Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-05-09; City Council; 10015; Statue of the Batiquitos Lagoon enhancementOF CARLSBAD - AGENr * BILL fD o o _io I AR« /fftt/f MTG. 5/9/89 HFPT PLN TITLE-STATUS OP THE BATIQUITOS LAGOON ENHANCEMENT PROJECT OEPT. HD. W$Mr CITY ATTY\>Op C.ITY Mf3R^\^ RECOMMENDED ACTION: NO ACTION REQUIRED OR REQUESTED. Staff will present an informational update on the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Project. ITEM EXPLANATION On November 13, 1987 the City entered into a six-party Memorandum of Agreement to establish an enhancement project at Batiquitos Lagoon which would compensate for habitat losses resulting from construction within Los Angeles Harbor. The first phase of the project was the preparation of the preliminary engineering report which was completed in the Spring of 1988. That report indicated that the enhancement project was feasible from an engineering and economic standpoint. The second phase began when the Council approved a contract with CH2M Hill for the preparation of the environmental documents for the project on April 19, 1988. The combined Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared (summary attached), and public review began on April 28, 1988. On May 25th the City and the Army Corps of Engineers will hold a non-required hearing to take oral comments on the Draft EIR/EIS. Public review will end on June 19, 1989. Staff anticipates that it will take 30 to 60 days for the consultant to respond to the public comments. When the responses are finalized, staff will schedule public hearings on the project and EIR/EIS before Planning Commission (tentatively early September) . If the comments do not warrant major revisions to the environmental document, Council could consider the project and certification of the EIR/EIS in late September. FISCAL IMPACT All project costs are being funded by the Port of Los Angeles through a reimbursement agreement with the City. EXHIBITS 1. Summary Batiquitos Lagoon ENHANCEMENT PROJECT EIR/EIS ;*•*— .:•£«' Vs-ft '-- ''•***:.' .^ ,.-/;& -^j W»lt. ^-!* 'f.lftV,if-s^*'4-.. CITY OF CARLSBAD SUMMARY The Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Project Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) is a joint document prepared for the City of Carlsbad and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (lead agencies) to fulfill requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This document is also intended to fulfill the CEQA/NEPA compliance obligation specified in the interagency Bati- quitos Lagoon Enhancement Memorandum of Agreement (MOA; see Section 1.3.1 for a discussion of the MOA). -The EIR/EIS is intended to provide decision-makers, agencies, organiza- tions, and the public with information on the beneficial and adverse effects of the proposed project. The document will also serve as a basis for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) issuance of a dredge/fill permit pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977. The CEQA/ NEPA and COE permitting process for the project will also initiate the review of this document by the appropriate resource agencies, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). The mandate of these agencies is to ensure conservation, protection, and enhancement of marine fish and migratory birds and their habitats, including the application of a regional perspec- tive in their project reviews. PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project would restore tidal influence to the Batiquitos Lagoon by construction of a short, nonnavigable, tidal inlet structure and by dredging the lagoon to produce adequate subtidal and intertidal habitats to ensure flushing and good water quality while maintaining existing habitat values. Additional project components include use of suit- able dredge spoils from the Central and West Basins for beach nourishment at Encinas Creek Beach and Batiquitos Beach (Ponto), the overdredging of the Central Basin for disposal of dredged materials, possible construction of sediment control facilities, provision of a managed fresh- water marsh, and construction of California least tern nesting sites. Additional project details are provided in Sections 1 and 2 of this document. In addition to the restoration of subtidal and intertidal habitats in the lagoon, the project has the potential to enhance the salt marsh habitats, facilitate flood control, allow for some health and safety improvements, and benefit recreation potential on the public beaches. PD613.001 The proposed project and attending project objectives (tidal restoration and protection of existing habitat values) were established in the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Plan, which was prepared by the California Coastal Conservancy pursuant to Public Resources Code 31000 et seq. The project is pro- posed through an interagency MOA to provide mitigation for the loss of habitat value resulting from Port of Los Angeles landfill development and channel improvements in the Outer Los Angeles Harbor, San Pedro Bay (see Section 1). The creation of new habitat value within the L.A. Harbor Dis- trict is considered infeasible and the resource agencies (FWS, NMFS, CDFG) have determined that compensation for such deepwater habitats should emphasize the creation of more scarce shallow-water, coastal embayment habitat with its relatively higher value for marine fish and migratory birds. PUBLIC CONCERNS/AREAS OF CONTROVERSY PUBLIC CONCERNS Public concerns about the enhancement project were identi- fied through the EIR/EIS scoping process. The study method- ology and scope of work for the EIR/EIS were changed in response to comments and concerns received during scoping. During the 4 months following scoping, a series of workshops were held to discuss and review the project with the public and several resource agencies. This EIR/EIS focuses on the issues brought out by the public and resource agencies. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY The primary areas of controversy identified during DEIR/DEIS preparation are: • Will the enhancement action compromise existing biological values, especially for birds? • What part does the present lagoon play in the regional context of lagoons and embayments in San Diego County and adjacent areas, particularly regarding migratory birds, and how may that role be affected by an enhancement project? • Will the tidal inlet jetties adversely impact the littoral drift and related coastal sand transport processes? • How will the lagoon be maintained and monitored to ensure that enhancement goals are met? PD613.001 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ACTION ALTERNATIVES In addition to the proposed project (Alternative A) and the No Action Alternative (see below), two dredging alternatives (Alternatives B and C) and two sediment disposal options were considered in this document. A detailed description of these alternatives is presented in Section 2. Dredging and No Action Alternatives were given equal treatment in this document. Compared with Alternative A/ dredging Alterna- tives B and C involve increasingly reduced volumes of dredg- ing, reduced tidal prisms, reduced amounts of subtidal area (-5.0 to 0.0 feet MLLW), and increasing amounts of inter- tidal area (0.0 to +5.0 feet MLLW) due to more gradual grad- ing cuts. Alternative C represents the smallest tidal prism required to maintain a reliable tidal opening to the ocean. Alternative C would also result in the least amount of beach nourishment. All dredging schemes affect the same lagoon surface area. Beach Dredge Nourishment Mean Dlumal Subtidal Intertidal Volume Volume Tidal Prism Area Area Alternative (mil yd9) (yd8) (ac-£t) (acres) (acres) A 5.05 3.10 1,642 220 176 B 4.13 2.64 1,457 169 227 C 3.55 2.16 1,383 144 252 Other sediment disposal options considered include the pip- ing of hydraulically dredged materials unsuitable for beach nourishment to Green Valley, or trucking the dredged mate- rial overland 34 miles (round-trip) to San Marcos Landfill. NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The No Action Alternative is fully described as a physical and biological system, mathematically modeled to determine the future (approximately 50 years) of the lagoon without enhancement action. Under this condition, the lagoon would continue to degrade in terms of water quality, sediment buildup, and shoreline flood conditions. Biologically, the extremes that the lagoon currently undergoes (e.g., seasonal variations from deep, freshwater habitats to hypersaline, shallow water conditions) would increase. Through their effect on habitat conditions, these biological extremes have imposed definite limitations, on fish and wildlife within the lagoon environment. Currently, without tidal flushing the lagoon is character- ized by an aquatic biota low in diversity and abundance, and PD613.001 composed almost exclusively of environmentally tolerant species. Without enhancement the aquatic biota is expected to undergo more severe environmental conditions and further declines in diversity. ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS ELIMINATED DURING EVALUATION PROCESS A wide range of possible designs that might achieve the lagoon enhancement goals have been considered. The poten- tial designs dropped from further evaluation include the so-called intermittent opening alternative (see Section 2.1.3 for more detail). .This alternative, or set of possible alternatives, encompasses a range of lagoon configurations that by design would not maintain an open ocean inlet and would require periodic opening of the entrance. The concept of a "staged" or "incremental" lagoon enhance- ment approach has also been considered. In a staged approach, the enhancement of the lagoon would be accom- plished in increments with only a portion of the dredging being done at any one time. These ranges of alternative designs would all include peri- odic closures of the lagoon. Inlet closure would have imme- diate and dramatic effects on habitat conditions within the lagoon. Water levels would stop being tidally influenced. If lagoon closing occurred during the rainy season, changes in salinity would result in the elimination of marine biota. The semidaily cycle of submergence and exposure within the intertidal area would cease. Increased temperature extremes, lowering of dissolved oxygen values, and increased levels of nutrient and pollutant loadings from watershed runoff would likely occur. In addition, sedimentation of fine material could take place much more rapidly than in the case of a tidal lagoon. Consequently, these conditions were deter- mined to be inconsistent with the goals of the enhancement plan project. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Impacts from the proposed project have been analyzed in detail in Section 3, and planned and available mitigation measures are described. Table ES-1 at the end of this sec- tion summarizes significant effects and mitigation measures, CHANGES TO THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Alternatives A, B, and C would all change the lagoon to a tidal system. The size of the tidal prism (i.e., amount of water exchanged with the ocean) would range between 1,642 and 1,383 acre-feet (see Section 3.2.1.5), depending on the alternative. Alternative C has only 34 percent of the sub- tidal volume of Alternative A in the East Basin, resulting PD613.001 in a smaller amount of water remaining on a low tide. Under each of the three action alternatives, water quality will improve significantly. Turbidity and nutrient conditions will improve the most, and the present hypersaline condi- tions will no longer occur. The expected salinity of the lagoon will approximate ocean conditions. WATER QUALITY Potentially significant impacts to water quality within the lagoon during construction include changes in turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and other constituents. Con- struction impacts to water quality will be minimized by using seawater during dredging and by maintaining a closed entrance (during construction). These impacts are all short term. The long-term effects are beneficial. Dredging will significantly improve water quality by returning the lagoon to tidal action (see Sections 3.2.1.6 and 3.2.2). Flushing rates will be faster under Alternative C, but salinity will vary more with Alternative C than with Alternatives A or B. Each action alternative will significantly improve sediment flushing from the lagoon, thus reducing sediment buildup. Flushing characteristics will change sufficiently to mini- mize future sediment buildup. BEACH NOURISHMENT The proposed project includes placement of 114,000 cubic yards (yd3) of sand at the Batiquitos beach (Ponto Beach) (for all three action alternatives), and between 3.1 million and 2.1 million yd3 (Alternative A and Alternative C, re- spectively) at the Encinas Creek site. The dredged sedi- ments are generally clean, ocean-derived materials to be dredged from the West, Central, and part of the East Basins. These sediments are approximately 90 percent sands and 10 percent fine sand and silt. Short-term impacts to water quality will be limited to in- creased turbidity and will be partly controlled by construct- ing berms and appropriate conditions for dewatering. The beach profiles will change during the short term, thereby altering the local wave climate. This change will affect surfing and other recreation activities in the short term, but should not create safety hazards for beach users. The beach slope equilibrium will become reestablished, and beach and wave conditions will return to pre-project conditions, by the end of the first winter season. The Encinas Creek nourishment site is adjacent to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. Beach nourishment could adversely impact, through sand placement, an existing out- fall pipeline as well as the nearshore conditions that the pollution control facility must monitor to comply with its PD613.001 discharge permit. These considerations will be carefully addressed in the final design and permit process, in asso- ciation with the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility staff. A long-term benefit of beach nourishment will be a net contribution to the littoral drift of 55,000 yd3/year. This addition will increase sand flow to beaches south of Carlsbad. TIDAL INLET STRUCTURES Construction will cause local, short-term impacts to water quality. By their design, the proposed jetties are not expected to affect the littoral transport processes in Carlsbad or adjacent areas. AIR QUALITY IMPACTS RELATED TO DREDGING Construction activities will not significantly affect air quality in the short or long term. Emissions from onsite vehicle exhaust will be much less than emissions from major roadways. Under each alternative, the Authority to Con- struct Permit and a Permit to Operate will require a Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis and an air quality analysis for all criteria pollutants. Estimated emissions would not initiate Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LEAR) and offset requirements for the nonattainment pollu- tants carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, and particulates under any alternative. The project would be considered a major source of nitrogen oxide (NO ) emissions. Because the area is in attainment for NO , compliance with ambient standards would be required through the permitting process. Project impacts are not considered significant. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Existing Conditions The existing biological resources at Batiquitos Lagoon are adapted to a wide range of physical conditions that fluctu- ate annually in response to climatic influences and artifi- cial breaching of the lagoon ocean barrier. The lagoon can vary from a flooded, fresh/brackish water lake in the winter and spring to a hypersaline shallow pond, greatly reduced in size and surrounded by dry, salt-encrusted flats in the late summer and fall. During dry cycles, ponded areas may evaporate completely. In June 1988, typical wildlife habitats within the project boundary included zones of highly variable deep (i.e., greater than 1 foot) to shallow water (354 acres), and non- tidal flats (64 acres); relatively depauperate, nontidal, coastal salt marsh (123 acres); brackish emergent marshes PD613.001 (39 acres); and brackish and riparian willow-dominated thickets (9 acres). The areal extent of these habitats varies seasonally and annually as shown by the following examples. During 1987 and 1988, deep water habitats varied between 88 percent (April 1988) and 1 percent (August 1987) of the project area; shallow water habitats varied between 35 percent (June and October 1987) and 2 percent (April 1988) ; and nontidal flats varied between 59 percent of the project area (August 1987) and none (January and June 1988). The areal extents of vegetated habitat types were less variable than those of water zones and flats but were partially flooded during the winter and early spring (see Table 3.4-9). Wildlife utilizing the Batiquitos Lagoon area is dominated by birds. Amphibians, reptiles, and mammals comprise a rel- atively minor component of the total organisms and species in the project area. The annual bird use of the lagoon varies with characteristic, annual breeding and migratory cycles and with fluctuations in available habitat resources, as described above. A total of 164 species of birds were recorded during a series of 10 surveys between May 1987 and September 1988. Some of the more significant patterns of use include the seasonal influx of waterfowl, in particular dabbling ducks, during the winter and spring flooding of the lagoon; and staging of resting and feeding shorebirds during the late summer and fall migration. Because the lagoon is typically flooded during the spring, the nontidal flats are unavail- able for migratory shorebirds at that time of year. Bird groups that have been observed within the project area throughout the year (e.g., diving ducks and herons) adjust their patterns of habitat use to the variations that result from the flooding and drying cycles. Breeding birds include the federally endangered California least tern and two federal candidates, the snowy plover and Belding's savannah sparrow. Other federal special status species recorded in Batiquitos Lagoon include the endangered California brown pelican and the following candidates for listing: the tricolored blackbird, long-billed curlew, white- faced ibis, coastal black-tailed gnatcatcher, and the brack- ish water snail. The composition of aquatic fauna and flora in Batiquitos Lagoon can be expected to vary from year to year depending on physical extremes and the chance composition of marine organisms that are introduced into the lagoon when it is artificially breached. Organisms that can withstand the extreme variations in salinity, temperature, and biochemical oxygen demand are relatively few. PD613.001 Aquatic resources of Batiquitos Lagoon during June 1988 consisted of a limited number of species of fish, inverte- brates, and plants. Though at least 11 species of fish are known to occur in the lagoon, only the California killifish and an unidentified species of shark were collected during 1988. Invertebrates present in June 1988, consisted of 12 species of insects, 2 species of polychaete worms, and 1 species of ostracod. The ostracod and a species of aqua- tic bug, the waterboatman, were the numerically dominant species. The only aquatic vegetation present consisted of wigeon grass and two species of algae. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Modifications The short-term impacts of Alternatives A, B, and C are essentially the same, involving the same habitat areas (approximately 466 acres) and occurring over approximately the same time frame (approximately 18 months). The same habitat areas will be cleared during dredging and grading of Alternatives A, B, and C. The construction of the fresh- water marsh area, the filling and grading for California least tern nesting areas, and the construction of access roads and construction laydown areas are anticipated to occur in the same areas for all three alternatives. After construction dredging, grading, and filling are com- pleted and permanent tidal flushing is restored, several years of habitat readjustment will occur. During this period, marine benthic communities and aquatic vegetation will establish within the subtidal and tidal zones. Coastal salt marsh vegetation species will colonize graded areas above subtidal thresholds, and the other wetland communities will adjust to the physical and biological conditions result- ing from the construction impacts. After this period of adjustment, fish and wildlife habitats should remain relatively constant. The primary differences among the three dredging alternatives are related to the relative amounts of subtidal and tidal habitats created by dredging and grading. Alternative A would create the most subtidal habitat (220 acres) and the least intertidal habi- tat (176 acres). Alternative B is intermediate, with 169 acres of subtidal and 227 acres of intertidal habitat types. Alternative C would result in the least subtidal habitat (144 acres) but the most intertidal habitat (252 acres). After a period of recolonization, tidally influenced coastal salt marsh (above +4 feet MLLW) is expected to cover approx- imately 139 acres with Alternative A, 158 acres with Alter- native B, and 171 acres with Alternative C. The amount of other major habitat types would be similar for the three alternatives: approximately 20 acres of.emergent brackish marsh, 33 acres within the constructed freshwater marsh area, and 36 acres of sand flats for California least tern nesting. PD613.001 The transformation from a complex of nontidal habitats to a complex of tidally influenced habitats will result in habi- tat changes for wildlife. These changes include a decrease in winter brackish/fresh water ponded areas, increased availability of spring tidal flats for migratory shorebirds, elimination of hypersaline ponds during late summer, and year-round improved productivity resulting from daily flush- ing. However, these habitat modifications should not be sufficiently different to cause the elimination of any existing wildlife species. When wildlife use of predicted habitats is compared for the three proposed dredging alternatives, it can be assumed that wildlife species groups will utilize the tidally influenced habitat types in proportion to habitat abundance. Diving waterbirds should, therefore, be more abundant in Alterna- tive A, which results in the largest subtidal area.' Dab- bling ducks and most shorebirds would be more abundant in Alternative C, which contains the most intertidal area. Diving waterbirds, dabbling ducks, and shorebird abundances would be intermediate in Alternative B. Wildlife groups that occur in coastal salt marshes would be expected to be more abundant in Alternative C than Alternatives B or A. The abundance of wildlife groups utilizing brackish emergent marsh would be comparable for all three construction alter- natives. Additionally, Alternative A would favor the dis- tribution of marine fish because of its more extensive sub- tidal habitat. CULTURAL RESOURCES Proposed dredging associated with the three action alter- natives could adversely affect fossil remains in parts of the lagoon. The significance of potential impacts cannot be determined because lagoon sediments have not been completely analyzed. Under all alternatives (including No Action), future access to possible fossil sites may be improved; thus, unauthorized fossil collection or disturbance could increase. A paleontologic mitigation program for the action alternatives is recommended to be developed and supervised by a qualified paleontologist approved by the San Diego Natural History Museum. Dredging impacts could occur to seven previously identified cultural resource sites. The extent of the impacts cannot be determined at this time because portions of sites may now be buried under sediments. Beach nourishment could protect one site by burying it, and disposal of dredged material at Green Valley could affect two sites. Preliminary tests at potentially impacted sites (to be determined at final design) will be conducted to determine appropriate mitiga- tion plans. PD613.001 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS RELATED TO SAN MARCOS OPTION Transportation impacts are related only to the San Marcos Landfill disposal option. Trucking material to San Marcos Landfill would significantly impact traffic conditions. The designated route includes intersections that are projected to be congested (stop-and-go conditions) by the time con- struction occurs, even without the project. NOISE IMPACTS RELATED TO DREDGING AND DISPOSAL Diesel-driven dredging equipment could increase noise levels from 10 to 20 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) at sensitive receptors. Noise guidelines could be substantially exceeded. If electric dredges are used, the noise impact would be 1 dBA CNEL at the four worst-case receptors. If diesel dredges are used, a mitigation plan to minimize noise impacts should be developed during final engineering design. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY Mosquito-breeding habitat may be lost through tidal inunda- tion under any of the action alternatives. The freshwater marsh will likely create new mosquito habitat, however, and would require mosquito abatement. The tidal inlet structure will impede lateral access along the beach for safety vehi- cles and personnel unless a crossing is constructed. Strong currents and the rocky shoreline may create potentially dangerous swimming and surfing conditions near the entrance jetties. Restricted access to beach nourishment areas will be required during construction to minimize safety hazards. MAJOR RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION The project responsibilities have been identified in the interagency Memorandum of Agreement. Signatories to the MOA and their responsibilities are as follows: the City of Carlsbad is the CEQA lead and will be responsible for per- mitting, project contracts and construction award, land dedication, and sediment control; the Port/City of Los Angeles is responsible for project funding, including pre- liminary design, environmental documentation, permitting, construction, maintenance and monitoring, and Carlsbad administrative costs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cali- fornia Department of Fish and Game, and National Marine Fisheries Service are responsible for habitat valuations, and review and approval of project .design and construction; CDFG is also responsible for lagoon management as an Eco- logical Reserve, including long-term physical maintenance and physical and biological monitoring; and State Lands Commission is responsible for project review and, as needed, the holding of lagoon property in public trust with a long- term lease to CDFG. PD613.001 10 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED AND CHOICES AMONG THE ALTERNATIVES The proposed project (Alternative A) and dredge Alterna- tives B and C have similar short-terra construction impacts that would not occur with the No Action Alternative. How- ever, relative to existing conditions and the No Action Alternative, the proposed project and Alternatives B and C provide significantly increased water quality, flood control capacity, recreation opportunities, and increased habitat for marine resources, diving ducks, dabbling ducks, and shorebirds. Alternative A is the alternative least likely to close, it initially provides the most sand for beach nourishment, and it provides the most shallow subtidal estuary habitat; as a result, it would be more favorable to diving ducks and fishes relative to the other dredge alternatives. Alterna- tive C provides the minimal margin of error for unpredicted lagoon closure, provides the least sand for beach nourish- ment, and provides the least shallow subtidal and the most intertidal habitat; as a result, it is predicted that this alternative would favor formation of habitat used by shore- birds and dabbling ducks relative to Alternative A. Alter- native B is intermediate to Alternative A and C in these characteristics. The No Action Alternative would result in further degradation of the lagoon, including water quality, flood control, and aesthetics. It is predicted to diminish the minimal existing marine resources and, in the long term, diminish habitat for all waterfowl and shorebirds while upland and nontidal marsh habitat would likely expand. Under all project alternatives, the freshwater marsh may not provide anticipated habitat if an adequate amount of natural fresh water is not available in San Marcos Creek. Alterna- tive measures that would enhance all dredge alternatives include: supplementing the freshwater source with reclaimed or potable water, or elimination of the freshwater marsh accompanied by modification of the dredge contour line to conserve some existing brackish marsh (see Section 3.4.2.3). Use of diesel dredge equipment may result in elevated night- time noise levels at some receptors during project construc- tion. Use of an electric dredge would minimize this impact but might result in significantly higher project costs. Alternative offsite disposal of dredged material at San Marcos Landfill and Green Valley may result in noise, traf- fic, and air quality impacts. Disposal of East Basin mate- rials in the Central Basin would eliminate these potential impacts. PD613.001 11 4J C 64) rH 4) GO< •rl(0 Q -PG g 4) rH4) G O>•H01 4)Q ^JG s4) rH 4) Go> •rlto4>Q 4JG g 4) rH 4) Gcn •rH (04) Q •rH 4-1 •Ha rl & T)Gid G •HCO 4)Q 4-1 C cs 4)rH 4)preliminaryc•H 13 4) cn •rH rHO. Qoo £j O^•Hto 4>13 parties,f£ O2 4-1 0 G0•Hcn •Ho 4)Q 4-1G g 4) rH 4) GO<•<H CO 4)13 cnw 4) rH •8 CO•H4Jidcn <j>a -HO -PH -iH EH SS(4! OH EHH Q cn ^*% C\J 'T CN § m P G S3EH D 4->U « 0< EH 4) 2 W £H W 3oJ u* aa H cn cn 4) 4)cn*•* Oiid a, •rl 4)Uidi-H ^i4J•H Ul rH4) -H o4^rH 4-1CO CO rH -HId rt 4) 3 rH4J f) O -H3 CO rt (0 cn Oi 'Ocid 01c uid JQ rHid 4) 4->id rH 1 1^14J•H rH•H•a4-1COC•H rH« rl3 4-1 O3 rl W CO 01§u 4) •H Ol CO rl 4) rl Q 4)C••H rl i! Cr*G •rl Uid rt XJ rHid rt4)4-1id rH -o ^4-1•rl rH •H 3toC•H rHid rl3 4-1 U3 rl 4-)cn 4-1u4)4-> O rlQt to0^ £ •l-l ^Joo 4)O COid 4) rH OlOi 0s ^05 CO •^4->•H rH •rl 3toG•H rHid rl3 4-1 O3 rl 4Jcn 4) -a" •rl rl jQ o4-> idoorH 4) 4) C•rl rH 4) 04•HOi COid0^ cnC•Hjjco•H H 4)G•iH rH 4)p. •H 04 4JU 4) 4J O rlOi o•p c •rHto 4)Q ^1rH Hid rl3 3 4->to T3 rH3 8 rH rH>d t»H 4->3 4) •H 4) 13 G rt -H Id rHOi 4) 0 Oi4) -H •n Qi 4)N•Ha•H G •rla S CO 4-> 4) U••M (y^J Q.4-1 a 4) -rt•n 4)C (0 0> rt•H 41(0 > 4) 13Q <d 14-4 0 C 4-1 0 rt •rl O 4-1 Ol «) Ql CO rH3 C id rl Id -H CO rt rt •rl 4-1 4) 13 4J4) Id rH rl 8id o ••H A 13 4-1 CO G C 0> Id 0) G CO•P 0 O rH MHeu id o rH >i 4)13 >3 41 C 4-1 rH O C CO -rl (d 4-1 CO rH C U rt Ot rH a -H GOl -H 13 4) ?4) 4) 4)G 4-1 U •rH Id GH a c <dwS-g£ 4) 4-> -rH 4)4-1 4) rHflj rrj J) g •g o Ot 0 rl rl D -P 0 <W -a41toid 4) O> rt G O -rlg -o•H OoH rHid <»H •rl4-1 -aG G4) id 4J rH O Oi •H 4-) OOHH mI -a 3O rlid G•HCn134> 13ido rt rH •rHid rt 13 C3O rlid ^c•Hcn 134) rlQ coCnG•H4-1OOM-l 4)O>•a•H rlA t Carlsbadtoidw •aG3 O rlid O"*G•H O> 41 rlQ to G 4-1 8U-l 13 rlid >4) rj OCQ t Carlsbadto 4) 13C rtid o>c•Ho^•a4) rta caOi r^•H4J 84-1 13 id> 4) rH3O C •rltoidCQ •ptn4)3 01 C•H 0^""OCO rla nourish-13 idtn oid4)A toidc•H 4-> 0 GG 4) U S to 4) •rl 1^| t 4)•n 440 GO •rH 4-1O3 rl 4-1 UlG 8 tooO A rt 10 Id rl Id rtcn cu 4) cn rl 4) 3 rt 4-1 M-l U 3 rl G rl O 04J 4H -HCO U) ,* rt rl D 0) •rl 4) >4) Vi -H S O -O CMOo 10 Q 0•H idCP (N •d CO •O§fi •rl4-1 oU O € u0)en 0)01 Ul u 3 rl •O 01 § •rl 4-1id rl 0) 8- id id id 01 01 0) 4) X.ui o> o>•d 0101 a> idui ri j:o *d 04 •O 130) 0)01 4-1O 0) fi O 8 °O> 01id -H O -rl A$4J 0) 3 rl O T3 04-n 0) 4->0) C^ 3 4Juid •rl •O•H 4-1 •rl•a•H fi 1 rH 0) £5 Cf>•HUl 0) Q id fio C -Hid 4-> rH 0*2 C ui•rl fi rl Oo u •rl O»C CO -i-l 3 013 r*i.(— i rj*d 04< S 01fi 0 •rl 4-1id 0) o 01 ^S fiid •rl 0)o oG OW — ' *^Q •H rl 0) O4 4->OidOis •rl fiOi •rl 01 1)Q 0>C •H rl 01 4-)id?01•d rl OM-l g 0) XI •PO 2 4-1 01 COu t^t4-1 •rl-d•rl rlg 4-1 •rl O ll J*rH 0 r-lido •Pu1•rl i-Hid•rl U •rl 4H 0) £5 01to 1 0)ucid J5 01 c 0-rl •Pid<u rl 4-> U fi fio>•H01 01Q Ul§ •rl 4Jid ^0) O40 0)01idA 04 ^14-1 •rl •d •rlxt rt3 CCf> •rl 01 0)a 01 0) rl Au01 •rl•a rH O rl § U •« 01 0) •rl t3 0)01 D •O•p 0) « ^^}•rl XI rl ^ 4-)01 J3id ui id rl 4-> Ul 0) W -rl 4-> -rt ^id x o3 o> id rl01 0 XI0) 4->u c3 0) -HT3 rH 01 o •H •rl 4-1 O> •rl id r-l fi 1 aiz id 01a Ul •rlQ fi•HCOidn r-lid ^44-1 C 0)CJ T3GidrHcuD §±4 <4-l UlG Ul r*id2 rl <U4Jid f^Ul rl 0•HUl 0)>•rl•d rl 0)4Jid3 K^010) rl U Ul 0o Vtid IN (NOo acu 4J U4)•n OU 04 (01-1 04 <Uo a -. •H O idO OO> it38, <D fl •H 4J OOE-t — 4)H•a 4-) §O >la| d «I §•H4-1 Oo Vio •H4-1 I4->id rl 0)4J 0) •H ido•rl I/I I to u •H rHid•HO•H4H 4) 0) <d 4-> •rl•o•H ^43 •O 0) 0 1H to rH 4) 4) rH 4-1C •H 4-> COos*•H •M3O | 5 •rl <P4 rH 4) to rH 4) 4) rH oQ s •0<u id ^1A IHo co•H4-)id •rl •r, rH toCo•H •H-dcoo 4)C•H rHidto ar- Dredge approximately everyO4 rH rH •H3 C•rltoidCD 4-1to 3 !X CI U Ooo mr- U) rlid4) ro jj^j •H3 rH rH •HHH K,, rH rH(d•H4J •§ n •rl 04 4) 0> 4) •O & 1•rHrrj 4)to •O4) •H ^44)7cid 4)oo to a § o1 id S rl 0) 4-) I o•rl •Pid •rl•a 0)(0 rl 0) JX £4 HJ rtj B< tfH rf. ^^, CS•n• CO go•H •PU0)01 0)<u01 dredge:0•rl 3U0)rH Q) 4-1 O 4)to 3 4)rH A•rlto (fl £controla•2.p3rH,«4a ^i 0 *(0 C3 04 T3 id nativerl 4>4JH (d rH 4) 4-1 rl 0 *•PC0)a 04•H j3 4) • •.to idO toto 4)ooid 4)>id 04 •«,A:u3 4-> C u4)4Jid 4)•O•H >0 cu Itoto4> 04 10 4Jto3 rHido•rle4)x:0 0)to D ^|O 1id ?c•H £(0idu,__) 4)4) J-3u S 4)4->•Hto § O C0u 4Jto3•0 4) O> C £ Xoz o 0)o otn rl0<?* tofi0 •rltoto •HsV 4->C!0) | '3 C? CPC •rl •I"0)V*o to<u (d rH3O •rl 4J ^4•d04 ^ 4) CON O OO *. X0 ~-* to 3Q 4) •H-P•H 3*CM rHH •rl 4-4•OC •H ^O4-1 U >P4 M-l<d •P id rH 3 c^O> ^««tn 0u Mid C(d01 ^idtoato•H T3 (NOO aa. cn 3w c •H(U 4-1 rH C•3 °Id OEH -^ 4-1C I ou § •rl 4->ido» -rl 4-1 •rl C 4-10i G •H 4)01 g 4) 4)-O rH 4)4J U C •n -rl O 01 )H 4) Ox Q •O MH 4) O UC C4) O 3 -rl rH 4JMH U •rl *tj 4) >. OS rH rH •O CD •rl 4J 4-1 Id 4J .C -H co x-~ -P >P[V) • ID -iH 4^ rv. (>4 • * r* H • <Nn3 ^* * 0) *O9- t usn • id id H 1*) rH rH3 01 a 4->G 'O 0) OQ 0 C « 3 55 -rl Id 2 4Jo •* 4-> O 1H SB 4) •cn en <N H • CP b 4) •<« S4) « -rl 01 PI 4->.*- 01 01 •rl 4Jx <d 4) 4-> •HMH jao <d Cn •SI rl Id Id rH 4) 4-» rH 4)u * 01 1 4) 85 rH IS25J3 C 4) rH 41 ^ *t3 rH 41 •rl toid -o id MH 001 4J C U CPId -rla. 01 g 4)•H -a CP Ula>-o jju 41•n O rl ft •a 4)U 01C 4J 41 Id 3 4-1 rH -rl S rti >i U rH -rl H 4Jid id-O 3•H O*4-i id 5 .p1 •H -rl S rHid4) 3o o1 id i rH JS O4 CP41 -rl 01 1 4-1c id O 4J G -rl „•§O" n3 G .£•rl 4-> U 01 -rl •rl 4-)x id41 3 O*MH idO rH 01 id01 TJS.fj•P 1C± d)rH 4) G •rl 01 S rl 41 4) 4)•P 01 id -^ id 01 4) 41 « -rlc a O A•rl O P 41 *d ^^ G 0> >i O G -PU -rl -rl CP rH >iT3 idSH 4) 3id i-i o* Oi ta 4) EH" 3 ? CP C ^3 4-1 •rl C rH Oid -H 3 4-> CT> O* id C T) -H h id CP Id 41 rls -a -o co•rl4J •rl•aaoo ?*1 rlid M0§•4)EH •801 to Qt C •S ^Jid •H •rl g I1J j^0 id 4J 4J -H g-9 g J34)U O Id -rl rH 4J Ot Id01 3 •rl C/*Q >d co•rl 4J •rl•s0o ^1 rlid ^0 g 4) -a4)011 Ol c0•rl4-)id •rl •rl g MH O 1 g d) 1)O <H(d ,*H rH rH S'rH •rl -rl 0 3 1 01 4)to -O4)01 ^Ql 5 J3 •rl 01 3 rl 4) g0 id to rH 41 tr>G 4J•H (d 4J 4J01 -H 4) A O Gid 01 rH 01 4-1 Q 4)i-4 3 014) •rl 4-> rlida rt* i IHo G0•H 01 •H U 4)a t% 01 i to41•P f*jto 41 41 +J (dG g rHpa co 4-1U 0)MH MH 41 4101 ^41 -§ffl ^1 •P •rl rH 3o1 •rl C •rl •P 01 •H X 4) 41 41 ,C01 014) toto id 04 g to 01 0 -H Nj ^^O41 idU to 3 ^O D^01 G 01 •rl 41to 4-1 A4) 01 01 P -rl *<d x <d3 41 g Go •rl P •rl T3 G OO ^J•rl ^01 04 UH MH3 rH •Q *C MH n)O a, c O -rl 4-1 COidG OQOrH rH Id•rl toid 4Jto a4J a) 0 414J 01id G 0 O U) id i•P rH 01 4) 4)i. ^4 •rl 01 rH 01 'O 4) rH O 3 C -H i 0>3 cS3 -rl 01 01 0141 idSB ffl 01 4-1 C 01o >dH Wid•aH 2 •rl (3idto * •P Hid 4) rl0 4->§§ MH O 01 4)U •8 34J 01 •rl 'O §•rl 4J •rl "S8 toO 4J•rl •rl C •rl 41 5 .CO41 to -id < 01 01 P 4) U >id -H T3 O4 4J 2 g id •rl G )441'O O 4JG -rl rH Id 4J <UCP 3 toG to O•H P MH0> 01T3 C <D 4> O g id 01a>to MH MH O O •rl 4-> U3 toid 01 id 01 01 £! rlo ido g 0)^ 5cn 5 rl MH O O •rl 4-) U3to 4J rH01 -Hc id csoo acu I (UCOW 4J C0) 8 u §•H4J>d •rl 4->•Hs C0•rl 4-1•rl 1Ou 4->•H 0) 04 J3•p fl•H O»> -rl01fl <0nj T3r-i 04 r4 fl fl O -rl 4->id C O> O •rl —' 4J "0CO CS -rl 0)a • g 01u m njOS . <o & O id JSco fl QI 2a o o) z « -rl U Q4J O4 COrl U rfj 0)2 co 4JUid O4 H 3E-t <U 1JO) flD 01 HI U — ' rl 4J0 0 'O§44 0 4) fl 85id 4JJ3 idti fl 3 -H •P Sto -3 •rl f-H Q (U fl0•rl 4-> •rl O U 4->•rl 0) 04 1 1 4->id §•H4JU3 4->Ulfl 0O V* 5•Hi f~\idu Q l-l O4-) fl 0) 01 H 0)<d uft 3 •-I Oid 01 •rl 0) iidooi-H 4)UUS0)0)u A •rl J3 S 0) 014-> flid o <0 4-1 fl0 •rl 4J•rl 0U •P rl0) Xzg o 4-) fl0) Ul 1id 01 Ul1 flo•rl 4-*•rl O O P •rl g 0) 04 1H idid uC 0 •rl i-l i-Hfl id 33? uid01P 0101 0)0) fl4-1 -rl 0) r!4-> 0),J ^J 01 0> PU fl T3 *Hfl in0 <i)CJ -O i0) flo <ufl 4-1id o A O4 3 <«-l•P 00) •rl 01 -O 01 O0) r-lr-la r) 001 \01 -a0 fl04 (d flo•rl ^J•rl 1Ou 4J ,f^ g 0) 04 010) •rl 4-1 •rl ^ (LJ •^ o 0 >iid a> fl t0 3•H 01 U 0)3 > r) -rl4J 01in flfl d) O 4->0 fl •rl 0 4JU01 3C -0O C •rl O•P U uT3 -n§ S1 0 O •rl <0 O A4-1 U 0) rl •rl Id A 010) O <U r) -rl O O4 Vt rl0 3 rH 4-1 Oid 01 01•rl -rl 0) •P A rl 101 •o Ulid 0)Ul3 <M.f-| ^0) rH 0) rH 4JId -rl > W C r-la) id0) 01 a Oi co 4J•H•a0o 4-1 .f^ g 0) 04 a> -. r) 01 || 01o in •H 0)01 Uu 0) « ^3 ^n 3 0)0 ^ id a>•-ic ja O^ *rl•H 01ui in0) Oa 04 fl0•rl4_),f4-a 0u P •rl g 0) 04 1S * flid ui o rl Ol-rlCT> l-t 4->o o idS0 S.C 0)0) 4J U)4^ -H d)(d S V* •rl O4 Qu C O O 0) -rl O4 0) O Ol 0) 4->id M 01 Ol < S3O 01 -rl 4J> 4J id<D fl PQ S CO •H 0 O C <4-l3 O CU 0•H S- ^ rl Id 35> 0) (flfi ^4 04 1 0 Id -rl ^30) 01 M-lii i f^ 0 0 4J SO •rlM-l•rl O» CO in i^ 0 rH -rl<d 4J •rl Id4J U §54J0 -P >i a fl -H §•H4J •rl 4-1 •rl •rl 4-1 infl •rl Ulid M-l O 01C •rl 01id Xt M-l O •rl in » CMoo 0)i-lQ 0)!H Q vOaa, PIo I (1)ui 9U C•HIt) 4J^ e•9 °Id O Poid I ,»^ ^* vO CO c O-Hjj 00)CO 11)0)CO•**ment to mini- Permit conditionA01 'u9Oe 01r-l 9 <u 0 A •HS t>o (Uu0)4-1 0) c asonal)4101 014-1U 1•H 01N 'e in Q)to9 r*4idC .3P (U oa) i oo o 01 a> c •r-l 0101<00uid c O 4Ju u4J 9 §13u tn §•HP•H •O OU MO TJ(I)01 1a c0 P •H4J '& OZ tPC•HM-l (U 9> 01idS u00*4 4,3u idid EHp. >r4 S r-l teral access Permit conditionid CQ Z PU9M4-> O O tnCoHid 01Ul 0)uuid id 0)P *o West CarlsbadP 4JC0) Uid•n •3 0) 4-1 gM •O0)Pidc g ^0) oido> <u «•Hk •0 id><ur-4 9OCQ M(U 4^ 0) 0> CP C c 9 01 0-H 4-1U9 P01 U 0)oidHcu ^,3 4) ^P 0 Cfl*»-* <oo§01•H3 §•HP •H 0U 01id0) !3 .^jo •H P01id<o § •a tna> 0) cu P•rH ••HP U9MPin a> r-lcM o•HPO9U4Jtn I OO CU I 4)CO 3W fl•rH fl) 4-1 rH fl Q O Id OEH -" 4JC Iou J*o •H 4->ido> •rH•p jfj 4J g fl) •PC g 4)I 4) •O-•H fl fi -P •H rQ01 fl fl) O Q U 1 •rH TJ1 0 fl)•H W TJ4-> fl•H 4) fl)g rj g EH Bfl) O£ U. fl) §u k4)U fl 01 fl "H01 id4) s .c> o •rH fl) Id4J i o m* 1 ^ 8*O» QI C (U 4-1 -r4n 1-4, 01id -a cWG (U -H CO O rH -P S H -r( rH Id O 0 4-> < CPrHZ U4) W ^ 4-> OidOiBH § •rH 4-1•H TJfl 3 o ^t•P••H •rH 4-> O 4) 4-1 PQ W4) fl -O rHcn id 4)— o o > •rH <N fl) •rH 0 C 4-1 4) O» 0)•H O -H01 rH O -* fi id <u fl •rH 01 -rH4-1 «fl fl) — > 4) k r-34J O W0 C ZOi -H U I "o? 04 fl)•H > 3 -rH O1 4-*4) idCa> kC fl)•H 4J 'O flJfl) T3 O C -Pfl) U> id•H •O rH 1 <d rH — ' 0) 0) 4->a> c •rH 0)Q S 4J <r4s 0) 04 4J fl g 4) c~t 4) T3 •-H fi fi JtP "iH•H -O0) fi4) OQ 0 C *^3 fl -H r-lid 3rH -a oQi 0) 0) 0 .fl0 rrj 0 C C 3 fl 3 O Id rH O 0) •rH fi O -H 4J Jk4 fl 4J UHid o -H id o01 4H CT>•rH 'H 4) -H 014-> 4) J3 -P C•H Ot -HOS O S -rHfl) 4J 4J 4) 01 Id 01 -rH 01 • fl •rH O fi 01 -rH O fl O -P A " fl -rH C g 01Oi 4J 4) 0 idId O Id I U rH U 3 014) fl) -H U fl) 0)U > MH O T3 Uid fl) -H T3 3 3OiTJ O rH 01fl) 4) T3 U id >4 ^ Qj -H C 0)04 o w ja -H g 4)01 •r4oc O4 13Oi ^d)4J01 8PQ 4Jfl rl 4)o o<4H Id r-H 0) Oi i* vIg fl •£?fl) 01 > -rl•H U rl 3 T3 O1 fl rH 0) £01 u0) id•H 0)Q .a •p •H g 4) O4 £ C4)S4) fl) T3•H C fl 4->Oi «H •H T301 fl 38 a 4) •r4 ^•O ^rH rHido•iH ^4-1 U rH 4)0)MH fl) fl) 4)01 l-lD -O 0 4-1 idu <4H •r4 tt 01 id•H 01 01 g rH 0 Id rl ••H <4H•pfl 4)0) 01 4J -rHo o 04 fl 4->fl •C01 •H ^3Oc r^oid0)PQ 4J•H g 4) Oi .pc 4)S4) 4) •a •r) fi C '4-1 01 -rl •rl T3 01 fl 4) O Q 0 01 3o O»C 01 -rH 4) 4-1 VH Id3 h0) 0)O p| H 0 0) UV4 fi <4H 4) 4) O•H rl rH Ck id 0id o -H A -H 4J4J id4) 0) 4->01 3 -rH •rl O 6O 0 -rH Z < K? 999 4-) fi 4) Q)B 4-) O!O4 3 C •H O -H3 U O!a* m fl) 94-)C 01 •P O fl H *44) id id3 4)4) 4) Cu 01 idId -H T3 d>rH O fl r»QI ^ id id rH rH •rH <4H•O C 3 0) O On § C.O 4->id rHtd 01oOi01•HQ fl) fl -r*fl) -Pfl) -rlS 01 •P fl 4->4) 0) 01J3 0) 3id4) *O AU C XC id 4)id•P W H01 4) 4) •rH U 0) •O rl fl) 3 01 -rl U) O> O V* <O kfl 01 O 4)•H -P «4H O 4J fl) CU O C •rl 01 0) 4) g -rH O 4) r-H•H 0 0) W -H iJ fl rl P 01 0 ^ OO a A4 I CUcn 3w a •rl CU 4J•-< aa o<d oEH — 4-1 C Q C 0CJ c0 •rl 4-1idcn •rl 4J •rl £ co•rl 4J•rl•9cou •p •rl g & •»GCn •rl CO CUQ idcu rl<d C 0•H 4-> U3 rl 4JCO^4 g EH O b C7*jj • 44 cn H 4-1 r-l O 2 co cu< u * § §STJ fa a or.i A\ 4Juid £H C0•rl 4-1 •rl tJCoo rl O >14-> •rl > •rl 4-1 H hM Was cn Aou cu <d M CU CU J CO XJ00 —a o04 4J •P8 ! >14J CO 0) rl 44 CUid cocn 3 c0•H 4-) U3 rl 4-1toc0u cu rl3 4-1O3 tH 4-1 CO 4-1 CU rH M C O•rl 4J •rl•a oo 4-> •rl rl CU 04 0 4-> X ca rl rl O CUS ca34Ja oO 4-1 rl44 (0 1 4-1 J3 Uu id<d 04cu S cu cu rH N 3 -rl T) g CU -HA CO -rlcn g ao•rl 4J•H T3 OU 4-1 •rlg CU 04 COUcu 3 CO s g1 •rl •rlid9 4-> COo 04 rl CU 4Jid 9 *CU^ 4-1id rlcuo<gcuH c0 •rl 4-1 •rl•a ou 4-1•H g CU 04 1 •rl•aa8>4-1 •rl r-1id3D4 bcu 1 SH O44 4-1 CO CUEH co 4-1 Oid 8-•rl >1 4-> •rl rHid30< a<c •rlCcu O40 r-lid •rl 4-> •rl •H tPa•H rl3•O COc0•rl •P C O•rl 4-> •rl•a§o 4-)*Hg cu 04 CO rl g •rl3LQ O 4J COco •rl4-1 (du cu •rl rl rl Id4-1CO 4-1cu cu rl r-l 4J -rl COO C04 -n i.Mcu 4-1id3 O4J CO 4-1 S1 >1 4-1 CO 0) rl 44 U)id cacn 3 >H^4-1C 0)C g ^4CU 3 cu rl3 4JO3M 4-1cn 4Jcu rH CM C 0•rl -P •rl•o OU 4-1 •rl g CU 04 CO rl CU4->ido£ O4-> CO Co•rl 4J U •rl V4 •P CO CUk 4-> COo 04 ccn •rl COcuQ > rl A 0) •rl CO Vl CO rl CUid uA uid rH<d 4Ju cu •rl rH 10 C >1-rlA 04£ 4-1 -rl U rl3 4-1 tn M CO fc4-) CU CU CO rl -Pc id80 o4J A G0•rl 4J•H T)C O0 4-) •rl g CU Q4 •k GCn •rlcocua rH -Pid ca rl CU<u 3: 4J<d oH 4J A 4J •P C3 CU0 Oco idI -nA T34-> id rt §S 4, §U fc3fc ca 4-> CO CO CU C 0o oo id 1 4Jca •H 0]X cn 0) CUu 44 Uo id G rH0 id •H fc 4-> CUid 4-)G id •rl r-l g•ri cnH G W -H &T3 •rl fc A •O rlid CUrH 3 S •Oid•8 rH rlido .£ 4->3 3 c 8S1 rH CO COo rl Uid ccn•rlcocu•o «^ao •rl 4->•rl•O Ou c0 4-1 -rl •rl 4-> S •* rl -Cl CU T304 id cu4-1id•a 6 B0uuid cocu 0 r-l 4J U •rlco A CU 0)3> 4-1 >iCU U•n CCUfi cn CU fct3 0) S cu «.ca >1 rl 4-1 CU CU g 4H a Id -rl •co s o CO 4J •H CU Id fceo-0 4H CO •rl U 4-1 0) 0) •rl 3 44T3 ca fc T3 CO 31? -rl CO 44 C•ri cn •rl » CO 10 CUcu -a•rl •P H4-i idcu a •l-l -rl4H4-1o c•rlCnG -•H >i C fcCU idA cn 4-> COcn cuC Ucu cuJ fi 0} O O g