so why does the state water board use unimpaired flow? one because it's really simple to understand the concept. it is not a complicated flow schedule, it's just 40% of unimpaired flow, which is what would be there if there were no dams and residenervoirs on the system. the general scientific literature supports the use of the nature flow regime as a reference for understanding functional flows needed to support and maintain native species and their habitat, so it's basically a generic approach to a river, and if -- if -- particularly if it's an unmodified river, it's a decent starting place to look at. but basically, what we see in the scientific literature, it's not generally supportive using an unimpaired flow approach in modified river systems, such as the lower tuolomne where specific river relationships have been developed. it's important we're talking about a lot of water one way or another in terms of trying to improve the tuolomne river, and we want to make sure we're making the most efficient use of that fishery while protecting

as a number if there was an unimpaired flow mandate. >> mm-hmm. yes. >> and it seems like there's an exercise or some work that could be done, should be done, to say, you know, that is 00 m.g.d., how much of that could be met through additional conservation, kind of taking and doing the next piece of work, and then confirming that that 100 m.g.d. is indeed the number that we're talking about, and if that would allow us to not only provide for our contracts -- and i understand we'd have to do that in partnership with bsca, and others, but drought scenario planning and climate projections, and whatnot. >> yeah, no, i think absolutely. if these requirements are in effect, we have to plan for that 100 m.g.d. you know, is it -- should we start planning for 100 m.g.d. right now? i think that's where we haven't gone there yet because that seems like a big number, and we still have questions about how the water would be used in the first place to benefit the environment, so why plan for something which we think is not necessarily the right answer? that sa

it is an approach of unimpaired flow. forty% unimpaired flow through february through june. that is their proposal. that is an approach that can be effective in a relatively unmodified systems for a heavily modified systems. a lot of the biology has changed substantially. it is not necessarily going to result in the benefit that one might hope for. it is different in other river systems. >> are you saying the state purpose --'s proposal was not based on the study of the actual river? >> no, not of the river itself. >> what other river systems? >> parts of the pacific northwest. >> ok. but not the actual river system? >> that is really an important point for us. we have invested about $25 million over the last 20 years and detailed studies on the river and none of that information was utilized to the best of our observation. >> do you know why they do not study the actual river systems we are talking about? >> it is a challenging job that they have in terms of deciding what to do. they went through an effort to work look at what might be good for the bay and delta system. the

of 45% to 65% of unimpaired flow with -- to protect fish and wildlife and ensure the health of the delta and the bay. this is much more important to bay area residents than increasing office space and inviting ever more people. thank you. >> president kwon: thank you. chris chutes. >> chris chutes with the california sport fishing protection alliance. in 2014, i came before you and recommended that you take a better approach to the water control plan. part one would be to modify the board's framework and create special rules for flows. part two, to find an equitable division of responsibility between the city and the turlock and modesto units. you didn't do it. the technical staff provided me with a modify flow model of the tuolumne river. we thanked you for giving us a common tool to analyze flow options. we used the tool to create a proposal for the tuolumne and we filed that proposal with the regulatory commission. it will require more flow than the water flow in wet years and has special rules for dry years and sequences. there was a nod from staff that it was better than what others

the state water board reports that the bay delta needs at least 60% of unimpaired flows. but is recommending only 40%. the p.u.c. should be supporting the flow. they should be supporting 40% staff recommendation. you are joining forces with those to protect the fresh water that is flowing into it. and negotiated settlements is no replacement for freshwater. it won't work. it will not avoid litigation either. the estate plan is an adaptive management approach. it has a 30-50% flow. it is flexible, depending on conditions. these negotiated settlements are no replacement for adequate fresh water. thank you. >> next five. teresa hardy, if you will come up. line up here. welcome. >> good afternoon. i am here as a representative of the san francisco bay chapter chapter water committee. i will reiterate the things that we have heard this afternoon. first off, i am really speaking for constituents. the residents of the counties deeply care about our environment. and they would like to see you reflect that position in what you vote on as far as water. you are a pointed officials.