotiating team and for their leadership in the integration of ecosystem functions into the treaty. I think Bill, for his words on this work ecosystems are very important to the basin residents, and it's heartening to know that integrating this interest into the treaty is being taken seriously. Next slide please. Thank you. The committee includes 10 elected officials appointed by local governments across the basin. Our communities continue to be greatly impacted by the treaty operations as shown by these pictures. We have embraced the statement from a community meeting in Jeffrey some years ago that that we need to acknowledge the losses and enhance what remains. Since 2011 the committee has been working with with the BC CRT team and then with the negotiating team to ensure the voices of the basin residents are included in decisions related to the treaty. We've listened carefully to what basin residents have said is important in our communities during the many community meetings that were held, and that we've attended. We've also sought advice on more technical topics to prepare our recommendations to the government. In 2013 we repair we prepared our first recommendations and in January we sent updated recommendations to the five governments on the negotiating team and more about this in the next slide. We've also recently accepted leadership to provide recommendations on integrating socio economic interest in the CRT modeling to inform the treaty negotiations. Our executive director will tell you more about this in a few minutes. We have other communications with the BC team and the negotiating team to share updates and discuss issues. We advocate for the solutions to community specific and broader domestic issues. Next slide. Thank you. Our updated recommendations include expanded information for several sections as listed on the slide and a new section on modernized governance and Kathy mentioned this governance work that is underway. We look forward to participating in the process to ensure local governments and basin residents have mechanisms for meaningful long term engagement and treaty governance going forward, unlike in the past and now. We have feedback from you on the updated recommendations. Google a KPLG CRT and click on our recommendations to get the recommendations there and feedback for basin residents have been positive so far which is great to see. Thank you for new if you have any comments on this so please take the time to do this. The committee is very aware of public commitments from the BC CR team to bring any elements of the negotiated agreement that impact the region back to the residents and local negotiations are finalized. Thank you to the province for that commitment. We encourage all of you to become well educated about the treaty and to stay informed about the ongoing negotiations to be ready to provide input when invited. The BC CRT engage website and CBT CRT website have lots of helpful information so I encourage you to go there and have a look around and see what's on there. We look forward to continuing to work closely with a negotiating team and the BC team to ensure concerns and issues for the basin residents and communities are addressed in the treaty negotiations and through solutions we can implement domesticality. Thank you and I'll turn it over to Cindy in a moment but I just want to remind people that the local government committee is a team of Columbia base and elected officials that continue to advocate for the base of interests and has been connecting with the CRT negotiations throughout negotiators throughout and the updated recommendations have been published and we encourage you to go on to the website to look at them again and make any comments that you have. I'll turn it over to Cindy Pierce the committee's executive director for a brief introduction to our new socio-economic integration work and thank you very much for your time. Have a good evening people. Take it away Cindy. You are muted. I'm sorry for managing slides and I'm using beyond my technical capacity at this time of the night. Thank you for your patience. Can you hear me now? Yes, we can. We can't see you but that's up to you whether you want to share your video as well. We can certainly hear you though so go ahead Cindy, thank you. How's that? Perfect. Thank you. Great to see you. Great. So thank you Linda and I want to echo the thanks that Linda, Chris and others have to all of you who are still on the line at this hour of the evening. It's really important that as basin residents we continue to share information about this important topic. Kathy mentioned in your presentation about CRT scenarios modeling and Bill has spoken about it at Great Lakes so I think he's got the basis. I'm going to add to that with a bit of a detailed description and then talk specifically about the work that the committee is doing on this defining integration of socio-economic interest to inform the negotiation. So we're just at the very beginning of this process and we've been reviewing past documents that have included a articulated community interest in the basin and we've identified a number of different types of socio-economic interest including flooding and erosion, navigation, recreation and tourism, health, particularly dust generation and agriculture. These are the sort of the preliminary set of interest that we see and I've heard about in the community. We expect to hear more as we work our way through this process. So to put a picture to Bill's words, this CRT modeling process is intended to inform negotiations and as Kathy mentioned in the long term to evaluate alternatives for implementing the treaty once it's been completed. So we start off, that's the outcome that we're looking for here. We start off with what I call what matters. Bill has spoken and Nathan and Jay have spoken about the indigenous cultural values. Bill has spoken about the ecosystem function where the committee is working on the socio-economic interest and DC hydro has provided information on the power interest. Bill has then described the creation of alternative hydro operations scenarios or what if we operated the river this way or that way. He's also spoken about the performance measures that we translate these things that matter into metrics of performance measures. So we can put them into this government model and that model will tell us how through performance measure outcomes, how well each of those what if models met performance measures and what matters to be All of that information will be provided to the negotiators and inform the negotiations about what needs to be in the treaty. I want to emphasize that not one what if scenario will be included in the treaty. This is to inform the space to create flexibility in the Canadian operations of the treaty primarily. That's the purpose of this work. I also want to mention that this river management model includes both the Columbia and the Canadian rivers from their headwaters through to the ocean. And it includes the major structures on those systems as well, including a little down, which is like the reservoir back into DC. We needed to have a model that includes the whole system. So the things like salmon lacerations to be carefully considered, and also to evaluate US proposal that come to the negotiation. So we're just at the beginning of this work. Our timeline started back just before Christmas, we've been reviewing documents and collecting information. And now in the process of kind of designing the engagement, working with the Columbia based regional advisory committee, which is a diverse group of based in residents and appointees from local government. That represents a broad range of perspective interests and geography. And they've been in place since 2014, providing, you know, providing informing, pardon me informing hydro operations and the Co2 negotiations. And we're attending to work closely with them on this work. So we're wanting to speak with them about how they want to be engaged and how they would suggest the public should be engaged in this work as well. And then take their input and continue collecting information to create some initial performance measures within the spring and summer, and then bring that back to you in the public for your feedback in September to October, and revise and refine and make recommendations to the DC team before the end of the year. So in the fall, perhaps a bit earlier, we will start to the confidential scenario modeling. Looking at as Bill described what what ifs might provide the best outcomes for the socioeconomic interest. And that will be provided to the university to inform their, their, their modeling that would include all of the interest over time. So we'll be reaching out to you in either late spring. And to the fall to invite you to provide public feedback on these performance measures so we can watch our website. Thank you so much Cindy and maybe I could ask just a quick question or point of clarity for folks who might not know what socioeconomic performance measures are. Could you give an example of what one might be, for example. Well, I'll use a navigation example to get log booms through the narrows between the two arrow lakes, the river flows and the narrows need to be at a certain elevation. So, a performance measure for navigation on arrow reservoir might be the number of days the reservoir above whatever the minimum level is where they can need logs. The location, it might be an elevation range that allows access to primary boat access location. Definitely thanks so much. Kind of put it into context for folks yeah that's great. So thanks so much Cindy and Linda that was great and it wraps up our panelists session for the night. I'll echo Cindy comments thank you for everybody who's hung out up until now there I'm looking at the attendee list and there's still 163 of you still online and there's a good number of folks who are have phoned into which is, which is awesome. I'd like to take this chance to answer some of the questions that have been post finally in the Q&A box here. And I will read them out so folks on the phone know what the questions are. And then, some of our panelists can identify if they'd like to answer them or not. This is also the time of night that my dog is scratching at the door so if you hear something that sounds slightly creepy. That's what it is. Sorry everybody. So the, the first question at the very top here that was asked quite early or on. I'll read it out. It says in the wake of British Columbia creating and implementing bill 41 in 2019, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People's Act. Considering that the Columbia Basin Trust Act, which created this, the Columbia Basin Trust is in receipt of the downstream benefits of the Columbia River Treaty on entirely unseated Indian land as per Royal Proclamation of 1763. Will British Columbia and Canada recognize articles three and four of the United Nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples, in particular the right to self determination, and to fund their own institutions and in doing so make substantial and meaningful changes to the Columbia Basin Trust Act so that the indigenous peoples will be in part reconciled with, for example, equal partners recipients in all downstream benefits, whereas the indigenous peoples will be able to freely choose what funds are used without interference. Can I invite one of the panelists to either comment, or, or attempt to answer the question there. Brooke I'd like to but it says you cannot start your video because the host has stopped it. Oh weird. I will see if I can unstop your video but Kathy why don't you go ahead and I'll invite. Okay, okay. And I'll invite others to step in. You know, we are very alive to the commitment and very committed to implementing the declaration and that's why the province has has passed the act. And, and that indigenous nations deserve are entitled to benefit of what happens activities on their, on their inner territory. And so we are having discussions actually brought in we're starting to have those discussions on sharing benefits relating to the Columbia retreat and and brought broadly the hydro system. So, very timely I mean they, the province invested almost half a billion dollars on Columbia Basin Trust and Columbia Power Corporation way back when and the trust now. Earns annually $65 million a year approximately, which is, you know, at times more than half the Canadian entitlement. And, and there is participation on the trust board by some indigenous nature some representation but that is, that is something that really is is a very good point to raise, and that will be I'm sure pursued so I invite others to jump in. Thanks. Thanks very much Kathy and and spill green here thanks. Thank you for the question. The. Yeah, I'll just add briefly to Kathy's answer which is the five governments agreed to establish a benefit sharing subcommittee under the negotiations advisory team and there are very much active live discussions on the topics you raise in the broader context around a benefit sharing so good question and this work is is going on under the negotiation advisory team. And I'll add with with direction from leadership in this regard as well. Thanks. So by speaking, I just want to reiterate and everybody knows that but, you know, in 2016, Canada. In 2016, you know, Canada endorsed the United Nations declaration without collect qualification and committed to its full and effective implementation and, and in December of last year. The government introduced legislation to implement this this so so there's no question that that the government is committed to the implementation of under it. Now, this being said, is very complex. And, and, you know, we have to look at ways, you know, to implement the declaration, you know, of government activity. So, you know, when when comes the time to talk about how what this would mean, and very precise the one particular issue. It's, it's so literally and hard to, to, to expand on this but I just wanted to make this intervention to say that there is a commitment there and legislation that is being considered. Thank you so much, Sylvain and to Bill and to Kathy for that. So we have another question here. There is a multi part question. So, but maybe I'll just choose. I choose one part of the question. And I should also mention too that all the, like there's no way we're going to be able to get through all of these tonight, but we will absolutely include answers to these questions in our summary report for this meeting. And all of these questions have been viewed by the panelists and I'm sure many of the folks who are linked in. So we'll keep making our way through the questions and just know that they will be answered no matter what. So one part of this question is some authors believe that it is necessary to go beyond international law to think in a more inclusive way, the governance of the Columbia River Treaty. Can we imagine a permanent transnational forum bringing together actors of various statuses. If you want to respond to that question about a transboundary governance possibility. So may you go ahead. Well, you know, without, we're still negotiating right we don't know what's going to come out of this and and and all elements of a future modernized treaty, you know, have have to be agreed upon before one of them is agreed upon right formally. Some sort of transnational governance to the treaty. So, so transnational will not be new. We are looking at ways to, to address governance issues, both internationally, I mean, between the US and Canada, and domestically. So yes, these issues are being considered. Perhaps Kathy you want to expand them. Okay. Great. Thank you. So, moving down the list. Somebody has asked if indigenous groups are represented on CRT treaty negotiating team, I hope that you've seen here tonight that yes in fact they are. There's a common ground between their interests and and others involved in the treaty negotiations and basically people who are affected by the treaty. Many, many shared interests there so thank you for that question. There, somebody has asked, I've often wondered about the grave sites in flagstaff tobacco planes, where they used to be, which is now flooded over by cuckoos. Maybe an acknowledgement about the grave sites that are now currently under the water. That's not an uncommon thing over over the, you know, millennia basically. So thank you for raising that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I just want that that is part of the work that Ingrid Strauss from our team is, is leading with the steering committee. And I earlier on, I mentioned the stories around the basin and areas that were impacted and communities that were impacted. That will be told when the heritage Columbia River basin heritage tour will be put in place. They're very important. Thank you Kathy. And we have another comment here. And question, how is the indigenous communities of bands of American Indians of the Columbia River being factored into this treaty as some of us are still sought for extermination to date. For the good of all, we have been apprehended for extermination genocide is a real thing that must be heard on a matter of treaties and negotiations. Our suffering pain and loss is immeasurable to say sorry is not enough reparations are in order. Silio falls, our sacred ancestor was taken prisoner of war. Would anybody like to make comment. Thank you for sharing that that experience with us. I could share a little something but also if anybody else on the panel wants to. Yes, of course, I saw one of the comments in the list that you're reading that said, it seems to be that the indigenous nations of Canada and I'll address the US side. The nations of Canada are observers, but they seem to be a little bit more than observers. I'll give you my point of view if, if, and if one, if one of the, my colleagues from indigenous nation wants to chip in. I certainly don't believe that they're only observers I do not consider them as just observers observers was a term that was chosen and it represents. Maybe what they what what happens when we are sitting down at the table with the United States, right, where where when when when we have a bilateral negotiation. The chief negotiator speaks for the Canadian delegation. I think my counterpart in the US does. However, when we get into the room next door, and we talk about how it went, and whether I did well or not, and what's going on and how should we amend our positions, I can tell you, we're not talking about or when we prepare our positions to be presented to the US. I as the chief negotiator consider the voice and the proposals and the comments and the opinions of, and Kathy does the same for any member of our delegation. We consider these these inputs from them. As equal to all of us right. So that's on the Canadian side but on the US side, yes, there has been some involvement. On the US delegation, I wish someone from their delegation was was in this meeting but this meeting is even though there are American participants in this meeting. It's, it's, it's a Canadian British Columbia initiated and led meeting. So, yeah, we've had we have seen members of the tribal members come to the negotiations and also make presentations on some issues, right. I won't comment on on on the extent that they are involved, because I don't know I don't sit in the US delegation meeting. So risk some comments of a couple of things that we're seeing, not here to promote an administration over another. But I think that there are some pretty key positions now that have impact on tribal life and and influences everything they do there are pretty key decision positions that are in the process of being filled for the first time. By representative of tribal or indigenous nations of the US so I think it's a good sign. But I'm not there to promote what the US delegation does but I will finish this intervention by saying that I'm very happy. I'm not in that and thrilled that our our indigenous nations are part 100% of this exercise and of the Canadian delegation for two reasons a is right thing to do, and be boy, they keep us honest, and not that I have a tendency to be dishonest, but they keep us on this and on our toes, and certainly I think that you made very valuable contribution to all of the work we do, and I'm not saying this is just nice. That's true. So I'll end here. Thank you so much survey. And I received a message from bill bill you'd like to add a little bit more to one of the previous questions bill go ahead. I'd like to add a bit to the question about burial sites and particularly referenced near tobacco plains. And it's an important point and I, and Nathan spoke earlier about work that's being done around cultural values, and the idea of the cultural values work and it incorporates addressing things like burial sites, like archaeology other archaeological sites, but also things that aren't physically tangible but cultural values that are tied to a place or location or a reservoir level without any physical evidence of physical evidence of that. The idea of the cultural value studies is to see, are there different ways of operating the reservoirs that could have less impact on cultural values and that's a very huge piece of work a very difficult question to answer but it is very much a piece of work that the nations are engaged in. Thanks. Thank you bill. So I'll ask I'll ask one more question from the q amp a box and I see somebody has their hand raised so we'll move over to that to listen to that person's question. So the next question here is the Canadian comprehensive proposal available to read now or must we wait until the negotiations are complete. I feel that that's been addressed but does anybody want to speak further to that at all. I can just in Kathy will certainly want to to perhaps complement what I say this. This is always as as a negotiation is going on a significant balance balancing act right between what we share publicly with those who are involved in what we don't. So, the governments of everybody. Everybody that is touched by by the negotiation is represented by their governments in the negotiation. Right there's representative from the BC government which represent BC people the indigenous nations. Canada is there because it's a treaty between. Canada in the US so, you know, we, we are all involved in that way. What we share and how much we share and how we share is a pretty complex and very touchy right. For example, the US, the US can say and we've told the US, we're making a proposal now you don't want you to share that publicly just yet. They say the same right there are reasons why these negotiations are held up. Now my colleagues in the trade negotiation world, you know, are a great example if you follow what we've done over the decades. When, when the first treaty kind of the US trade agreement was there were some consultations, not that much, not much things were talked about public. As it evolved more and more, the concentration process for any kind of agreement became, you know, a lot more extensive and a lot more interlocutors and stakeholders were consulted. And Columbia River Treaty is a case in point the consultation in the 1960s. When it was first negotiated is nothing compared to what we do now right. But the sharing of formal proposal is is a is is a thing that is a little bit more sensitive, eventually like Kathy said before any decisions are made or before anything is signed and cast. The people who are impacted by this will will be informed and consulted. There are different ways we can do that right. But for now, we're not at a point now and we're certainly not advanced enough to be able to make these things public. I will give you eight I'll finish there after that I'll give you a personal opinion. You've been being like everybody else so I've got my understanding is that I've got my thoughts to and, and but I have, I feel that what we have presented to the US as our first formal offer in the same way as all the discussions we've had before are all very much representative of everything I've heard and read about what indigenous nations and basin residents and other stakeholders want to be pushed forward. This being said, some of the things that are being pushed forward are actually mutually exclusive. So, at one point, you can only do so much on our side to reconcile everything. And of course, at the end of the day, we are negotiating with a significant partner, and we can't all get what we want right and there's a lot of give and take. That that is that you know and trial and error that is being done during these negotiations but anyways, I feel very comfortable that what I presented to the US formally in June is representative of what we've heard. And if we want to know, by and large, what it is that we presented on and what are the issues that have been raised Kathy mentioned earlier, it is very much in line with with the position that was laid out in the recommendation to negotiate that was published in 2012, I think. Long long answer. Well I certainly have nothing to add after that today. That's fine. Thank you so many. So, now we're going to flip over to somebody who has their hand raised. Madeline McKay, I'm going to allow you to unmute yourself and if you're still interested in asking question, you should be able to ask it now. Thank you. Go ahead. I am wondering if those of you on the Canada side of the negotiation are also at the same time, working with the federal government to undo the declaration of extinction from 1956 of the Sun Eyck's people. Since they are the original people of the Columbia River what we call that and if now at this point. It seems like an ideal time to make sure their partners in this conversation, 80% of I live in the cusp 80% of their lands where living sites were flooded. So yeah, I just wonder if that's a parallel effort going on to make sure indigenous voices are respected. Thank you. Okay. Kathy you want to go ahead. I'll just, I'll just. Yes, there have been conversations between the BC government and, and particularly in the area of ecosystem vision while I live with, with the Colville, the Federation of Colville tribes and, and, and, and of course there's the very important Supreme case that we're waiting decision but we are we definitely respect and honor the decision of the lower courts that affirm the rights of this next in, in BC, with regards to the negotiation that's a little tricky. And I, and I remember a couple of years to my year two years ago, I was in California for an adaptive management conference and the chairman, Michelle was there and we talked about the negotiations and, and we said well it would be tricky because how the tribes in the US are being consulted with the State Department by the State Department, and, and so being consulted on negotiating positions with Canada puts the people in a precarious position. We haven't had any request or to engage in the negotiations per se on the Columbia River Treaty. I definitely recognize that the courts and respect the courts decision regarding the Lakes Division of the Colville tribes and their rights in Canada. And thank you, Kathy. The other thing I will ask, I will add, in that context, and first of all, thank you for your question. And of course, terrible things that have happened in the past, and as a white person, I will never be able to fully appreciate them. Like, I have an intellectual capacity to realize that that was really bad, but I can't really feel it because it never happened to me so I'm not going to take over Madeline this part. However, one thing I want to say, and as I was looking at the questions, right. There are very valid points and very, very important issues that are being raised, such as the one you raised, you know, and we have to remember also that we are in a context of negotiating with the United States. Very, how should I put this, a very concrete treaty that cannot encompass everything else that needs to be resolved, right. And the treaty is about dams that were built and water management and, you know, and impacts that these dams and this water management is having both on Indigenous nations and, and basin residents. And we can address everything right but of course we try to use the, because we realize that as representative of the federal government is probably going to agree as a representative of the provincial government that we also have a responsibility to maybe be an agent of change for other issues while we can't resolve them ourselves. A good example of that is the work that we are doing on, on considering the feasibility of salmon reintroduction, which could end up being going further than just that, depending on the result of the work. You know, when you look at it, if you, the treaty dams have not stopped any salmon from coming together, right, the dams that did are not part of the treaty were built before the treaty. So we can't really resolve that but what we have decided to do is two things. Hey, try to push this issue to be addressed because it needs to be addressed if you're not. And the other thing is make sure that whatever we do or agree to in the treaty does not become something that will preclude an eventual reintroduction, should we find the ways and means of doing that right. So what we do should not hurt, not hurt, hurt the reintroduction salmon, but negotiating with the treaty with the US was also part of the decision as to what this association should and should not entail, cannot address all of these operations. But we, if we can be an agent of change, we being the people involved in the Columbia River Treaty modernization. We will be and we are trying to be in some of those. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much Madeline for your question and to Kathy and Sylvain for the answers. So I do notice that we are at 815, which is when we officially said that we were going to wrap up. And I've seen, you know, people leaving as they need to, I'm still very impressed to see 144 people on this call. If panelists are okay with it, we'll keep going through and asking questions for as long as we have the stamina. So with that, and of course anybody who needs to log off obviously do that. Look back to the BC Columbia River Treaty website for all follow up material on this session, including a survey that will help us improve on future sessions. So if you need to hop off please make a note to do that. Next question here. What are the relative weights that the US attributes to the three areas of focus of the treaty flood control power generation and ecosystem services. What are Canada's weights. I have a guess as to what the answer to this is going to be given that negotiations are confidential but Sylvain or Kathy would either of you like to comment. I want to be as considerate and polite as can be so I just don't want to sit there say, I won't even provide some sort of an answer so I'd rather, I'd rather do that. However, to be perfectly honest. If, when you ask me, what is the proportional weight or the respective weight that the US is is putting into this. If I was able to tell you everything that I know about the negotiation. Before I could actually give you an answer that that is representative of the, you know, a percentage, right. I will not hide the fact from you. And that one is easy and I alluded earlier in the meeting flood risk management is important to that. Look at how many people live in the basin and look at the infrastructure that they have. Look at the potential that this mighty Columbia River has to wreak havoc and flood areas in the US by the way. So of course, it's important to that. But as as for assigning a precise or, or, or semi precise weight to it. I'd be hard pressed to do that. And we're probably going to have a better idea after a couple of upcoming rounds, but then again, it's difficult for us to share that until it's time to share. So, I'll leave it at that. Thanks so much, Sylvie. So a next question is will the Canadian negotiators advocate for those who lost land and a way of life behind the dams that were built in the basin. Kathy or Sylvie, or any of the other panelists. Thank you to just retrusal. I'm not sure advocating to whom and for what exactly, but what we are doing is looking at what are the issues that the communities around the basin are bringing up to us what the interests are, and addressing them outside the negotiation on the CRT as I explained earlier we have about 12 projects where we're, we're looking at how to improve certain or mitigate certain impacts from the treaty that we can that we can address within, you know, that are in our hands and so that certainly is something that we're committed to doing. And, and that we're going to continue to do as communities themselves identify what we should be working on with them. Great, thank you Kathy. Moving on to the next question. Does the expanded modeling initiative examine scenarios for reservoir operations on both sides of the border or just Canada. Maybe, Bill you could speak to that for or Kathy if you're available for for where we're at now is that the model has been set up to be able to examine a range of alternative operating scenarios for the Canadian reservoirs and of course, in parallel for the river reaches downstream of the reservoirs. So it is currently Canadian focused, but I think we see the need in the future to be able to do collaborative modeling with us so we can come up with a common understanding of the impacts to reservoirs rivers and ecosystems and other values on both sides of the border but we're not there now we're the work we're doing now is focused on the Canadian side and I think that's a good starting point where we can identify preferred collectively can identify preferred operations potential preferred operations and then ultimately get to some perhaps collaborative modeling with the US. Great. Thanks so much Bill. Here's another question on salmon here I'm not sure if you would comment or or possibly something or Kathy but what is Canada's position on restoring salmon runs via installation of fish fish passages on the dams or obstructions. And answer that because in my earlier career I was part of the mystery environment and involved in the environmental assessments with with with bill and parts of some of the environmental assessments required the province to, to include fish passage if fish were crossing the border or be or feasibly reintroduced into Canada so on to you bill. Thanks, but it will bounces because it's, I think it's specifically asking for Canada's position, certainly within the Columbia resummon restoration initiative we're actively examining what the options are for providing fish fish passage at the impassable dams and it's a really important focus of our work. Okay, I'm not a scientist. I'm not a fish. We have a huge department in the government Canada, people like that. What I will say is salmon is an issue. And as I've evolved over the decades. Pacific salmon is is is an important issue for the federal government. And, and there are a lot of people at fisheries and oceans, who, who are looking into this and trying to figure out, you know, what is feasible or not. We have a group now it was mentioned before tonight that a group that has fisheries and oceans representatives BC provincial expert representatives. Indigenous, the three basin indigenous nations who've signed a letter of intent and they're, and they're looking at this. The first question. And again, I'm not an expert, but the question they're looking at, or now, in the future, we don't know. The main question is, we have to look at the feasibility of reintroducing the salmon right and, and, you know, it's probably feasible, but, but we don't know, and we certainly don't know how. And at what cost, and at, you know, and, you know, by doing what right so we're doing the things step by step, and now there's some work that is being done. And there's probably going to be more work in the future. And again, to touch a little bit on an earlier question when it talked about are you doing modeling with the US ecosystems. And actually, it's obvious, even for a guy like me that any serious work about salmon reintroduction will will require transboundary work, because right now the salmon is blocked way before. It has the buck, right, everybody has a blame in this but physically the salmon is this stop before the border right so obviously we can do all the work we want in Canada. And salmon needs to go up and back down to the ocean. So if there's no going back down to the ocean in the US, whatever we do in Canada will will will not will be will not have a big impact. It's the same, you know, if and when the US decides we're reintroducing salmon we're going to do whatever we want. It's not likely that they will be able to do this very successfully if nothing is done on the Canadian side because this is used to go up way past. I mean, eventually they'll have to be a by national thinking on this right, but for the time being, we're starting and again, I was very surprised to learn and a lot of you probably know that so I don't want to sound like that. I feel repeatedly that the most serious issue for salmon is not always to have them come up through the dams is how they go back down, right, both in the river that where the current has been slowed down and it, it makes it a little fish to go back down and they're more, they're more likely to be victim of predators right and also when they go over the dam, they don't always successfully go over the dam or the turbine so it's a two way street. But anyways, first things first, there's some work being done. Hopefully there'll be other work being done and we're working with our indigenous nations and indigenous peoples and we'll see what comes out of phase one and then go from there. Thank you so much. So then, so the next question here is, again, I think Kathy talked to this but earlier but maybe to reiterate when do the people of the basin get to have a say before the team makes a final decision. Yeah, I think we asked her that a couple of times. Okay, great. And here, Miss, so it's a question for you, Sylvain. What is your opinion on the proposal and validity of an earth and down built just north of the 49th. This proposal will do many things such as stabilizing water levels in the Cougarosa reservoir, protecting ecosystems and bake erosion, providing economic benefits by way of recreation but most importantly to protect and control our natural resource water. So you have made mention of many things that the US are concerned with but those same concerns are felt north of the border as well. We have seen arbitrary decisions from the US Supreme Court that circumvent the US Army Corps of Engineers and BC hydro. Sylvain, do you have a response to that comment and question. Hold on. I'm having an issue with my video. No, I don't and I'll tell you why it's not because I don't care. It's an issue that has been raised, and the government of BC is looking at right so I don't want to preempt publicly certainly what I think of this so for now, I'll leave it at that. But if Kathy wants to say something up to her but on this one, I'll leave it at that. So I think, and I suspect that the questioner is fully aware of what's going on. How, what the process is for the Cougarosa dam so we'll allow the process to unfold as I explained earlier this evening. Thanks. Thank you to. So I'm going to move over to the raised hands over here we have one hand that's raised from Jerry. Jerry, I'm going to allow you to speak so if you could unmute yourself and ask your question. If you're still interested, there you go. Yeah, yes, I certainly am. Jerry will keep from the Columbia Valley and I'm just really interested in, in all the negotiations how you are taking into account the, the long the long term loss of water we're talking about water, and you know the abatement of the glaciers, and so forth other stages. Are you talking about a stage, you know with your models that we can do this, or I'm just interested in in how that, how that's playing out because it's a, it's a huge issue. Obviously, climate changes is is right there with you on the table. I'll start to answer that and maybe Bill or Savannah or others would jump in. Climate change is definitely has been top of mind. Ever since we, well even before we started talking about the future of the Columbia River Treaty and the there are many, many scientists on both sides of the board are looking at what are the predictions for climate change for the basin. The good news for us anyway in BC is that the total inflow, less glacier melt, less snow more rain but we're still going to continue to have a healthy snowpack will mean that in total over the year will have the same or even maybe more water. Maybe not, you know, that may not be so true in the lower Columbia. So, but, and Bill could, or Cindy could talk to this climate change scenarios or baselines are being incorporated in the modeling that we're doing to to look at the effects on all of the interest that we've been talking about tonight. Bill here I can add a few things. So thank you, Kathy. Next point I'll make is that, you know, some of the climate change discussion needs to be is negotiations confidential so I can't speak to that. But within the ecosystem function work and thanks to Cindy's work very much in each the ecosystem function studies. Back a bit. So Cindy spearheaded an effort to develop kind of consensus information on likely impacts of climate change, looking ahead to, you know, dirty and 60 years scenarios. And so that summary is in considered in each of the ecosystem function studies about okay, so here's what we think would happen to a particular ecosystem value if the operations continue this way. Here's what we think would happen is the operations continue this way, and we have this degree of climate change and again looking at different emissions pathways, etc. So that work is being done within the ecosystem function work, and then finally I would say that we're having very active discussions about how to address how to meaningfully and effectively address climate change within the negotiation process and I should say one final final point, which is that Catherine referred to the modeling and currently considering to their work been done both sides of the border. One by the river management joint operations committee on the US side developing forecasts of inflows to reservoirs on both sides of the border. And then we go way up to the headwaters and then there's somewhat parallel work being done on the Canadian side by the Pacific climate impacts consortium so we have two day pretty robust data sets of forecast of future stream flows and the uncertainties there and working through what which data sets can we use in the modeling to consider climate change impacts. Thanks. Thanks so much. You guys appreciate it. Lots of questions always about how climate change is being considered in these negotiations so I appreciate those those answers. And this might be somewhat related there and sorry thank you Jerry who was the one to ask that question. Very much appreciate you doing that. Moving back to the Q&As I think we'll have a few more, depending on the how the panelists are feeling. This one might be related to what was just asked but how could open sourced environmental data between Canada and the US aid in treaty negotiations. When anybody like to respond to that question. Oh yeah, absolutely. So how could open sourced environmental data between Canada and the US aid in treaty negotiations. So one comment I'll make in that regard is that we have made a decision and a commitment within the ecosystem function. To make that all the data that's been collected for the purposes of ecosystem function studies and it's quite a vast array of information, both geospatial and other types of data. We're committed to making that publicly available through a data portal it's being developed by soccer college and the Columbia Basin Trust has agreed to fund that data portal for at least for the next three years so there is a commitment to open sourcing the data that has been compiled and of course we're very open to exploring what other data sources could be brought into that that soccer college data portal. Thanks so much Bill. And I should also mention to that we'll add a link to that portal on our website so again visiting the Columbia River Treaty website. It's engage at gov.bc.ca or just Google Columbia River Treaty, and it should come up. So we'll take maybe a couple more questions and then wrap it up for the night. So the next one is is a logistical question how frequent are the negotiations between Canada the US. I already answered or Sylvan has already answered the question about local tribes involvement. And are there minutes of the negotiation meetings available for public viewing. I think most of that's been covered but Sylvan or do you want to speak to how frequent the negotiations are. Yes, yes, yes. Historically, they've been very, very big rule of thumb, every two two and a half months, except of course, for the last one, which, which, frankly, not only the US and BC election played a role in pushing back around but also the COVID situation certainly has not helped, right. And negotiations and you can see that if you follow the renegotiation of the Canada US Mexico free trade agreement. Usually negotiations will happen every two months. So you can have meetings in between who will touch only it'll be like a working group, we did that earlier on on one particular issue, you know, we, we call that. I remember the intersessional session and, and you can have full fledged sessions happening faster than that, depending on the time you need in between sessions to negotiate the issue we're facing here is a lot of a lot of the themes and and and and the conditions we're dealing with in this negotiation are extremely complex, and sometimes if you decide to address an issue in between rounds two months is not enough. Right. For example, anything that has to do with modeling. Even though some of these things are done with computers these days. It take you know the computer does it very quickly but what you input in the computer usually takes time before the modeling can be done so sometimes we need more time to negotiate right. And, and so, I suspect we could have around, reasonably soon as a new administration they're very much now engaged meeting us as a group of that. And then, and then, you know, we'll start again to have more regular. So I think we are going to wrap up soon here I see one more hand is raised so I will ask Ken to unmute himself and ask his question, the final question for the evening. Ken go ahead. My name is Mario Scott Laro I'm from Pembroke BC. I'm older than dirt. Hello, the Columbia River pretty from day one. I can't tell you how disappointed I am in tonight's program for a Gation is a big issue with me. I want to thank Kathy, I can burger. I think we're lucky to have her on our negotiation team. I think she should get a lot of credit. I belong to build the we're many are self funded, not have any financial interest. And supporting the we're here in coconut. Even with COVID-19 has been locally strongly endorsed. I've written registered all registered letters to the premier without any response on calls to our MLA responsible for the treaty, we're not returned. The U.S. my opinion, monetary value to the U.S. is in the billions, building a we're on cookies noosa, if the U.S. maintains a level of 24 FIFI is mandatory. received all this monetary and economic benefits. In 2017, Bellisfeld newspaper monetary benefits to the U.S. is $138 million. Canada receives nothing. The 85% of the water stored is in Canada according to latest engineering study. A major contract in our area suggested locations for the weir and identified required construction materials nearby. He agrees that the suggested weir up for most cost of 400 million in the engineering study is reasonable with a possibility of coal mines ending this project, generate economic and employment for generations. Please respond. Thanks very much, Mario and Mario, we it's great to hear from you. We connect with you often as you know and as we all know, so it's great to hear from you. I would invite maybe Kathy to respond. Go ahead, Kathy. Hi, Mario, nice to hear your voice and thank you so much for the kudos. Those are things, words of like yours, keep me going and trying to do the right thing for the basin. We know how important the recreation levels, water levels in the Kukanusa are and we, you know, 2019 was a year that we don't want repeated. So we are committed to, you know, addressing this, rectifying the problem, finding a solution one way or the other and I know you will keep us, our feet to the fire because you are relentless and I want to congratulate you on your upcoming 94th birthday and I wish more residents had the passion and the fire that you have. A lot more would get done. Kathy, I'm just a young man, I'm only 92. Sorry, I aged you, I'm so sorry. Thank you, thanks very much and thanks again, Mario, for raising your concerns. Really important to hear them on public platforms like this in addition to our engagement outside of that. So really appreciate that and thank you, Kathy, for your response. So we're at 8.45 Pacific time here. I think we're going to wrap up for the evening. Thank you so much for everybody who's stayed along for the last half hour here, especially there was, you know, about 90 people still left on this webinar which just goes to show the passion and the high level of interest that many, many different people have from all different walks of life towards the Columbia River Treaty. So thank you once again. I'd like to remind everybody again that a recording of this will be available on YouTube. We'll share it through our social media channels as well as on our website. And if you have any additional questions for us or any additional comments, please send them to columbiarivertreaty.gov.bc.ca or you can fill out the survey that will get sent around. Before we wrap up, I'd like to give Kathy the chance to say a few words and any of the other panelists as well if you'd like, Kathy, go ahead. I'll just say that I've been so impressed by the attendance, by over 200 people participating by the breadth of questions. And I'm really disappointed that we couldn't tonight answer all of them but it's really, you know, we're going to think about after tonight whether we should have another session and just carry on with the questions. Their presentations were important to give you an update on where we were at and all the different activities going on. And I appreciate, I was reading the chat that people were interested and appreciate the information. Maybe we should have in not too long in the future, just a Q&A to carry on this conversation because it is so important. So thanks to everybody and I'll let other panelists say a few words. Thanks so much, Kathy. And I'll invite any of the panelists to unmute themselves and share any final comments. I don't want to take any more people's time for attending this meeting and giving us the opportunity to share some of our thoughts and hear some of your thoughts and I'll be delighted to do this again. Thank you. Thanks so much, Sylvain. Go ahead, Nathan. Just think the goal that we had for tonight is significantly being met just with exchanging relevant information and developing a better understanding of the representative of the indigenous side. It's conversations like this, I think that will allow us to move ahead with a greater level of understanding and move toward that goal of reconciliation. So thanks, I'm very impressed with the attendance this evening. Well, I would just also like to thank everybody for participating when limped and I know this was a more of a technical briefing from our team at the negotiator level here and sort of giving people a sense generally about the mechanics of things and some of the issues but I would definitely welcome another session in the higher level session where our leadership can speak more broadly about the relationship and some of the bigger, more political-based issues and have that opportunity as well. Limped. Thanks very much, everybody. Bill or Cindy or Linda, would you like to say any final words before we sign off for the night? Yes, thank you. Just thanks everybody and stay safe and please keep informed on the treaty and what's going on. There's so much information on the websites that were mentioned and I really appreciate your attendance tonight. Thank you. Thanks very much, Linda. Hi folks, I wanna reiterate my astonishment at the numbers and at your perseverance going through this. Lots of great information shared and it would be wonderful to have another session to dig into some of the topics a little bit more deeply and watch for the information about social economics or it'll be coming to you in a few months. Bye-bye. Okay, I have very little to add other than thanks to all of you who participated and the Q&A session in particular and I would particularly welcome a follow-up session more focused on the Q&A. So I think that there's obviously much we didn't get to in the questions and so a good basis for further conversation and discussion. Thank you. Wonderful. Thank you all and I 100% agree and it sounds like we have our next step here. So keep your eyes and ears open for the next session that we will hold. Thank you once again, everybody. And with that, I'll stop the recording and end the session. I wish you all a safe evening. Keep well and take care of yourselves all the very best.