Snug Harbor
Index   Reservations   Cottages   RV sites   Marina   Rates   Leases  Photos   Videos  Maps  Directions   Contacts  About Snug Harbor   About the Delta   Historic Delta   Fishing   News  
To Do   Restaurants
2016 Update of the BDCP
DWR and USBR have released the "final" version of the BDCP, which includes tunnels and other conveyance measures to "conserve" Northern Califoria fresh water so that it can be diverted to other areas of the state.  Water is proposed to be used for residential, industrial and irrigation uses in other areas, despite the clear proof of over 20 years of damage to NorCal environment from excessive exports.  And they want to continue to take to much water?  Here's the link: 

http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/FinalEIREIS/FinalEIR-EIS_VolumeI.aspx

The problem is that the whole plan is based upon false and/or outdated baseline data, which has been repeatedly pointed out to the managing agencies who respond with "Well, its the best available science we have right now".  They ignore the fact the baseline data was developed by the people who want to take the water.  The same people who refuse to provide to the public accurate and firm evidence of actual flows and diversions from the Delta since 2005.  The maps below explain some of the issues and the current version of the plan to drain the Delta: (click or double-click on each map for larger version)

  
The two maps above come from the BDCP.  Note that despite DWR/USBR saying only 3 intakes would be built, there are 5 potential locations on the map.  The written documentation says only a few privately-owned recreation facilities will be impacted, New Hope Landing area being one of them.  New BDCP and also the Prospect Island EIR/EIS documentation give specific numbers for the flows that will continue on Miner Slough and Sutter Slough.  Computer Modeling chart provided by DWR in the WaterFix hearing process also provides the minimum flows expected for each of the North Delta rivers & sloughs so that is a positive this for us here on Steamboat Slough, if DWR is telling the truth, and if the computer models are accurate.  In any case, there is clear intent by SWRCB that surface water in the North Delta must be maintained to drinking water standards.  (See Prospect Island info below).  The map on the right shows the "restoration" areas but it is not clear where the funding for this comes from.  However, the federal government did just fund over $10 billion for California water infrastructure and flood control.  "Flood Control" means capture of rain water and river flows to use the water for other purposes, while also protecting select locations.
   
The map on the left below is from the BDCP, but since DWR/USBR did not disclose the new intakes and revised "perimiter conveyance" tunnels and canals that divert Sacramento River water BEFORE it reaches the North Delta, I added in the estimated location or ther perimiter route.  The map next to it shows the plans from 1945 which were not actually fully built until 10+ years ago...and now we are seeing the negative impacts on the native salmon species of California, and on the drinking water aquifers of the whole lower Central Valley basin.  DWR/USBR has suspended NorCal in a permanent drought flow status, and the tunnels would make it worse.  Note that in the last 10 years new intakes in the Delta and north of the Delta have also reduced flows in the Delta, resulting in summer water temperatures to high for migrating salmon, and resulting in huge amounts of invasive water weeds, particularily in the west and south Delta areas.
 
 
WHO wants to take the water and divert it?  (see below from the MWD of SoCal meeting) Clearly the water contractors of Southern California are the vast majority, but a few SF Bay area communities are also supporting the tunnels.  Isn't it ironic that right now the Livermore area has applied for a groundwater exemption so that the oil and gas companies can frack in that area, but they are also asking for more water from the Delta.   Bay area residents need to speak up and go to their county supervisors and express concern about this issue, and the plan for fracking in the Livermore area too!
  
Just as a reminder, below are past graphics developed by MWD of SoCal.  Look familiar?  Here are the names of the same plan:  1945-1965 Delta Cross Channel;  1978-1982 Pherpheral Canal; 1998-2006 Calfed Preferred Alternative Plan; 2006-2008 various portions of the plan names Delta Vision, DRMS Phase 2, and Bay Delta Conservation Plan. 2009-2013 BDCP, then split into WaterFix and EcoRestore, then back to BDCP by 2016.  In all cases, no matter the name, look at the FUNCTION of the project.  "Conveyance" may be labeled flood control, habitat restoration or flow modification but it is the same thing.
      
Below are screen shots from the eir/eis for Prospect Island "restoration".  Note the assurance of surface water quality.
   
Map below is another one from past planning, but I added the notations and a screen shot from sonar conducted on Steamboat Slough south of Snug Harbor, along Ryer Island approximately across from the monitoring station installed in 2015 at the Grand Island "restoration" site.  You can not see the pipes from the land on either side of the levee on Ryer Island, but they show underwater.  Where did these pipes come from and when?
 
  Just some reference maps of locations in the Delta