The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/09/2023 - Land Conservation And Stewardship Board - Agenda - Regular Meeting Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting Hybrid format: In person or Zoom 1745 Hoffman Mill Road/Main Office Conference Room August 9, 2023 August 9 , 202 3 Participation for this Land Conservation & Stewardship Board meeting will be available online, by phone or in person. Public Participation (Online): Individuals who wish to address the Land Conservation & Stewardship Board via remote public participation can do so through Zoom, see below. The meeting will be available to join beginning at 5:30 pm, August 9, 2023. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board. Join Zoom Meeting https://fcgov.zoom.us/j/95836874270?pwd=d3pPaTluOTBlMlVpbXpCQTFWbTZ3dz09 Meeting ID: 958 3687 4270 Passcode: 85q?8r!Y One tap mobile +17209289299,,91262842297# US (Denver) +13462487799,,91262842297# US (Houston) Dial by your location • +1 720 928 9299 US (Denver) • +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) • +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) • +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) • +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) Find your local number: https://fcgov.zoom.us/u/aeizWCgMH Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). You need to have access to the internet. Keep yourself on muted status. Public Participation (Phone): As listed above, the meeting will be available beginning at 5:30 pm . For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time – phone participants will need to hit *9 to do this. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Committee. Once you join the meeting: keep yourself on muted status. Documents to Share: If residents wish to share a document or presentation, the Staff Liaison needs to receive those materials via email by 24 hours before the meeting. Individuals uncomfortable or unable to access the Zoom platform or unable to participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments you may have to Katie Donahue, kdonahue@fcgov.com. The Staff Liaison will ensure the Board receives your comments. If you have specific comments on any of the discussion items scheduled, please make that clear in the subject line of the email and send 24 hours prior to the meeting. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting Hybrid Format: In person or Zoom August 9, 2023 August 9 , 2023 1. CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 PM 2. ROLL CALL 3. AGENDA REVIEW 4. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS Draft Oil and Gas Regulations update Kirk Longstein 20 min West Nile Virus update Matt Parker 10 min 7. BOARD UPDATES BAC Scott Mason 5 min 8. DEPARTMENT UPDATES Katie Donahue 10 min 9. ADJOURNMENT Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting | 1745 Hoffman Mill Road July 12, 2023 Members: Ross Cunniff, Chair Elena Lopez, Member Scott Mason, Vice Chair River Mizell, Member Denise Culver, Member Joe Piesman, Member Andrea Elson, Member Mark Sears, Member Holger Kley, Member 7 /1 2 /20 2 3 – MINUTES Page 1 1. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting was called to order at 5:31 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Holger Kley, Denise Culver, Ross Cunniff, Scott Mason, Elena Lopez, Andrea Elson, Joe Piesman, River Mizell. Mark Sears joined the meeting at 5:35 p.m. NAD Staff: Katie Donahue, Julia Feder, Tawnya Ernst, Kristina Ostrowski, Mary Boyts Matt Parker 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION: None 4. AGENDA REVIEW: No changes to the agenda 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Member Lopez submitted minor changes to the June 14, 2023, minutes. Mary Boyts amended the minutes as requested. Member Piesman made a motion to approve the June LCSB meeting minutes with changes submitted by Member Lopez. Member Lopez seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved 9-0. 6. WELCOME NEW BOARD MEMBERS Chair Cunniff welcomed the two new Board members and asked that they to introduce themselves. Member Mizell stated her interest in serving stems from her graduate degree in Conservation Communication with a focus on disabled communities. She is employed with a climate positive bank. Mark Sears noted his 22-year tenure as the Manager of Natural Areas and is pleased with an opportunity to again be involved, in a small way. He stated his hope to share his knowledge and looks forward to serving. Chair Cunniff then asked the rest of the board members to each provide a brief self-introduction for the benefit of the new members. He again welcomed the new members and stated he is looking forward to their contributions to the discussions. 7. ACTION ITEMS Hughes Stadium site Chair Cunniff opened the discussion with the announcement that the City closed on the Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 7/12 /2023 MINUTES Page 2 purchase of the former Hughes site last week. Chair Cunniff then provided a recap of last month’s gatherings of the of the Board. He reported that several Board members and 6-8 members of the community toured the Hughes parcel on the afternoon of June 14. He explained the benefit of being physically on the property was to gain a better sense of the site features and the relationship to Maxwell and Pineridge Natural Areas. Chair Cunniff noted members of the community asked about vegetation and restoration, wildlife that had been observed, and the footprint of the former stadium. The Board held their regular monthly meeting at Primrose Studio where they engaged in a discussion of their observations of the site and future use scenarios. It was decided to form a committee (Cunniff, Lopez and Piesman) to draft a memorandum to Council to express their observations and to make a general recommendation regarding the future use of the parcel. Member Piesman stated his intent was captured in the draft and thanked Chair Cunniff for the final edits. Member Lopez stressed the importance of the Board to not constrain themselves at this time given the limited information about the site, including environmental site assessments. She stated she would like to add Member Culver’s comment, made during the June meeting, regarding high-intensity use precluding a wildlife rehabilitation center. She thanked Member Piesman and Chair Cunniff for their work on the draft memorandum. Member Elson expressed her gratitude to the committee for their excellent work. She stated the draft memorandum clearly outlines the ecological values of the parcel as well as the Board’s concerns regarding future use. She expressed the importance of the Board communicating their recommendation early to Council, especially as organized interests advocate for high-intensity use. Member Culver appreciated the bulleted lists would be an efficient way to clearly communicate the Board’s recommendations and values to Council. Several Board members supported Member Piesman’s suggestion that “integrated into Maxwell Natural Area” be added the first bullet item under recommendations. It was agreed to strike “abundance” from the first paragraph as proposed by Member Sears. Member Kley stated a wildlife center has a strong synergy with the mission of the Natural Areas program. He asked the committee if they had discussed the definition of “large” used to describe parcel size. Member Lopez replied the use of the word “large” was intentional; not wanting to constrain considerations of the Board, especially given the wildlife on the site. The Board has the option to scale back their recommendation. Chair Cunniff added, the committee was not comfortable drawing specific boundary at this time. While the southwest and western portions have more plants and animals, even the parking lot areas could eventually have conservation value. Member Elson asked if the Board’s recommendation is potentially committing the NAD to management of more of the parcel than staff are comfortable with. Katie Donahue responded that staff is withholding judgment until the completion of the public engagement process , and regardless of final acreage, will work to meet the community’s goals. As with all property Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 7/12 /2023 MINUTES Page 3 acquisitions, the NAD will assess and prioritize critical needs on the property. She also noted that funds spent on the Hughes purchase will impact restoration resources; there will be trade- offs. Member Lopez pointed out the paragraph in the memorandum that emphasized restoration costs should not prohibit land conservation/acquisition. Member Lopez explained that Council can also ask the citizens, through a ballot measure, to set aside additional funds for this particular property. There was additional general discussion around financing, acreage valuation, various departments contribution based on use, and the potential income from a lease for a wildlife rehab center. Member Elson made a motion that the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board approve the amended memorandum to City Council regarding the Hughes Stadium site. Member Culver seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously, 9-0. 8. DISCUSSION ITEMS Coterie Notice of Alignment Tawnya Ernst, Land Conservation Lead Specialist provided a brief background of Coterie Natural Area and shared maps showing the property location as well as the existing underground powerline and the paved trail. The powerline was installed on the property in the 1990s and the trail was constructed in 1995, both prior to transfer of the property to Natural Areas management in 2000.Tawnya Ernst stated a Notice of Alignment (NOA) can be described as an internal version of an easement. Recently, when L&P needed to perform maintenance work on the powerline at the Coterie Natural Area it was discovered that the underground powerline had not been documented with the City or recorded with the County. The City’s survey crew found the paved trail segment was also not documented. Subsequently, the City completed legal descriptions, including locations and dimensions, of both the underground powerline and paved trail segment. Tawnya Ernst explained the purpose of the memo was to update the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board on plans to formalize Notices of Alignment with the City of Fort Collins’ Light and Power and Parks Departments on the Coterie Natural Area for an existing underground powerline and paved trail, respectively. This Notice of Alignment is intended to clean up an oversight from 20+ years ago and to formally document the existence of the trail and powerline by recording a document with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. She noted the Notice of Alignment does not require City Council approval and will be finalized by the City Manager. Discussion Member Kley commented the NOA memorandum appeared straight-forward, and he had no questions. Member Elson stated the memo was really well done and headed off any questions she may have had. Chair Cunniff asked if the stream (Spring Creek) is slated for rehabilitation. Julia Feder explained the stream is managed by Stormwater Utilities and that she did not think it was slated for rehabilitation in the near term. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 7/12 /2023 MINUTES Page 4 9. BOARD UPDATES Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) Member Mason reported the BAC took a bike tour on June 26th to preview the current and upcoming bike improvements throughout town. Active Modes staff would like the Bicycle Advisory Committee become an official advisory board so that it would be able to directly make recommendations to Council rather than going through the Transportation Board. This change would also allow for the board membership to reflect mode use and community diversity, including people with disabilities and those historically underrepresented. The City’s Ad Hoc committee on Boards and Commissions will consider this change to the BAC during the July 19th meeting. 10. DEPARTMENT UPDATES Katie Donahue, Natural Areas Director Hughes site The City closed on the Hughes property acquisition. The next public engagement cycle is still planned for this fall. NAD Master Plan update Katie Donahue thanked the LCSB for their feedback on the naming of the NAD management plan which will be titled Natural Areas Strategic Framework: The Guide to Conservation and Stewardship 2025 and serve as the department’s vision document. Staff will be posting a Request for Proposal (RFP) to assist them in developing the plan. The Zone updates will continue to reflect the planned tactics for each geographic management zone. Staffing Updates Rachel Balduzzi, who currently coordinates the NAD volunteer program, has been promoted to Senior Supervisor for Public Engagement. The Ranger Sr. Supervisor position will be posted in the coming weeks. Katie Donahue briefly described some adjustments to the department staffing structure and noted that several supervisory positions would be filled in coming months. Staff is currently conducting interviews for the Trails and Visitor Amenities Sr. Supervisor. Good News items CBS News, Denver has been running a series on the conservation agriculture work that the NAD is doing in partnership with the Poudre Valley Community Farms. Staff is planning the official opening celebration of Kestrel Fields Natural Areas for Saturday, September 9th, 3-6 p.m. Tentative agenda includes family activities, plein air artists, and food from Poudre Valley Community Farms. Once details are finalized, staff will send an announcement to the LCSB. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 7/12 /2023 MINUTES Page 5 The Colorado Sun recently published a news article about fireflies in Colorado and the research being conducted at Riverbend Ponds by the Colorado Butterfly Pavilion. The article also described the NAD community programs about fireflies. West Nile Virus The abundant rainfall this summer has resulted in very high mosquito counts. The City will likely be posting spray notices in the coming week(s). 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION Member Mason made a motion that the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board go into executive session for the purpose of discussing with the City's appropriate management staff water and real property acquisitions. Member Kley seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved, 9-0. 12. ADJOURNMENT The executive session concluded at 6:48 p.m. and the regular meeting resumed. The meeting was adjourned at 6:58 p.m. Ross Cunniff, Chair Date Oil and Gas Reverse Setback Requirements 2023 Kirk Longstein Senior Environmental Planner 2Oil and Gas Areas of Focus New Oil & Gas Facilities Siting requirements Approval procedures Design standards Operational Standards Emissions controls Leak detection and repair Spill detection and response Reverse Setbacks Distance for new development from existing wells Adopted April 4 September 12 Council Work Session Code refinements proposed; September 5 1 2 3What is a reverse setback? OG Reverse Setback From the building OG Setback From the Well Fort Collins Code New wells: 2,000’ setback from all buildings Existing Wells: 2,000’ setback from residential Timeline 4 Key Dates: •1920’s – First Oil and Gas drilling in Fort Collins •2003 – Moratorium & 350’ reverse setbacks •2018 – Fort Collins LUC updates – 500’ reverse setbacks with 150’ alternative compliance for PA wells •2021 – SB181 Rule 604 updates – 2,000’ setback from new well siting •2023 – Fort Collins LUC updates – 2,000’ setback from new well siting 3 4 Senate Bill 181 UPDATED: January 15, 2021 Rule 604 b. •No Working Pad Surface will be located more than 500 feet and less than 2,000 feet from 1 or more Residential Building Units or High Occupancy Building Units •Any Wells, Tanks, separation equipment, or compressors proposed on the Oil and Gas Location will be located more than 2,000 feet from all Residential Building Units or High Occupancy Building Units 5 Current Land Use Code Ordinance 114-2018 LUC Sec. 3.8.26 - provide standards to separate residential land uses and high occupancy building units from existing Oil and Gas Wells 500’ buffer or the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission designated setback distance, whichever is greater. 150’ buffer Alternative compliance buffer reduction from plugged and abandoned wells. 5 years of annual soil gas and groundwater monitoring at the well location. 6 A producing well operates in the Hearthfire subdivision north of Fort Collins in this Oct. 23, 2013, photo. Coloradoan Library 5 6 Fort Collins Field 7 DOUGLAS RD One Operator •Prospect Energy City •10 Active Wells o 4 Producing o 6 Injecting •20 Abandoned Wells o 6 Drilled and Abandoned o 14 Plugged and Abandoned GMA •16 Active Wells o 8 Producing o 8 Injecting •30 Abandoned Wells Oil and Gas Overview 8 WELL NOT ABANDONDED •Producing •Enhanced Oil Recovery •Injection (Enhanced Oil Recovery) Well Fluids consisting of brine, freshwater, steam, polymers, or carbon dioxide are injected into oil-bearing formations to recover residual oil through a Production Well. ✓2,000-feet setback ✓No Monitoring required ✓Modification of standards allowed 7 8 Oil and Gas Overview 9 ABANDONDED, NOT RECLAIMED •Drilled (Dry) and Abandoned Well which has proved to be non- productive which means it was covered as soon as it was drilled and never produced. ✓500-feet setback ✓5-years of monitoring ✓No modification of standard ABANDONDED, AND RECLAIMED •Plugged and Abandoned Well is permanently shut down, plugged, wellhead removed, and considered safe and secure by COGCC inspection. ✓150-feet setback ✓1 environmental site assessment prior to permits ✓No modification of standard 10Oil and Gas Monitoring Well Status Proposed Monitoring timeline Risk Trade-off Plugging and Abandoning 1 X prior to Permit Low Potential casing failure & cement shrinkage in clay soil and salty soil Dry and Abandoned 5 years Low Potential conduit to adjacent ground water source Producing None – operator requirement High Hydrocarbons present at the surface during production Injection – Enhanced Recovery wells None – operator requirement Medium Closed loop greywater injection. subsurface risk for potential sources of benzene Injection – Disposal wells N/A N/A – none in Fort Collins Brines are separated from hydrocarbons at the surface and reinjected into the same or similar underground formations for disposal. *Greatest risk - older wells before 1950 9 10 Disclosure •Recorded Plat shall show the oil and gas buffer on the property. •Condo Association declaration. •Written notice 30-days prior to close, in at least fourteen (14) point font to any potential purchaser. 11 Allowed Uses New development and existing properties ✓Secondary (uninhabitable) structures allowed ✓Secondary (habitable) structures not allowed ✓No permanent playground structures in common areas 12 11 12 1.Increase buffer for developments near existing oil and gas operations from 500’ to 2000’ to match COGCC and Fort Collins new code setbacks 2.Allow modification of standards for active well buffers, no less than 500’ 3.Decrease soil-gas and ground water monitoring requirements for plugged and abandoned wells from 5 years to 1 year. 4.No change to buffer for developments near existing abandoned wells (not fully reclaimed) at 500’ 5.No change to buffer near plugged and abandoned wells (fully reclaimed) at 150’ 6.No change to disclosure requirements for future property owners via a property covenant 7.Add requirements for point-of-sale disclosure notice. 8.Add prohibition on detached occupiable buildings from existing buildings located within the oil and gas buffer. 9.Setbacks include all occupiable buildings rather than residential only. 13Summary of proposed changes 14 Back up Back up slides 13 14 15Summary of proposed changes ✓2,000’ - active wells (PR &IJ) ✓500’ - inactive not fully reclaimed ✓150’ fully reclaimed ✓No monitoring for active well buffer ✓5 yrs. monitoring not fully reclaimed ✓1 yr. monitoring fully reclaimed Montava County Club Reserve Hearth Fire Sonders Existing neighborhoods – allowed use within the buffer: ✓Secondary structures allowed ✓No new common area playgrounds Point of listing disclosure 16Enhanced Oil Recovery Injection Wells MSSU #30-17 – County Club Reserve MSSU #30-07 15 16 7/31/2023 17Peer City reverse Setback Comparison Municipality or County Producing well Plugged and Abandoned Broomfield 2,000’250’ Commerce City 1,000’50’ Erie 2,000’150’ Fort Collins 2,000’150’ Loveland 500’500’ Longmont 750’150’ Larimer County 1,000'200' 18Peer City Research - Reciprocal Setbacks Municipality or County Includes All Occupiable Buildings Certain Uses Allowed within Buffer Differentiate Between Active and PA* Wells PA* ≥ 150'Monitoring Requirement for PA* Wells Boulder X X X Broomfield X X Commerce City X Erie X X X X X Fort Collins X X X X Loveland X Longmont X X X X (occupied buildings) Larimer County X X (can apply for alternative compliance) * PA = Plugged/Abandoned Wells 17 18 7/31/2023 19Setback Scenario Active and abandoned wells 20Setback Scenario Prior to the adoption of SB19-181 500 – Feet Reverse Setback 19 20 21Setback Scenario After the adoption of SB19-181 2,000 – Feet Reverse Setback 21 1745 Hoffman Mill Road PO Box 580, Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 MATT PARKER / RESOURCE MGMT SUPERVISOR NATURAL AREAS DEPARTMENT 970-416-2433 /p 970-420-3715 /c mparker@fcgov.com /e MEMORANDUM Date: August 9, 2023 To: Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Members From: Matt Parker, Sr. Supervisor, Natural Areas Through: Katie Donahue, Director, Natural Areas Subject: 2023 West Nile Virus Update Bottomline The 2023 mosquito season is proving to be a watershed year across the State of Colorado with local mosquito abundance reaching or exceeding the highest levels since monitoring began. Critically, the West Nile Virus (WNV) infection rates is entering the predictable and annual summer increase. 2023 will likely be a severe WNV year. Since 2003, Larimer, Weld, and Boulder Counties have led all other Colorado counties in human cases of West Nile Virus. Colorado’s total case number is second only to California. However, recognizing that the management of WNV is a politically charged issue within the community, the WNV Program aims to reduce WNV risk while minimizing negative environmental and human health impacts associated with treatments. Current Conditions This year, Northern Colorado experienced the ninth wettest May/June in the past 129 years of record. With the first week’s trapping data (June 11) it became clear that mosquito production was on par to exceed the annual average. Each subsequent week of data demonstrated that trend. The high abundance, coupled with an emerging infection rate has led to the earliest recommendation for an adult mosquito treatment since 2007. West Nile Virus Biology and Key Local Considerations WNV is always present in our region. Many wildlife species, particularly avian species, act as a reservoir, capable of hosting the virus without succumbing to its impacts. Each year the virus follows a fairly predictable pattern, commensurate with the life-cycle patterns of its two local vector species, C. tarsalis and C. pipiens. These patterns, although generally consistent, vary year by year in terms of scale of virus intensity, specific location, the species driving the risk, and specific timing. However, patterns do emerge. • An early season flush of Aedes vexans, a floodwater mosquito not capable of transmitting WNV • A later pulse of C. tarsalis and C. pipiens • An increase in the infection rate of C. tarsalis and C. pipiens after the abundance pulse • Higher WNV risks east of College Ave. City of Fort Collins How the WNV Program Mitigates Environmental and Human Health Risks Starting in early May, the focus of the WNV program is on mosquito larvae control through widespread identification and treatment of breeding locations with Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis. This bacterium breaks down the digestive system of mosquito larvae and similar lower species in the black fly family. Application of Bti is widely recognized as the most environmentally responsible method of mosquito larvae control. The backbone of the program is the development of data through trapping and surveillance. The City operates a 53-trap system, collected weekly, to assess the abundance of mosquitoes and the intensity of WNV throughout the community. The weekly data allows the Larimer County Department of Health and Environment (LCDHE) to understand the details and nuances from week to week. With this data, LCDHE can make clear recommendations to the city manager if adult mosquito spray events are necessary. The City’s WNV Program utilizes outreach and public education to increase awareness of WNV and develop a community understanding of the personal actions available to minimize risk of contracting WNV. These outreach efforts have contributed to a high degree of community awareness, and a drastic decrease in the expression of vitriolic concerns from the public. The final element of the WNV Program, and importantly an unbudgeted element, is adult mosquito treatment spraying. This is an action taken only if recommended by the Larimer County Public Health Director and funded through the City’s emergency funds. The key data point used by the health director to make recommendations is the Vector Index, a computation of the Culex abundance and the Culex infection rate in a given area. West Nile Virus Plan, Do, Check, Act Process The WNV Program, designed by experts from Colorado State University and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has refined both the policy and operational elements of the program over the past 20 years. Key recent policy refinements have focused on maximizing the positive impact of adult mosquito treatments while limiting their size. This results in treatments that are better positioned to break the amplification cycle and reduce the likelihood of treating the entire city. The Vector Index is the lever by which City Council sets the risk tolerance for the community. To date, any changes to policy have been addressed and adopted during the WNV off-season. This allows implementation of City Council’s policy to proceed through the WNV season with predictability and consistency for the community. Enclosures: 1. Abundance Graph showing mosquito traps per night, per quadrant. 2. Infection Rate Graph, per 1000 mosquitoes, per quadrant. 3. Vector Index Graph, a calculation of abundance and infection rate, per quadrant 4. CSU Weekly Data Summary showing actual values for abundance, infection rate, and Vector Index. 29College AveCurrent Week:Week Ending Date: 7/23/20232023 West Nile Virus - Mean Culex (Female) Abundance per Trap NightCollege AveDrake RoadDrake Road0.020.040.060.080.0100.0120.0140.0Week24Week25Week26Week27Week28Week29Week30Week31Week32Week33Week34Week35Week36Week37NE Quadrant Abundance vs Historic (Red)Current AbundanceHistoric Abundance0.020.040.060.080.0100.0120.0140.0Week24Week25Week26Week27Week28Week29Week30Week31Week32Week33Week34Week35Week36Week37SW Quadrant Abundance vs Historic (Red)Current AbundanceHistoric Abundance0.020.040.060.080.0100.0120.0140.0Week24Week25Week26Week27Week28Week29Week30Week31Week32Week33Week34Week35Week36Week37SE Quadrant Abundance vs Historic (Red)Current Vector AbundanceHistoric Vector Abundance0.020.040.060.080.0100.0120.0140.0Week24Week25Week26Week27Week28Week29Week30Week31Week32Week33Week34Week35Week36Week37NW Quadrant Abundance vs Historic (Red)Current AbundanceHistoric Abundance 29College AveCurrent Week:Week Ending Date: 7/23/20232023 West Nile Virus Infection Rate per 1,000 (All Culex)College AveDrake RoadDrake Road0.05.010.015.020.025.030.0Week24Week25Week26Week27Week28Week29Week30Week31Week32Week33Week34Week35Week36Week37NE Quadrant Infection Rate vs. Historic (Red)0.05.010.015.020.025.030.0Week24Week25Week26Week27Week28Week29Week30Week31Week32Week33Week34Week35Week36Week37SW Quadrant Infection Rate vs. Historic (Red)0.05.010.015.020.025.030.0Week24Week25Week26Week27Week28Week29Week30Week31Week32Week33Week34Week35Week36Week37SE Quadrant Infection Rate vs. Historic (Red)0.05.010.015.020.025.030.0Week24Week25Week26Week27Week28Week29Week30Week31Week32Week33Week34Week35Week36Week37NW Quadrant Infection Rate vs. Historic (Red) 29 C o l l e g e A v e Current Week:Week Ending Date: 7/23/2023 2023 West Nile Virus Vector Index C o l l e g e A v e Drake Road Drake Road 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Week 24 Week 25 Week 26 Week 27 Week 28 Week 29 Week 30 Week 31 Week 32 Week 33 Week 34 Week 35 Week 36 Week 37 NW Quadrant Vector Index vs. Historic (Red) Current Vector Index Historic Vector Index 0.75 Vector Index Threshold 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Week 24 Week 25 Week 26 Week 27 Week 28 Week 29 Week 30 Week 31 Week 32 Week 33 Week 34 Week 35 Week 36 Week 37 NE Quadrant Vector Index vs. Historic (Red) Current Vector Index Historic Vector Index 0.75 Vector Index Threshold 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Week 24 Week 25 Week 26 Week 27 Week 28 Week 29 Week 30 Week 31 Week 32 Week 33 Week 34 Week 35 Week 36 Week 37 SW Quadrant Vector Index vs. Historic (Red) Current Vector Index Historic Vector Index 0.75 Vector Index Threshold 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Week 24 Week 25 Week 26 Week 27 Week 28 Week 29 Week 30 Week 31 Week 32 Week 33 Week 34 Week 35 Week 36 Week 37 SE Quadrant Vector Index vs. Historic (Red) Current Vector Index Historic Vector Index 0.75 Vector Index Threshold 1 D. Reporting templates Based on the need to now report data not only for FC citywide but also separately for each of the four zones (NW, NE, SE, SW; broken down using College and Drake) the city has been divided into for the purpose of WNV surveillance and mosquito control, CSU had to generate a new reporting template. This new reporting template is tailored to provide data relevant to the Level III and IV entomological triggers (see below) for control measures in the “City of Fort Collins Program Response Guidelines to Mosquito Borne Arboviral Activity (July 2008 edition)”. Level III • Vector index > 0.5 and increasing • Culex mosquito populations increasing and at or above historical average for that time period • Mosquito infection rates of > 3.0 per thousand (0.3%) and increasing Level IV • Vector index > 0.75. • Culex mosquito population above historical average for that time period • Sustained mosquito infection rates of > 5.0 per thousand (0.5%) The new reporting format comprises a set of 6 tables to address the current week (1a, 2a, 3a) and to provide seasonal and historical context (1b, 2b, 3b) (see full table formats on following pages) • Table 1a. Vector Index for current week • Table 1b. Vector Index for All Culex by week from June-August • Table 2a. Vector abundance for current week • Table 2b. Vector abundance for All Culex by week from June-August • Table 3a. WNV infection rate per 1,000 females for current week • Table 3b. WNV infection rate per 1,000 females for All Culex by week from June-August 2 Table 1a. Vector Index for current week 1From Table 2a (CDC light trap catches only). 2Derived from the data presented in Table 3a for estimated infection rate per 1,000 females (CDC light trap and gravid trap catches combined). 3Vector Index for Cx. pipiens = (Mean abundance of Cx. pipiens females per trap night) x (Estimate for proportion of all Cx. pipiens females infected with WNV). 4Vector Index for Cx. tarsalis = (Mean abundance of Cx. tarsalis females per trap night) x (Estimate for proportion of all Cx. tarsalis females infected with WNV). 5Vector Index for All Culex = (Vector Index for Cx. pipiens) + (Vector Index for Cx. tarsalis). Table 1b. Vector Index for All Culex by week from June-August Week FC – Zone NW FC – Zone NE FC – Zone SE FC – Zone SW FC – Citywide LV BE BC Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 23 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 N/A 24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.27 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.01 0.24 1.23 0.00 28 0.09 0.00 0.10 0.03 0.73 0.10 0.27 0.01 0.36 0.04 0.23 3.03 0.00 29 0.39 0.08 1.23 0.09 0.86 0.24 0.79 0.03 0.86 0.12 0.77 2.28 0.64 30 0.08 0.14 0.26 0.07 0.15 31 0.14 0.17 0.23 0.08 0.18 32 0.16 0.26 0.32 0.14 0.23 33 0.14 0.41 0.26 0.10 0.24 34 0.13 0.20 0.28 0.07 0.19 35 0.06 0.19 0.25 0.11 0.17 36 0.03 0.08 0.05 0.02 0.05 37 0.03 0.11 0.03 0.00 0.04 1 The historical average for Week 23 is calculated from 2006 -2014 data. The historical average for Week 24 uses 2006-2020 historical data. The historical average for Week 25-35 uses 2006-2022 historical data. Week 36 historical average is calculated from 2015-2022 data (2015 is the first year to have surveillance data collected into weeks 36 & 37). Week 37 historical average is calculated from 2015-2016 and 2018-2019 data. 2003-2005 surveillance data were excluded due to changes in trap locations from 2006 on wards. Week: 29 Mean abundance of females per trap night1 Estimate for proportion of females infected with WNV2 Vector Index Cx. pipiens Cx. tarsalis Cx. pipiens Cx. tarsalis Cx. pipiens3 Cx. tarsalis4 All Culex5 FC – Zone NW 13.11 215.22 0.0128 0.0010 0.168 0.224 0.392 FC – Zone NE 26.50 446.90 0.0069 0.0024 0.183 1.051 1.234 FC – Zone SE 8.93 451.60 0.0194 0.0015 0.173 0.688 0.862 FC – Zone SW 19.67 266.44 0.0049 0.0026 0.096 0.696 0.792 FC – Citywide 16.14 362.28 0.0110 0.0019 0.178 0.678 0.856 LV 16.1 695.2 0.0000 0.0011 0.000 0.772 0.772 BE 6.2 794.8 0.0000 0.0029 0.000 2.282 2.282 BC 8.2 40.8 0.0000 0.0156 0.000 0.636 0.636 3 Table 2a. Vector abundance for current week (CDC light trap catches only) Week: 29 Total number females collected Number CDC light trap nights Mean abundance of females per CDC light trap night Cx. pipiens Cx. tarsalis All Culex Cx. pipiens1 Cx. tarsalis2 All Culex3 FC – Zone NW 118 1937 2055 9 13.11 215.22 228.33 FC – Zone NE 265 4469 4734 10 26.50 446.90 473.40 FC – Zone SE 134 6774 6908 15 8.93 451.60 460.53 FC – Zone SW 177 2398 2575 9 19.67 266.44 286.11 FC – Citywide 694 15578 16272 43 16.14 362.28 378.42 LV 596 25723 26319 37 16.11 695.22 711.32 BE 31 3974 4005 5 6.20 794.80 801.00 BC 49 245 294 6 8.17 40.83 49.00 1Mean abundance of Cx. pipiens females per CDC light trap night = (Total number Cx. pipiens females collected) / (Number CDC light trap nights). 2Mean abundance of Cx. tarsalis females per CDC light trap night = (Total number Cx. tarsalis females collected) / (Number CDC light trap nights). 3Mean abundance of All Culex females per CDC light trap night = (Total number All Culex females collected) / (Number CDC light trap nights). Table 2b. Vector abundance for All Culex by week from June-August Week FC – Zone NW FC – Zone NE FC – Zone SE FC – Zone SW FC – Citywide LV BE BC Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 23 6.11 2.81 1.00 5.48 5.67 8.04 7.11 0.78 4.98 5.67 8.57 12.80 N/A 24 4.33 2.90 2.70 7.22 9.00 9.00 6.56 1.83 6.05 5.80 11.65 11.60 N/A 25 18.00 6.07 14.70 17.18 29.20 21.45 7.00 3.95 18.84 13.49 41.51 98.00 6.32 26 126.67 12.78 128.50 30.90 222.87 33.19 96.56 8.07 154.35 23.08 237.59 848.80 45.00 27 28.56 26.20 204.30 59.47 361.27 46.37 25.89 11.86 184.93 39.49 392.95 712.40 49.00 28 169.78 41.14 128.30 85.39 439.00 87.64 265.00 17.70 273.98 62.95 196.65 1056.00 49.00 29 228.33 47.89 473.40 86.69 460.53 74.04 286.11 22.52 378.42 61.74 711.32 801.00 49.00 30 47.92 107.84 80.94 22.16 68.37 31 55.08 96.93 63.68 19.93 63.02 32 39.85 78.44 52.73 20.69 49.71 33 28.80 68.09 42.43 14.21 40.70 34 21.58 53.67 27.74 10.35 29.68 35 10.83 27.34 17.94 6.39 16.36 36 11.18 36.44 13.82 4.94 16.63 37 8.13 34.33 11.08 3.12 14.29 1 The historical average for Week 23 is calculated from 2006 -2014 data. The historical average for Week 24 uses 2006-2020 historical data. The historical average for Week 25-35 uses 2006-2022 historical data. Week 36 historical average is calculated from 2015-2022 data (2015 is the first year to have surveillance data collected into weeks 36 & 37). Week 37 historical average is calculated from 2015-2016 and 2018-2019 data. 2003-2005 surveillance data were excluded due to changes in trap locations from 2006 onwards 4 Table 3a. WNV infection rate per 1,000 females for current week (CDC light trap and gravid trap catches combined) Week: 29 Total number individuals examined Total number pools examined Total number WNV-infected pools Estimate for WNV infection rate per 1,000 females1 Cx. pipiens Cx. tarsalis All Culex Cx. pipiens Cx. tarsalis All Culex Cx. pipiens Cx. tarsalis All Culex Cx. pipiens Cx. tarsalis All Culex FC – Zone NW 485 1941 2426 16 45 61 5 2 7 12.82 1.04 3.04 FC – Zone NE 462 4475 4937 17 95 112 3 10 13 6.90 2.35 2.79 FC – Zone SE 238 6785 7023 13 143 156 4 10 14 19.39 1.52 2.07 FC – Zone SW 193 2398 2591 9 52 61 1 6 7 4.88 2.61 2.82 FC – Citywide 1378 15599 16977 55 335 390 13 28 41 11.03 1.87 2.54 LV 20 900 920 2 18 20 0 1 1 0.00 1.11 1.09 BE 31 722 753 2 15 17 0 2 2 0.00 2.87 2.75 BC 49 245 294 1 5 6 0 3 3 0.00 15.58 12.40 1Maximum likelihood estimate (MLE) for WNV infection rate per 1,000 females calculated using the CDC PooledInfRate 4.0 plug-in for Excel. Table 3b. WNV infection rate per 1,000 females for All Culex by week from June-August 1 The historical average for Week 23 is calculated from 2006 -2014 data. The historical average for Week 24 uses 2006-2020 historical data. The historical average for Week 25-35 uses 2006-2022 historical data. Week 36 historical average is calculated from 2015-2022 data (2015 is the first year to have surveillance data collected into weeks 36 & 37). Week 37 historical average is calculated from 2015-2016 and 2018-2019 data. 2003-2005 surveillance data were excluded due to changes in trap locations from 2006 onwards. Week FC – Zone NW FC – Zone NE FC – Zone SE FC – Zone SW FC – Citywide LV BE BC Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 Current year Historical average1 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.00 N/A 24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 N/A 25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.29 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.15 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.74 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.20 0.60 2.83 0.00 28 0.64 0.00 0.74 0.42 1.69 0.76 1.23 0.59 1.36 0.51 1.18 2.73 0.00 29 3.04 1.37 2.79 0.86 2.07 2.10 2.82 0.84 2.54 1.38 1.09 2.75 12.40 30 1.97 1.62 3.47 2.06 2.40 31 2.94 1.82 4.77 3.38 3.28 32 4.31 4.54 6.86 9.22 5.23 33 6.40 6.51 9.37 6.67 7.50 34 7.89 4.05 10.38 9.88 7.39 35 9.39 5.81 14.70 35.98 10.13 36 6.94 1.98 3.55 6.45 2.76 37 3.53 3.04 3.56 0.00 3.97 West Nile Virus Update -2023 08-09-2023 Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Matt Parker, Sr. Supervisor 2West Nile Virus 2023 Update The Seasonal WNV Amplification Cycle 1 2 3CDC National WNV Human Cases per 100,000 capita 4West Nile Virus 2023 Update 3 4 5West Nile Virus 2023 Update 6West Nile Virus 2023 Update 5 6 West Nile Virus 2023 Update 7 •GIS based system to ID and treat breeding sites •Bti •Program Metric – % Mineral Oil •53 Traps •Weekly Data •Dataset dating to 2004 •CSU Collaboration •English/Spanish •Drive to LETA Sign-up •Improved branding and maps Larval Control Trapping and Testing Public Outreach •Better public maps •GIS Tracking posted longer •Spanish translation for LETA, rack cards, data, web pages •GIS Street Update to VDCI •Removal of GIS Heat Map 8 Recent Improvements West Nile Virus 2023 Update Ongoing Challenges •Conveying complex data •Comparing against the “what if” •Inability to measure a true outcome 7 8 West Nile Virus 2023 Update 9 For More Information, Visit THANK YOU! Fcgov.com/westnile/ 9 10