Layman here that has to read these maps and generally understand them often, so I'll take a crack at it.

BFE stands for Base Flood Elevation. It is the elevation of a 100-year flood event at that particular point. If you read the FEMA flood maps, and see a black squiggly line with a number on it within Zone AE, that is the elevation of the water during a 100-year flood event at that point. So say your BFE is 1040 feet, and you're standing on ground that is at 1041' elevation. You are not within the 100-year flood plain as defined by FEMA.

LiDAR stands for Light Detection and Ranging. For this purpose, satellites beam down laser pulses to the ground to "map" the topography, and it can be fairly accurate. If you have Google Earth Pro, their elevation data is oftentimes based on LiDAR data.

As it pertains to these cabins, it appears that some of these cabins may not be within the 100-year flood plain based on LiDAR data. But, the only way to know for sure is to survey on the ground from a known elevation point and determine what the actual elevation is at the base of the structure. There's also the Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) that was done at Camp Mystic where 15 buildings were surveyed on the ground and were determined not to be within a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). An SFHA here would be anything within Zone A or AE. It does not include Zone X (shaded), as that is a 500-year flood event area. But the only people that know which structures were determined not to be in a SFHA are the ones that submitted the application, because the LOMR doesn't identify which buildings they are by name, just by Building X.

As a finance guy whose 30 year career is numbers, the concept of describing these as "100 year" or X year has always driven me a bit nuts. I think it gives a false impression of probability and recurrence to some people. I get what they are going for and it doesn't really matter in substance, but I've never thought it was a wise way to label these areas

A better descriptor would be "annual 1% flood area."

Thanks for breaking it down.

I guess I was asking for more of a breakdown of the elevation of cabins from the LIDAR data in comparison to the BFE. I just saw the LIDAR map with no elevation breakdowns and the BFE seems to only be on the FEMA maps in 5ft increments.

You're also 100% right that 1% annual flood area would be more effective way to refer to these spots.

Not in front of my computer right now but I think the lidar I was looking at for Twins was about 1842. BFE is 1835.

Teslag said:

---

Not in front of my computer right now but I think the lidar I was looking at for Twins was about 1842. BFE is 1835.

---

This is fairly accurate information IMO and even if it's off a little it makes the point clearly.

Now factor in that from pics it looks like the cabins are several feet off the ground and factor in that water rose to the ceilings in those cabins. So add another 10 to 12 feet to the depth.

The water rose as much as 15 or 18 feet above the BFE.

Nobody plans for that.

misread. disregard.

Curious if the counselors were at Cypress Creek or at Guadalupe.

FM 949 said:

---

Curious if the counselors were at Cypress Creek or at Guadalupe.

---

I would assume both.

I meant the ones the poster talked to. They have since deleted the post.

So, what is the current dead and missing count? I am concerned that not all will be found.

MagnumLoad said:

---

So, what is the current dead and missing count? I am concerned that not all will be found.

---

My dad and I were talking about this last night. Talking about how much Texas officials would be willing to spend to search and find all the missing and dead. We agreed there's no limit to what SHOULD be spent, but what would they spend to do it and complete this mission knowing the monumental task at hand searching such a massive stretch that would need to be investigated.

From last night it was still over 150.

In floods like this, it's common not all bodies will be found. I'm not sure how long recovery efforts will last but praying we find as many as we can.

Not everyone will be found. Some will be buried under feet of soil in the riverbed. And you would have to search the banks from Hunt all the way to Canyon Lake. That's 75 miles as the crow flies.

One thing I wonder about this is people that are listed as missing that don't know they're listed as missing, and if that really happens.

Are you implying that because they have kept the missing person list so quiet, that people might actually not be missing. It's just nobody knows to tell them they aren't?

There will, unfortunately, be remains that are stumbled upon for years to come.

MagnumLoad said:

---

So, what is the current dead and missing count? I am concerned that not all will be found.

---

We didn't get an update yesterday because of the President's visit. I haven't seen any updates since Thursday.

Here's a story from the AP about the cabins in flood zones. I'm guessing that because the FEMA maps are more about insurance than safety, it wasn't seen as a big problem to grant exemptions?

https://apnews.com/article/texas-flood-camp-mystic-map-records-investigation-e12bee8d5f88301363861ca12c19b929

Wow that is a very reckless, quite frankly bull****, article. The author bends over backwards to frame the narrative that the camp was frantically and carelessly trying to exempt buildings while FEMA ignorantly did so. Such ridiculous horse ***** You don't hate the media enough and this is why.

LOMR's are straight forward if there's a BFE on the map. There was. It was 1835. So any structure at 1836 or above will get a LOMR approved. Period. The end. A surveyor shot the elevations of the buildings, found them to be well above elevation needed. LOMR approved. Nothing nefarious and they happen ALL the time. It's common. That's why there's a defined process for it.

And Mystic applying for a LOMR has nothing to do with safety. They just didn't want to pay flood insurance, and rightly so. With the BFE established they had every reason to believe these cabins were in a location not to raise a red flag.

BBRex said:

---

Here's a story from the AP about the cabins in flood zones. I'm guessing that because the FEMA maps are more about insurance than safety, it wasn't seen as a big problem to grant exemptions?

https://apnews.com/article/texas-flood-camp-mystic-map-records-investigation-e12bee8d5f88301363861ca12c19b929

---

Dick Eastland wouldn't do anything to intentionally put girls in harms way and paid the ultimate price while trying to save them. The camps got hit by a nuclear bomb of a flood wave, like nothing ever seen before.

These people can get ****ed.

And what's more disgusting is the implication in the article that since this camp hosted a lot of wealthy white girls they somehow used money and privilege to buy off a LOMR from FEMA.

OK, think I finally got a feel for BFE. BFE is the anticipated max of a 1% event in mean sea level, right? IF this is correct, do we have the normal MSL of the river at this point. I'm just trying to a feel for numbers; the Kerr County Mitigation Plan speaks to 10'" of water. Also, I get Design Flood Elevation as a safety factor.

I get this is all based on risk management for insurance purposes and people try to conform to requirements. I can recall my first flood insured house was at the 10' MSL point.

"These people can get ****ed."

Well stated.

Teslag said:

---

Wow that is a very reckless, quite frankly bull****, article. The author bends over backwards to frame the narrative that the camp was frantically and carelessly trying to exempt buildings while FEMA ignorantly did so. Such ridiculous horse ***** You don't hate the media enough and this is why.

LOMR's are straight forward if there's a BFE on the map. There was. It was 1835. So any structure at 1836 or above will get a LOMR approved. Period. The end. A surveyor shot the elevations of the buildings, found them to be well above elevation needed. LOMR approved. Nothing nefarious and they happen ALL the time. It's common. That's why there's a defined process for it.

---

Love how they buried this at the end of the article

"Steubing, a longtime municipal engineer in Texas, said the rain and flooding that hit Kerr County in a matter of hours were so much more intense than anything in its history that it's hard to call the flood plain management a failure.

Local officials likely believed they were following existing regulations when they allowed the camp to keep growing, but "then Mother Nature set a new standard," he said.

"You could have built things 2 feet (0.6 meters) higher, 3 feet (0.9 meters) higher, and they still might have gotten taken down," he said."

This is very informative.

🌊More than 100 people are dead following devastating flash flooding in Texas on July 4th weekend. It’s the deadliest non-tropical cyclone-related flash flood to hit the United States since 1976.

MyRadar meteorologist @MatthewCappucci investigates what transpired. pic.twitter.com/WU1fbLRwgt

— MyRadar Weather (@MyRadarWX) July 12, 2025

And not only that, Camp Mystic is in an unincorporated part of Kerr County. There's not a lot of local regulation for development anyway. Basically meet county platting requirements, satisfy the TCEQ for water/sewer/stormwater and comply with FEMA as they did they are good to go. If you're outside a municipality and ETJ in a rural county the landowner has a lot of deference as to what they want to build on their land.

This author is desperately trying to look for some local and landowner failure and it's just not there.

I agree, that article is drawing all the wrong conclusions. I have been looking at all of the publicly available data and have put together my analysis in the links below.

In summary:
- This flood seems consistent with the FEMA 500-year flood event (0.2% annual probability).
- The buildings and cabins appear to be above the FEMA 100-year (1% annual probability) Base Flood Elevation based on LIDAR data.
- The FEMA LOMA confirms that the buildings and cabins were above the BFE.
- The 500-year flood elevation at Mystic is about 10 feet higher than the 100-year BFE.

Here is an overall analysis of the 100 vs 500 year flood, geography, rain intensity, flood gage data, topography, and the FEMA FIRM map boundaries. https://pxl.to/mystic-analysis

Here is a 4D analysis which combines the LIDAR topography with the time/flow data from the Hunt flood gage: https://pxl.to/mystic-4d-timeline

Well said everyone. That article is full of half truth after half truth. Intentionally misleading and disgusting. It can't be trashed enough.

BBRex said:

---

Here's a story from the AP about the cabins in flood zones. I'm guessing that because the FEMA maps are more about insurance than safety, it wasn't seen as a big problem to grant exemptions?

https://apnews.com/article/texas-flood-camp-mystic-map-records-investigation-e12bee8d5f88301363861ca12c19b929

---

Doesn't the camp predate FEMA's existence (1979)? I assume that their existing buildings in the flood zone were grandfathered, and the regulations would only apply to new construction.

BBRex said:

---

Here's a story from the AP about the cabins in flood zones. I'm guessing that because the FEMA maps are more about insurance than safety, it wasn't seen as a big problem to grant exemptions?

https://apnews.com/article/texas-flood-camp-mystic-map-records-investigation-e12bee8d5f88301363861ca12c19b929

---

I'm not really what to make of this article, it definitely seems one sided. But is it implying that the camp didn't have flood insurance? Without it, where will the money come from to rebuild?

That's correct. Flood maps can and do change (and these likely will). If a new map encompasses a structure it doesn't mean it has to be torn down. You just need flood insurance if it's financed or you want insurance to cover something. That's what Mystic did. Map said they were in a flood plain. Insurance was probably going to rise quite a bit so they removed as many as they could by elevation to reduce their insurance cost. That's it. They didn't try to remove them in an effort to keep the buildings in a flood plain to avoid moving them.

roo333 said:

---

BBRex said:

---

Here's a story from the AP about the cabins in flood zones. I'm guessing that because the FEMA maps are more about insurance than safety, it wasn't seen as a big problem to grant exemptions?

https://apnews.com/article/texas-flood-camp-mystic-map-records-investigation-e12bee8d5f88301363861ca12c19b929

---

I'm not really what to make of this article, it definitely seems one sided. But is it implying that the camp didn't have flood insurance? Without it, where will the money come from to rebuild?

---

They had insurance. Which is exactly why they sought determinations to have some buildings removed.

mcsatx said:

---

I agree, that article is drawing all the wrong conclusions. I have been looking at all of the publicly available data and have put together my analysis in the links below.

In summary:
- This flood seems consistent with the FEMA 500-year flood event (0.2% annual probability).
- The buildings and cabins appear to be above the FEMA 100-year (1% annual probability) Base Flood Elevation based on LIDAR data.
- The FEMA LOMA confirms that the buildings and cabins were above the BFE.
- The 500-year flood elevation at Mystic is about 10 feet higher than the 100-year BFE.

Here is an overall analysis of the 100 vs 500 year flood, geography, rain intensity, flood gage data, topography, and the FEMA FIRM map boundaries. https://pxl.to/mystic-analysis

Here is a 4D analysis which combines the LIDAR topography with the time/flow data from the Hunt flood gage: https://pxl.to/mystic-4d-timeline

---

Thank you for this. It is exactly what I've been saying from the beginning but you've actually put it all together. I encourage everyone to read this.

I'm curious on your 500 model what depth are you showing at say Twins for example. My understanding is that those cabins are about 4 feet off the ground and the water got about 8 feet deep in the cabins. So about 12 feet of water above natural ground. It seems based on your map and Lidar you are only showing 5 to 7 feet of water at that spot. If true I'm thinking 500 year is even an underestimate.