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  
California's latest Water Wars & news 
(You might want to view the video linked to the right for an overview of the Delta)
Lots of  past documents available at
  For more receint information go to the updated WaterWars pages
bdcp2-USACEcommentsFinal.pdf  My comments on the "Tunnel of Lies" or the false baseline data about the Delta that is being repeated
by DWR/BDCP plan drafters.  Technical and boring and refers right back to the years of false Delta data, with reference links.
his is the detail drawings of the proposed tunnel.  Note that boaters and anglers have been reporting
that it appears tunnel shafts have been "pre-built" - MWD has been spearheading the process and perhaps funding the pre-built sections,
if they exist.  Note that funding may be done using taxpayer dollars under the guise of "flood control" which is water conveyance also
but the primary purpose is to save lives and property, where the primary purpose of the proposed tunnels is to provide fresh water
for industrial uses like gas and oil production, cooling of mega-computer hubs for internet companies, and water for new housing and
commercial developments in areas of the state outside the Delta.
Documents related to NSS comments on BDCP                the many names of the same project, Timeline


Look at the proposals in comment period this month:  This is an attack on Northern California environment-and may result in privatizing water in California.  Ask WHO will own and control the water of California if this proposal is granted.  Ask WHO will be paying for the legal actions, construction, damages to NorCal environment?  Will the private parties who take control of the water pay for the damage, or will YOU, the California taxpayer?

WHO wants to take so much water from the Sacramento River such that the Delta would be suspended in a permanent Drought status and what do those private parties propose to do with that water?  WHO controls MWD and Westlands...answer that question and then ask what it does to California's future?

first response:

USACE:  impacts to waterways:

SUBMITTING COMMENTS: Written comments, referencing Public Notice SPK-2008-00861 must be submitted to the office listed below on or before October 9, 2015.
Zachary Simmons, Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District
1325 J Street, Room 1350
Sacramento, California 95814-2922

Yet another wrong map of the Delta and a perfect example of the modus operandi of the drafters of the BDCP:  The use of silence to intentionally mislead to cause harm to others:
suspend North Delta in a permanent drought flow, like it has been for almost 10 years:

9/1/2015 DWR and BOR (USBR) are asking the state and federal government agencies to grant more water rights despite the fact there is no water
In the meantime at night you can hear construction going on in several areas of the Delta, as reported by boaters gunkholing or anglers
out after evening catch.
8/11/15 waterweeds2015-2.pdf   Photos of water weeds for Delta Chambers campaign
Important meetings July 28 and 29!

DWR is trying to push through building of tunnels to divert Northern California water to lower Central Valley mega-farmers and new housing developments. 

DWR is having only 2 public meetings in all of California about the proposed revised tunnels and water diversion.  USACE decided to make the same meetings their public input dates as well:

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District has posted Public Notice SPK-2008-00861 to  Two public meetings will be held for the proposed Bay Delta Conservation Plan/California WaterFix project.  These meetings will allow the public the opportunity to provide comments to the Corps regarding project impacts under its authorities. 

SacramentoTuesday July 28, 2015, 3:00 to 7:00pm, Sheraton Grand Sacramento Hotel, Magnolia Room, 1230 J Street, Sacramento, Ca  95814

Walnut GroveWednesday, July 29, 2015, 3:00 to 7:00pm, Jean Harvie Senior and Community Center, 14273 River Road, Walnut Grove, CA  95690

This project is located in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in Sacramento, San Joaquin, Contra Costa, and Alameda Counties, California.  For additional information you may contact Mr. Zachary Simmons at our California South Regulatory Branch, 1325 J Street, Room 1350, Sacramento, California  95814-2922, email, or telephone 916-557-6746.

7/16/2015 Comments submitted regarding the Delta Wetlands Project. Note USACE email address for submission is bouncing back emails sent.
Hard copy also mailed.  usace-wetlands-comments2015.pdf

FloodSafe (somewhat) revised conservation plan is now up for comment and review.

Comments are due by September 14th, 2015. You may submit your comments to 

Stacy Cepello by email ( or by postal mail at:

Floodway Ecosystem Sustainability Branch
P. O. Box 942836
Sacramento, CA 94236-0001

July 2015 Here we go again!
The BDCP is back along with the same thing renames as waterfix and ecofix on DWR website.

Summary of the plan:  use tunnels to drain northern California surface water to export
the water to other areas of the state to be used to grow more almonds and other produce
to export to other areas of the world, and to provide more fresh water for industrial
uses like horizontal hydraulic fracturing.  The plan may help with water quality for
SoCal urban areas, but it does not provide more water for urban areas.  However,
urban rate payers all over the state will pay for it.  Plan also effectively drains
land and water use rights in the state.  Expect 30 years of intense litigation, of course
at the rate payers' expense as well.  Note "rate payer" is generally the urban person
who drinks water.
On a more positive note, the "conservation" proposals for Steamboat Slough were
dropped and since the tunnel is on the East side the impacts will not be as great
for places like Ryer Island-except that traffic could be pretty busy once they
would start to complete the building of the tunnel sections.

June 2015
Water contractors plan to turn several more Delta islands into water reservoirs:  Bacon Island,
Webb Tract, and talk about "restoration" of Boudin Island and another tract.  They have applied
for NEW water rights even though California's water is said to be over-allocated by 500%. 
Barrirs and gates are proposed to be used to divert more Sacramento River water into the Delta
reservoirs so that water will be available for resale to the highest bidder or whichever corporate
farms have the strongest political cloute.  I did a video about this severalyears ago.  The computer
modeling for the Delta Reservoirs plan was done through the Jones Tract field studies of 2004.

June 2015 DLIS or Delta Levee Investment Strategy.  Unbelievable!  The DSC is using the false data from the DRMS Phase 1 technical data...again!!  For more info on the wrong data of DRMS Phase 1, go to the 2005-2008 links found at the DRMS-Barriers Timeline

June 2015 Now DWR and USBR are proposing other gates in the Delta.  If the link to the right doesn't work, try opening the pdf below that.  Its over 600 pages of detail drawings of the proposed gates.  Three Mile Slough and Georgiana Slough are two important ones to note.  The gates are "recommended" but that does not mean they are approved yet, hopefully.

ESS-03 Management Draft_02132015.pdf
May 12, 2015
No barriers for Steamboat Slough or Sutter Slough, according to DWR.  Barrier at False River going in...

The function of the False River barrier is to keep boats and fish from getting in or out of the Franks Tract area along the popular boater access waterway.

USBR also proposes a flow and fish gate or barrier on False River.  Those two barriers combine to limit fish migration in that area, as well as block or impede boating traffic

Don't the combined actions of DWR and USBR make it appear
they are trying to CREATE a freshwater emergency, not
avoid one? 
Unanswered questions and concerns regarding the FUNCTION of the barrier combined with other actions in the Delta:
1.  According to the Delta levee maintenance engineers (RD) Water seeps through and under rock barriers.  DWR knows this.  That means saltwater could seep through and under the False River barrier, that salt water would flow into the Franks Tract area and potentially reach the fresh water export pumps.  Is DWR trying to create a freshwater emergency?
2.  Low fresh water outflow from the Delta (due to record fresh water diversions or exports from the Delta) over the last five+ years has caused a great increase in growth of water hyacynth which is bad for naitve fish and hinders boating and navigation.  DWR is currently spraying with an approved product.  Waterways being sprayed include the channels and rivers conveying fresh water to the export pumps.  Has there been any analysis of the impact to humans who will be drinking that water sprayed with ... what?
3.  The state and federal government are allowing the installation of fracking wastewater wells located in the Delta.  Within a few hundred feet of one of the main channels delivering the fresh water flow to the state export pumps, in 2014 a fracking-fluids wastewater well was put in, filled up and then apparently sealed.  That fracking wastewater well is on Staten Island, owned or managed by The Nature Conservancy.
4.  For several years DWR and the political propaganda materials told the public the levees are frail and about to fall down.  What happens if the vibrations from installing the permant metal structure or "abutment" at Bradford Island causes a levee failure?  Or the fracking going on nearby islands like Twitchel or Sherman Island causes levee failures? If you want to
understand the reason for barrier proposals
in the Delta, see the video or explore the
links from the timeline documents below:


Timeline of Delta Barriers and Gates Proposals with
links to historical maps and documents

MWD proposed barriers as early as 2003
for the sole purpose of diversion of more
Sacramento River water into the export

May 2015 Here we go again with the CalFed name game...same plan, new names NEWBDCP2015.pdf
April 15, 2015 DWR posted a notice and emails were sent around confirming that DWR has "truncated" the USACE request to install drought emergency rock barriers on Steamboat, Sutter, or Miner's Slough.  Good news but also odd given the notice just a few days ago from USACE.  In any case, comments will be submitted to USACE unless it also recognizes the removal of Steamboat Slough as a barrier site.

April 12, 2015 Other Delta people sent around notice that USACE had posted a 2-week notice for comment on DWR's proposed change location for the Steamboat Slough barrier to near Hidden Harbor, so Snug Harbor would be on the "freshwater" side of the barrier but access to Rio Vista by boat would be blocked if your boat is over 24 feet long or above their weight limit that is not clearly defined anyway.
More information and comments will be posted in the next few days.  USACE did not send me notice and I am on the email list for notice, so one wonders who did or did not receive the notice and the revised description?
April 8, 2015 On 4-8-15 I received a map and draft proposal from Mr. Holderman of the South Delta Improvements Program (SDIP) which indicates moving rock barriers to the lower end of Steamboat Slough and to Miner's Slough.  While I agree it may be better for the North Delta farmers, that statement is made with the assumption that there will still be adequate flows on the Sacramento River to assure the fresh water levels meet all North Delta water quality standards, and that the waterways would remain navigable.  However, the DWR document did NOT provide for boat portage, did NOT address the amount of freshwater and flows that would be directed into Steamboat Slough, Miners Slough and lower Sacramento River between Walnut Grove to below Viera's.  In fact, when you combine the proposal for False River barrier with the current Steamboat and Miner Slough barriers, it just takes a barrier at Three Mile Slough and one on the Sacramento River below Viera's to accomplish the "Central Delta mixing zone" which has been a target goal of SDIP.  Click on the map or pdf and consider the implications for long term ownership of California's water..  This is a MUCH bigger issue than just impacts to one small community called Snug Harbor.  And yes, there will be impacts to us here but no one knows what they will be.

April 2, 2015 Lots of farmers, environmentalists, agencies, attorneys, Delta residents and businesses put in comments objecting to the barriers or the lack of adequate CEQA and lack of assessment of the possible long term impacts from installation of proposed barriers.
this page and more info page
It appears there are over 1500 pages of comments and attachments in opposition to the proposed barriers, particularily the Steamboat and Sutter Slough barriers.  However the Governor may have different plans, we're told.  Unsigned executive order is being circulated which refers to barriers somewhere in the Delta, and for different pruposes, so whatever the governor is proposing is not known at this time.  In the meantime, we will get copies of all the comments posted at the barriers update page by about April 5th as we are busy with customers and other media work.
January & February & March 17, 2015 Dept of Water Resources has proposed to install barriers at the north end of Steamboat and Sutter Sloughs again.  They say it is due to the drought but the reality is that barriers were proposed as part of the in-Delta water storage plans from MWD in 2004
DWR Emergency_Drought_Barriers_Initial_Study

My comments regarding the proposed barriers is located here:
Attachment A  barriers/comments/AttachmentA.pdf
Attachment B:  barriers/comments/AttachmentB.pdf

Go to this page for more detailed information on comments and the links to realted background documents. 
There are many references and background documents and maps I used to develop my comments, so I created Attachments A and B to be included with the comments.  North Delta Cares Clarksburg Meeting of locals Feb 4th 2015 did not provide any new information, really.   DWR spokesperson Paul Marshall of the in-Delta water storage and DWR computer modeling divisions did a presentation for us in Clarksburg on Thursday February 12, 2015 at 6 PM.  No new information and what appeared to be intentional ommission of material facts.
Go to this page for an update added 3/17/2015
January 2015 Major levee work proposed for some waterways of the North Delta
DWR document links:
Under the FloodSafe program, very substantial levee repairs and improvements are proposed for many of the islands of the North Delta area.  There are two reapir areas proposed for Ryer Island and several for Sutter Island and Grand Island which means there may be construction going on in the Delta sometime this summer.  Fish agencies usually require that no in-the-water work start until after August 1st and end by about Nov 1st but water contractors want exemptions so they can start doing the work before August 1.
2014 Description Please see the 2012 Delta Water Wars pages for a review of just some of the documents and comments and actions related to the Delta in 2012. Misc other Delta Water Wars docs For pre-2012, go here. 
12/21/14 The BDCP issued an updated tunnel conveyance route.  The primary issue is HOW MUCH WATER IS DIVERTED and the long term impacts to Northern California environment, economy, fish and people.  The revised BDCP still proposes diverting to much water, in much the same way to much water diversion has already affected our drinking water aquifers and caused the extinction of important aquatic species There is supposed to be a new shortened EIR/EIS process in 2015, but really important long term effects to aquifers is ignored, apparently.  Any computer modeling done is also based on incorrect flow data for the Delta-a fact emerging from several sources related to pending lawsuits against several government agencies.  In the meantime to much water continues to be diverted away from Northern California bay area lands affecting the water quality of our aquifers that are not already contaminated by fracking actions.
12/9/2014 We received a notice from the Delta Protection Commission that a huge storm is headed to Northern California.  But Senator Feinstein and Boxer, and Governor Brown and much of DWR says there is a drought so they are trying to push "emergency" water transfer legislation through congress this month.
Perhaps this will be the event that triggers the in-Delta water storage Delta reservoirs at Bacon Island to start being used? 
October 2014 Even in a drought year, the USBR and DWR have sent more water down the Yolo Bypass area of the Delta and the Liberty Island Reservoir seems to be at least 20% larger.  Lower water flows in the Delta mean warmer water which encourages invasive aquatic weeds groth.  more info DWR and media are pretty silent about the status of the BDCP.  It is supposed to get revised and there will be additional opportunity for public comment.  The plans have not changed since the "Delta Vision" documents of 2007 which were developed with the strong influence of MWD and Westside Water District of the lower Central Valley starting 2004 or earlier.  Or is another name change coming?  See the timeline below:
August 2014 Warm during the day, so plan to be in the water, which is also warmer than we've ever seen it.  We have lots of water here for boating and family fun but no salmon have been caught yet.  Water is to warm for salmon to migrate through this waterway at this time. 1998 to 2014 timeline helps to make sense of what has been going on here in the Delta, and for whose benefit:
July 2014 BDCP is in final comment period.  Note that the decisions were made behind closed doors from 2000 to 2004 and much of the "restoration" and conveyance sections are already built or in process.  Public comment is supposed to be an opportunity for the impacted parties and the public to have meaningful input.  How can there be meaningful input when the decisions were made long ago?  I was not going to comment, as the whole document said to be over 40,000 is full of fabricated science and revised history of the Delta.  A book and generation of lawsuits worth, not a simple comment on a plan that was determined long ago.

Remember, it does not matter HOW they take the water as much as how MUCH water they take, and from WHERE.  Quite literally, the conveyance plan drains the NORTH DELTA of its fresh water flow from the Sacramento River.  The farmers will use in-island canals and their wality quality will suffer greatly-but they weill survive or sell out to the oil & gas companies fracking the Delta.
BDCP documents:
BDCP how to make a comment instructions:
Mail to BDCP Comments,  Ryan Wulff, National Marine Fisheries Service
650 Capitol Mall, Suite 5-100, Sacramento, CA 95814
6/7/14 DWR has confirmed the "Delta Barriers" proposal is not going to happen this year but they are still moving forward with the process in case barriers are needed in the future.  DWR promised many people in the Delta there would be a public meeting when/if they decide to go forward with barriers.  No meeting by DWR or USBR has happened yet.  USACE plans to do some "restoration" work at Big Break and Franks Tract maybe even starting this year.  In the meantime, the comment period for the BDCP has been extended again. 
Go to this page for more on Steamboat Slough-no hinderance to boating despite what some media might say!
6/8/14 update:  DWR/USBR did not disclose that in-water berm or barrier crossing Steamboat Slough east of the Steamboat Slough bridge was already installed sometime in the past.  Using HD sonar with video, the location of what appears to be two barriers or berms with a very deep hole inbetween can be seen.  Hole or deep rut is under the Steamboat Slough bridge.  Go to this page to see photos of the sonar/fish screen and for links to the 3 short videos explaining what was found and where.  Why didn't DWR/USBR disclose the existence of this already-existing barrier to normal flow into Steamboat Slough?  Was the barrier put in to manipulate the outcome of the salmon migration pathway studies and the DSM2 flow studies?  Who authorized the work to be done, when, and what is causing the 35 foot deep large hole or rut under the bridge?
5/29/14 Unaccounted for water flows and exports-updates Who got that diverted water, where and why?
5/21/2014 Silence of the main stream media... Congress passed a water infrastructure bill yesterday that includes at least $12 billion for California.  Still needs senate approval and signing by the President but some DC people say it could be done before June 1st.  yet Brown, Feinstein etc are so quiet about this victory for the water heist group!  Sad, sad days for the Delta and northern California aquifers.  As more water is exported to the south, the NorCal aquifers will not be replenished, sea water will encroach and residential wells will run dry or sour.  Yet you will not hear main stream media or the politicians that are supposed to protect this area say anything about the long term effects.
May 2014
Comments due no later than June 12 2014

We are in the comment period of the BDCP.  People seem to think it is important to comment on the 40,000 + pages of the conveyance and "conservation" plans.  Since so many of the "proposed" actions are already built or under construction, one needs to wonder why making comments is important-one reason might be to preserve legal rights but another may be to let the scientists and politicians doing an "independent" review understand that so much of what is written appears to be a done deal despite the short term, long term and permanent damage to Northern California aquifers.  People have been asking me about my research and comments still to be submitted, so follow the links to some of the draft written comments and videos to explain my comments.  My focus has been the baselines used for BDCP computer modeling NSS comments on the BDCP and links to videos explaining comments, posted at the request of others in the Delta also reviewing BDCP data

1998 to 2014 timeline helps to make sense of what has been going on here in the Delta, and for who:

Remember, it does not matter HOW they take the water as much as how MUCH water they take, and from WHERE.  Quite literally, the conveyance plan drains the NORTH DELTA of its fresh water flow from the Sacramento River.
BDCP documents:
BDCP how to make a comment instructions:
Mail to BDCP Comments,  Ryan Wulff, National Marine Fisheries Service
650 Capitol Mall, Suite 5-100, Sacramento, CA 95814

5/2/14 DWR announced on 4/18/14 that they will not try to install barriers accross Steamboat and Sutter Sloughs this summer, but "may" install them if needed during the winter.  Thanks to the anglers, boating associations and farming community, DWR seems to have heard loud and clear some of the original Delta waterways are still cherished by more than just the locals.  Spring rains also helped to reduce the "emergency" need.  Please note barriers were proposed by MWD as part of their plan to divert Sacramento River fresh water to the export pumps.  The barriers split the Delta east and west.  Fresh water and brackish water sides. 
Go to
this page for an update and comments added 4/20/14, regarding the proposed barriers for Steamboat and Sutter Sloughs, which could have lasting negative impact on the water quality of this area of the North Delta. 

Note that there is already an in-water berm on the Sacramento River which directs some of the natural fow of the water away from Steamboat Slough and down towards Georgiana Slough.  It is not yet known when the in-water 8 to 10 foot high berm was added, which reduces flow on Steamboat Slough, but most likely it was added to affect both the direction of freshwater outflow and the outcome of the salmon migration pathway studies.
Note also that there are MANY new fracking wells in the Yolo Bypass areas and one of the byproducts of fracked wells is BRINE water-super salty!  So is
the proposed increase in salinity due to fracking or saltwater encroachment or both?  See Fracking timeline below (March links)
USACE posted their report and proposal for flood protection and Steamboat Slough, Sutter, Ryer and Grand Islands are targets....again.  However, get through the different pages and descriptions and it appears that, for now at least, for USACE at least, modifications to Steamboat Slough and Ryer Island are NOT cost effective.  The study says the Big Break/Franks Tract area will be the focus of their brand of "restoration" or their "tentatively selected plan".  No changes to Sutter or Grand Island at this time, either, per USACE plans.  How all this fits with DWR plans of the BDCP and/or barriers is not yet understood.
 Details here

Important! Links and timing for the different agencies with proposals affecting the Delta which interested persons should be aware of...April is a huge month
for public comments due.....  go here


Updates: 4/15/14
DWR still planning to move forward with barrier proposal USACE gave public notice yesterday.

March 12, 16 2014

updated 3/23/14
Updated 3/28/2014
 Go to this page for an update and comments added 4/8/14, and to see more maps, documents and reports showing how MWD in 2004 or earlier planned for barriers in 8 locations in the Delta to create the MWD "Emergency Freshwater Pathway".  DWR says the barriers will "protect Delta water quality" when actually they mean water quality for central and South Delta water exports.  Looks at DRMS Phase 2 "armored aquaduct" proposal for an idea of what is going on in the Delta.  Walter quality in the North Delta on the west side will suffer from salinity encroachment.  Computer modeling from related DWR projects indicates salinity levels will go from 200 or less EC to over 800 EC by the end of July-if their computer raw data imput was correct.  Since the water depth for the affected waterways is different from the data referenced in the DWR documents, most likely any report DWR would provide could not be accurate as water depth affects flow rates and volume and also water temperature which changes the EC estimates.  DWR says the barriers are proposed for the "drought" emergency ignoring the fact we've had good rain since they proposed the barriers in February 2014.  DWR proposes barrier installation by May 1, 2014 at Franks Tract area and by June 1 for Sutter and Steamboat Sloughs.  Barriers on Steamboat and Sutter Sloughs would be removed by November 2014, they say.  See Barriers Timeline
March 2014 You might ask what "fracking" has to do with the Delta Water Wars?  If you look at the timeline of when horizontal fracking was invented (1998) and who has been buying up Delta lands for natural gas exploration most of the proposals for "restoration" areas begin to make more sense.  Click on the map to the right to see the correlation between the areas where there are natural gas reserves accessible by new-technology fracking, and the proposed BDCP "restoration" sites

Click on the pdfs to see more details of which gas exploration companies have been putting in wells where.  It takes fresh water to frack and to produce gasoline from oil.  Fracking industry contractors admit that part of the overall process of fracking has created incidents of "induced seismic events" meaning earthquakes.  Now it makes a bit more sense that people have been predicting an earthquake in the Delta that has never happened before-those people were aware of the negative impacts of fracking, apparently!

updated 2/26/2014
UPDATED 3/27/2014.  I noticed that DWR corrected the data that I challenged that showed how little fresh water flow was in the Delta.  Nice to know someone from DWR is listening and actually making an attempt to correct wrong data distributed by DWR online.  Here is the link to the comparison of the first chart of Delta outflow over the years and the 3/19/14 DWR revised chart, in pdf: unaccountedwater-update.pdf
same comparison in jpg-click to enlarge:  

Perhaps the really low tides we are experiencing in the Delta is not just a result of it being a very dry winter, but also because the people who manage the water flows on the rivers simply can not count!  Also note that there is a big difference between water quality for drinking, and the proposed "X2" measurement for fish.  Please see the poster to the left which is a summary of a very detailed review of water exports claimed by DWR, which showed there is unaccounted for water exports from 2006 to 2010.  The second poster looks at computer modeling of salinity impacts on Steamboat Slough under BDCP actions.
Who got that diverted water, where and why?

2/28/2014:  A DWR water engineer got back to me with the acknowledgement that the Delta inflow and outflow summary table in the 2013 Water Plan happens to be WRONG.  Apparently someone in DWR posted the incorrect table, that has been there online and still is as of 3/18/14, providing the public with the wrong information.  That's really the point, isn't it?  DWR and its henchmen provide false data to the public to divert attention away from the fact Northern California fresh water and aquifers are being drained to provide water for ...


February 2014 As the state faces a drought year at the same time as proposals are in public comment that would divert even more Sacramento River water to other areas of the state, it is helpful to review a short timeline and graphics to understand what is going on.  Comments on effects of the BDCP will be added or linked as available.  In the meantime, if you want to understand what is going, basically a few huge corporate farming families from Kern and Tulare County, and MWD from Los Angeles area, was to have the righ to take more, much more, water away from the Delta, leaving just enough as necessary to hopefully save native fish species from extinction.  While everyone is complaining and criticizing...they are building block by block, small project by small project to reach the goal no matter what is best for all of California, and irregardless of individual land and water rights.  Welcome to the story of thw water bullies of the 21st century who are hiding behind the saladbar scientists of the 21st century!
1998 to 2014 timeline helps to make sense of what has been going on here in the Delta, and for who:

Comment on the California Water Plan:  Where tunnels make sense
Comment on the BDCP, incorporated into the California Water Plan:  Suggestions for long term solutions
Comment on the BDCP:  BDCP uses a fabricated baseline history from SFEI, et al.
Comment on the BDCP:  BDCP uses changing or confusing waterflow baseline
Comment on the BDCP and California Water Plan:  Unaccounted for Water
Comment on the BDCP:  Impacts to transportation
Comment on the BDCP:  Impacts to navigation-restoration sites
Comment on the BDCP:  Impacts to local wells and septic system
Comment on the BDCP:  Using false baselines of flood and seismic risk
Comment on the BDCP:  Impacts of salinity on the North Delta original waterways
Comment on the BDCP:  The Big Picture:  MWD goals for California Water
  The purpose of this page is to provide links and information regarding the latest rounds of the California water wars, from the perspective of the Delta, with a Steamboat Slough and North Delta region focus. 

The WHOLE Delta is important, of course, and what happens in or for the South Delta region does affect the North Delta and the whole state for that matter.  Bottom line issue:  The Sacramento River has good, fresh water and Southern California, Central Valley farmers south of the Delta, and San Francisco Bay area developers want that water.  Its not just about the fish, contrary to what the news medial and politicians want us all to believe! 

Scroll down this page for summary information on the documents and plans that are proposed.   For much more documentation on this subject, we suggest you take a look at    

For general Delta history go to               
or links to the Delta's role in the water wars: deltahistory
How much water is available and who wants new water rights?  Click on each of the 3 page copies below for the summary answers:  (i.e. California Department of Water Resources has made promises to deliver up to 500% more water than what is receive in rain each year!)
   THE ISSUE:   In summary, water agencies from south of the Delta want to export more water, leaving not enough fresh water in the NorCal area to allow for native fish, Delta farms, NorCal people, or NorCal aquifers to not be degraded or eliminated.  Much of the proposed additional water export will be subsidized by YOU the California water drinker, (rate payer) so that a few huge corporate farmers in Tulare and Kern Counties areas can get water to grow products 80% of which is exported to other areas of the world. The corporate farmers also make profit reselling the subsidized water to cities like San Bernardino for more housing and resort development.  YOU pay to transport the water, The Corporate Agribusiness gets the profit.  Oh, and they need the water for fracking, or horizontally drilling for oil in various parts of the state which can cross-contaminate drinking water aquifers and potentially cause earthquakes, but the EPA is allowing it to happen here without regulation.  California is slowly creating milktoast regulations.  YOU will be paying for that fracking water too while THEY make the profits and potentially cause great harm to Northern California's aquifer.
December 9 2013 It's about the water, control of the Delta lands and access to the mineral wealth below those farmlands.

Today the Bay Delta Conservation Plan "public review" draft was posted online.  Today was also the last day for the public to have an oppotrunity to comment on California's Water Plan  update of 2013, a fact no one seemed to be aware of at the rally at the state capitol building to protect the San Francisco Bay and Delta.  While the maps say there will be no "restoration" actions in our area, other documents callf for the setback of the levees along Steamboat and Sutter Sloughs, much like what is happening on the west side of the Sacramento River below the connection with the Deep Water Ship Channel.  There is also talk about continuing the imbedding of "large woody debris" into Delta channels-NOAA used to call those hazzards to navigation but apparently someone convinced them otherwise.  The bottom line is that most of the Sacramento River water is proposed to be diverted into the San Joaquin River system to be exported to the south, leaving the Delta in a suspended "dought" water level status.  This could negatively impact all of the aquifers of the Bay and Delta area over time.

Click on the graphic below to see an easy explaination of why water contractors to the south want Sacramento River water...less salinity means less processing costs which results in greater profits.  Folsom South Canal extension puts Sacramento River watershed flows into the San Joaquin watershed for export to the south, bypassing the Delta.  Note the map showing flow of the San Joaquin which historically used to flow to the north to the SF Bay and Delta, but in the map it is apparently proposed to flow always south.

Unique protest sign:  can you decipher the "doge" language?

comment to DSC comments/dsc12-19-13.pdf
Links if you care to look:

38,000 pages, estimated

20,000 pages, estimated when including attachments and study references Delta Plan

Already approved & under construction water conveyance actions to divert Sacramento River watershed flows into the San Joaquin watershed to allow additional exports:

California Water Plan update:  4 or 5 huge volumes-haven't counted pages yet

December 2013 The volume of documents and reports, meetings and proposed changes to how California "reoperates" its natural resources is the topic of the month and years to come.  I created a list of links so those who want to see a timeline of what has been going on might be able to learn quickly.  Printable pdf: deltahistory New web page with timeline links related to the Delta and California's
current water wars.

Click HERE for a summary and links for the documents and planning processes happening in 2013
November 2013 Food for thought.  As Melinda T from the NDWA said "Garbage in, Garbage out".  The
Delta Names map is only a draft, but you can see at the gist of how many different names have been used for the Delta waterways and islands in the last 15 years of planning for the curren water heist.

Octomer 2013       1.  We are in the comment period for the "SCARF" project which statedly will impact Delta waterways.  Map below of impacted area, and here's the link to the notice since it is hard to find online right now:  SCARF DEIR_NOA_signed.pdf 
In fact, full access to all documents is being denied to the public via a password requirement.  Here's some screen shots of what I found when trying to access the info:  deltastuff/scarf2013.pdf.   Access to the BDCP EIREIS full site is also blocked by password.  So much for "transparency"!.  I emailed to reuest a password for access but so far I have received no response while other people interested in the Delta have gotten emails back explaining why they can't have access
        2.  I found a link to one of the state webpages that listed restoration projects by region.  To the right are spreadsheets in PDF so you can look up the projects and who or what contractor, agency or nonprofit got funding to to the project.  So far about $800,000,000 as been funded and/or expended...and this is the RESTORATION work !   All of the "conveyance" portion of the work is not listed on the website.  However, some of the projects listed have the words "restoration" in their name but were part of the CALFED conveyance projects.  Look at the FUNCTION of the project, not the name.  Does the project divert water into a watershed, canal, tunnel or waterway that it does not naturally flow to?  That is a diversion project.  The REASON for the diversion is a different issue.  Public notice about San Joaquin River restoration project that might effect Delta waterways according to the project description:

CALFED ERP Expenditures that show online as of 10/7/2013  SCARF NOTICE
since the water districts who have been taking the SJ water over the last 100+
years are not expected to give up their water uses, ask WHERE water for those
SJ farmers will come from ... 

Other related links:

See regional spreadsheets for program titles and costs.





San Joaquin




SF Bay




deltaerpprojects.pdf  sac_erp_projects.pdf  SJerpprojects.pdf
Sept-Oct Misc documents

2013waterplan.pdf *** Notice the new water conveyance structures


August 30, 2013      The Delta Plan, which is more of a plan to get more consistent and permanent water rights to other areas of the state while experimenting with adaptive "restoration" projects, is supposed to go into effect 9/1/2013.  Media outlets seem to criticize it because it has gaps but the wording says they can incorportate the BDCP under certain circumstances.

      Impact to those who live, work or play along Steamboat Slough is STILL not clearly stated, or impacts here are flatly ignored along with impacts to the rest of the Delta.  For example, we hear flow on Steamboat Slough would be lower, and unidirectional.  Which direction?  If there will be reverse flows on Georgiana Slough, logic says the same for Steamboat Slough, which means we would not get freshwater outflow but only brackish inflow if the state builds tunnels that suck the Sacramento River dry north of Steamboat Slough.  Another example:  the BDCP "Economic Impact" report draft started with a false baseline for current Delta recreation benefits to the state (lowering it by more than 50%), and then made assumptions that the construction actions of builting the tunnels, setting back levees, destroying roads with heavy construction trucks, etc are unavoidable negative impacts that will not be mitigated.  As Melinda Terry put it, the state is saying "Sorry Charlie" you loose (Delta landowners, residents, anglers and boaters) so that private individuals that own private corporations can take the water to resell at huge profits to the highest bidder.  Oh, and California water users pay for the transport and infrustructure necessary.

     If you happen to have trouble falling asleep, some of these documents are real snoozers but actually quite important to the future of the Delta and Northern California as if fully implimented it shifts most of the voting power and eventually the state capital offices to the southern part of the state.  Delta Plan redefining waters.  Last page shows Steamboat Slough as still on the list of areas to consider for "setback levees".


DeltaPlan_2013_APPENDIXES_COMBINED.pdf  29 pages needed to define some of the terms used!  If you want to see what is proposed to be built as an interim plan, or the central conveyance option of the BDCP, which is just like the CALFED 2000 plan  asking questions getting no answers in Courtland August 27  take the time to listen!  the central conveyance plan
July 16, 2013       The draft chapters of the 20,000 page BDCP was reviewed by Melinda Terry of the North Delta Water Agency, who provided a 17-page summary to a group of us in the North Delta, meeting in Walnut Grove.  I also have been reviewing the BDCP and have gone to meetings and done my own research of the past historical Delta flows, and other important matters to the Delta we love.
    The two pdf links on the right can be reviewed independently, or can be viewed while listening to my slideshow/video linked to the right as well.  This update has been provided at the request of several North Delta local landowners and neighbors.  If interested in more information, there is a BDCP meeting in Sacramento on 7/17/2013  info at
 video link    
 see the pdf:
NorthDeltaImpacts-bdcp-nss.pdf and see intakes north of the Delta altready built or under construction
Intakesnorth  or  Video of NDWA meeting on impacts to North Delta which goes along with 
North Delta Impacts-updated-mt.pdf   this is the 17-page summary, with some items highlighted
June 2013 While everyone talks about BDCP and the Delta Plan here in the Delta we see the construction and destruction going on, even though the BDCP has not been approved.  The central conveyance option from CALFED 2000 ROD is being built, along with many small "restoration" projects and "flood protection" projects that add up to be very similar to the 1949 plan and the CALFED plan.  Add to the in-Delta projects the many projects North of the Delta which divert Sacramento River water before it reaches the Delta, and it appears there will not be any water left flowing in the Delta to fill those proposed tunnels 90% of the time, at best.  So perhaps tunnel talk is itself the diversion while the water conveyance projects are being built? For a look at a series of wrong maps of the Delta generated by government agencies or their contractors and other online mapping websites in the last 10 years, go to: which is just one of many themed "wrong maps of the Delta" series.    Screen print to the right is one we found...what happened to the other Delta waterways and about 75% of the Delta marinas?
See our own summary at  Chronicles of Delta Access and the June 2013 addition: noaamarinas-timeline.pdf
June 2013 Here is a map series of the various CALFED alternatives which very closely resemble the BDCP alternatives, which also closely resemble the CALWATER proposals which go back to the 1945 to 1965 conveyance plans for diverting Sacramento River water to the south.  Sections of the CALFED 2000 record of decision "preferred alternative", modified, are being built now as regional "restoration", "flood control" and "conveyance" projects.  Take a ride around the Delta and you will see what we mean. delta_reoperation.pdf
  mercuryinfish2013.pdf   SacBee and other online media have reported that Delta sport fish have high levels of mercury.  They have been studying that issue for many years now.  What I find quite odd is that  in previous studies (2005 and before) the Yolo Bypass was a huge source of mercury perhaps due to the flood runoff from the foothills where the mines were located that either mined mercury or used it for gold processing.  So why does the latest report IGNORE the existence of the Yolo Bypass or the previous study results?  Is it because the state and federal fish agencies are currently conducting studies to show how salmon grow bigger in the Yolo Bypass, and they don't want the public to ask what are the mercury levels in those sample fish?  If the state does not sample the fish in the Yolo Bypass and does not report on the fish in the Yolo Bypass, what does that tell you?
June 2013
Update 6/19:  No surprise, lots of groups are filing lawsuits against the state and Delta Stewardship Council's Delta Plan.  I personall think it is a bit odd that some of the lawsuits are against the BDCP which is not "approved" yet, even though many elements of the BDCP are under construction anyway.

Bay Delta Conservation Plan summary of conveyance alternatives and costs.  The "central conveyance" portion of "dual conveyance" is already under construction so the question is...what is the OTHER conveyance route?  Option A utilizes Ryer Island which of course greatly impacts our area of the Delta during construction time.  But all the options have neagive impacts for all of the Delta and shifts Sacramento watershed flows to San Joaquin and on south flows.

May 2013
/bdcp-maps2013.pdf is a group of maps found in the current drafts of the
Delta Plan and draft BDCP, and the agencies referenced in the plans.  Maps tell a story....  another "locals" plan is also in the works: wdic-compared.pdf
Go to the USACE Sacramento District website to find the huge planning files for various portions of the levee revisions related to the Delta Plan. 

  please click on the letter and review.  Consider sending
WRITTEN comments to the Delta Stewardship Council with copies to everyone you
can think of!

Delta Plan:  Delta Stewardship Council approved the "Delta Plan" May 16-17.

CouncilAdoptsfinalDeltaPlan.pdf  Interesting how the largest "plumbing" project in California history is pretty much on the back pages of Northern California newspapers.  Interesting quote from the Napa Valley Register, May 17, 2013, page A6, quoting Jonas Minton:  "Most troubling, Minton said, is the lack of standards for how much water the delta needs to be a healthy estuary.  Another problem is the reliance on the unfinished twin tunnel project for both restoring water supply reliability and habitat."    Hmmm  "unfinished twin tunnel project"?

 Expect to see "near term" construction projects in the Delta which are all part of the overall plans to revise the Delta.  For example, setback levees on the west side of the Sacramento River are already under construction and approved for more work by USACE.
Delta Plan links: Http://
Rule making: neighborlettermay2013.pdf  delta_reference_maps.pdf     delta-wrongmaps.pdf

BDCP  (Bay Delta Conservation Plan)  DWR   Website links:
BDCP document links:

USACE:  Report on California Flood history and protection and actions for the future:   Http://  
Website links:
Comment period: Until Monday May 20, 2013 at 5 PMemail comments to:  use form at


April 2013 Many, many important meetings this month.  BDCP has released more of the planning documents which seem to cover restoration work ALREADY DONE.  Not mention of the many different new water intakes (fish screens) located North of the Delta that are also ALREADY COMPLETED.  And there is a request to do worn on central delta islands to be used for in-delta water reservoirs, but if you fly over those islands, it appears the levee improvements are ALREADY DONE.  Wonder if all the noise and trucks on Ryer Island in winter 2011 was for a tunnel shaft or similar project?  In any case, the public is invited to provide comments on the BDCP documents (or the thousands of pages that have been released so far) and the Restore the Delta foundation is gathering Delta supporters to protest in Sacramento on 4/4/2013.  In the meantime, Snug Harbor is helping host a group of youthful photographers and pros from National Geographic while they spend a few days touring the Delta by boat and vehicles.
Recovery_Plan_for_Central_Valley_Salmon_and_Steelhead.pdf  summary

ModifiedRegulationApril2013.pdf  DSC plans  (setback levee map at the end)

3-31-2013 USBR plans to inundate the Yolo Bypass for fish experiments.
3-29-2013 Using Delta Islands as reservoirs...the Delta Wetlands Project and In-Delta storage issues.  The owners of Bacon Island and Webb Tract are asking for NEW or increased water rights, to divert Sacramento River water into the Mokelumne River and Central Delta during "wet" years if there is enough water.  However, based on a very detailed accounting of all the other water rights claimed, the Sacramento River does not have the flow capacity to fill the proposed reservoir islands.  So who's water will be taken to fullfill the request and who will pay for the damage to mitigate the effects of the water diversion?

Comments submitted to USACE today:


  Photos show work already being done in anticipation of approval of use of Bacon Island for a reservoir, no doubt
Proposal to use Bacon Island for in-delta storage moves forward:   Notice in Federal Register
Website about the plans:   the "Delta Wetlands Project" moving forward
In comment period now

See video about project
PDF of in-delta research
March 2013

The "Substitute Environmental Document" or "SED" was posted online and is in the comment period.  Notice how the media does not really refer to this...but its the BDCP for the South Delta which will be the reason or validation for more water exported from the North Delta...

And the flooding of Bacon Island and Webb Tract for in-delta water storage is proposed to move forward which moves MORE water flow to the South eventually.
Some of the (almost) final documents or proposals for the BDCP were released for review on 3/14/2013.  Go to for all the documents.  I made screen prints of a few of the maps that reflect proposed actions in the North Delta and around Steamboat Slough.  See BDCP maps 2013

Proposal to use Bacon Island for in-delta storage moves forward:   Notice in Federal Register
Website about the plans:   the "Delta Wetlands Project" moving forward
In comment period now
Here is my question series-questions that have been asked several times and never answered by DWR:

See video about project
PDF of in-delta research

The "SED" instead of the BDCP for the South Delta  which will take more Sacramento River away from the North Delta if approved as written.  In comment period now.
3/4/2013 Doing a bit of research on the effect on mean high and low tide since DWR and other government agencies have been "managing" the Delta water flows to create much more exasperated high and low tides.  Looking back at Steamboat Slough, Sacramento River, Sutter Slough and Cache Slough flows in January 2006, I found that the online data provided by USGS website had changed and/or data was missing.  I made a request under the Freedom of Information Act, and the USGS public officer claimed ....   well read her response and form your own opinion........usgs-steamboatflows.pdf
Examples of flow data USGS showed online in the past that the USGS public information officer says was never collected because the monitoring station was flooded.  So are the charts above based on fabricated information or did the USGS public information officer make an unsupportable claim to limit data access?
1/27/2013 images-2013/deltastuff/DISB_Burau_ISB_brief_2013_02_14.pdf
Proposal by another USGS "scientist" that could affect flows on Steamboat and Sutter Sloughs.  I checked around with neighbors-this is a new one to all of us!

In the meantime, the state now wants to revise the definition of mean high tide.  Since the water managers have been creating artificially highr tides during the "pulse" flows, it seems this would raise the meain high tide line statistically, which results in conversion of private lands to state lands along the rivers and streams affected, potentially.
2/19/2013 USACE held a "meeting" in Clarksburg.  I went there.  Not sure what the propose of the meeting was, but at least there were several people from USACE who are the "responsible" representatives conducting the a study on the Delta levees and islands.  Since the USACE website says they will be utilizing DRMS Phase 1 data, I brought with me proof of the incorrect data regarding Ryer Island and other mistakes of the DRMS Phase 1 report.  Also pointed out that as of the end of 2012 DWR still had not issued an "errata sheet" acknowledging the changes and corrections for the DRMS Phase 1 "Final" and the revised version.
images-2013/deltastuff/The Bacon Island-draft.pdf

I am simply asking that the state and federal agencies use verifiable FACTS that can be proven, not fabricated and revised Delta history which has been used to revise flood flows, ecological assumptions and more.

Maps to the left are from reports and studies that are ongoing.

Misc reports from the past that will impact 2013 decisions:
2/8/2013 NSS comments submitted to the Delta Conservancy regarding their request for suggestions for promotion of the Delta.  I added a bit of historical perspective from the last 10+ years of Delta promotion.  In the meantime, take a look at the official CA map for 2013 by clicking on the map to the left    deltapromotioncomments.pdf
1/11/2013 NSS submitted comments on the Delta Plan, along with supporting documents Go to Delta Plan Comments
updated 1/6/2013
     The California state Conservation office had a telephone meeting to let concerned citizens call in to ask questions about Fracking regulations in California...there are NO regulations right now in place.  Here's a description of Fracking.  I find it really odd that the state has been so concerned about the "risk" of levee failures in the Delta, yet the state allows fracking operations to be conducted without regulations in highly seismic areas of California.  And the people answering the questions from reporters from all major media in California and beyond said it IS possible that a "seismic event" could be triggered by the injection wells made necessary as part of the overall fracking process.

So I asked the following questions and here is a summary of the answers is to the right.  In the meantime, a documentary on the effects of fracking just came out staring Matt Damon:
: is the Youtube trailer

     So finally the latest round of water wars in California makes a bit of sense.  Cities like Woodland and Davis want to get surface water rights from the Sacramento River because they probably became aware of the fact more diversion of Sacramento River water north of the Delta & around it will result in lowering the aquifer tables in the NorCal area, and allow saltwater encroachment into bay area freshwater aquifers.  In addition, the fracking operations that are allowed to happen in California with NO oversite could result in contamination of both public and private wells.  DWR decided in 2000 to make all well owners that "serve the public" have to greatly increase reporting and testing of the wells.  The huge industry of well management was created overnight and from what I can tell there is no purpose for the reporting except for the state to make to track possible contaminants from fracking operations.  At the very least shoudn't the fracking companies pay for the costs of testing the wells monthly?
Q:  "When a seismic event happens which is caused or suspected to be caused by fracking operations, how many billions in Bond or insurance is the state rquiring the operator(s) to carry to compensate California taxpayers from loss?"

The answer: none.
Q:  I then said that Delta water conveyance, or the cost of exporting Delta water to the south, is subsidized by California taxpayers. Will francking use subsidized water?

The Answer: there are no regulations proposed for what water will be used. The operators will get water where ever they can in the area they are fracking.
     The state charges us marinas a lease fee to let docks and boats float on the water, and we have to be bonded and insurred. Our operations will not bring on a seismic event. So why doesn't the state require bonding and insurance for fracking actions that COULD cause "the big one" DRMS and USGS predicts will happen? 
     Farmers and sewage disposal companies are very closely regulated regarding the quality of the water that is allowed to be "injected" into the waterways.  I would assume this applies to surface water injections as well as injections into wells to put the water into the aquifer system for natural filtration.  And only NOW the state is talking about creating regulations to monitor those residue injection wells?!  Grand scale hydraulic mining was outlawed in California in the 1880's, more than 140 years ago!  The state is STILL dealing with the environmental damage from the gold, silver and mercury mines that used hydraulic methods for mining when California was first a state.  Why arn't those laws being applied to protect California?

Please see the 2012 Delta Water Wars pages for a review of just some of the documents and comments and actions related to the Delta in 2012.

For pre-2012, go here. 
  There are sooooo many different agencies and reports about the Delta this year, this section is now divided into several pages, so the page will upload easier.  Please go to California Delta Water Wars Page 2 for more improtant information!