Index Reservations Cottages RV sites Marina Rates Leases Photos Videos Maps Directions Contacts faq About Snug Harbor About the Delta Historic Delta Fishing Gas Dock and Store News To Do Restaurants
2015 to 2013 2012 2011-2009 Unanswered Questions of BDCP 2015 2009 "Don't Drain the Delta" back to receint Water Wars page Barriers in the Delta planning: MWD plans Subsurface barriers Barrier info WaterWars 2017 WaterWars 2018
dcf/Overall_Summary.pdf
Soil_Investigations_LatLong_20191218.pdf
2019 maps
Boring plan may be an indication of tunnel and other
conveyance plans:
Deliv 42DEIRv1 112119 Volume II Appendices_a_y19.pdf
Deliv 42DEIRv1 120519 Volume I508.pdf
Back in 2008 DWR developed a study of how to quickly
respond to large oil spills in the Delta waterways. I thought
it was strange since other than the Sacramento Ship channel
and San Joaquin Ship channel, and the J-Mac Ferry, there
are not such large boats in the Delta. Now it makes
sense...they were planning in 2005-2008 for the tunnel route
being disclosed in 2019. North Delta is called GRA8, and
shows detailed maps of where sorbient booms woud be
placed to stop major oil spills. Not just spills from vessels,
but also from oil and gas wells in the Delta.
It is a pdf so it should download so you can open it in a new
window. Note also that reports about oil and gas wells
and fracked wells north of the Delta seem to tie into all
of this planning. dcf/frackinganddrinkingwells.pdf
tunnel would have the capacity to take all Sacramento River flows. It will be a gravity feed system, we're told, to reduce reliance
on electricity. Even though the DCA meeting was cancelled, their website provided the following documents as a preliminary
indication of the draft documents expected to be published by the end of 2019...yes, really. A quick glance of the "sensitive receptors"
(which means humans impacted by the new tunnel plan) lists all the schools and hospitals far out of area of the possible tunnel path,
but omits the locations of most of the Delta recreational facilities, all of which would be impacted by construction traffic, noise, bad
air quality, ground vibrations, degraded water quality, etc. If the planners pretend we don't exist, does that mean the "scientists"
told to computer-analyze impacts to "sensitive receptors" won't be analyzing impacts to all of us?
The DDP stands for Delta Destruction Plan, and includes opening several bridges on the Sacramento River to allow large barges to bring in tunnel
building materials. How will that impact the already messed up traffic back up at Rio Vista when the Rio Vista bridge is in the up position?
And what about the impacts to all the marinas and docks along the Sacramento River in the Walnut Grove area-will repeated barge traffic, including
at low tides, harm the docks and boats there? This time around, DWR is acknowledging that there are MANY known gas wells in the construction
area. How many levees could fail if the tunnel digging causes a major explosion from hitting an unknown section of gas well or lines?
DWR issued documents for comment period regarding impacts
from drillingin the Delta. The problem is that some of the places they want to drill are random and have no known or disclosed reason for the drilling, other than a vague reference to planning barriers. But the DWR page about barriers references Georgiana Slough in the North Delta, not Steamboat or Sutter Sloughs. For example what is the purpose of drilling in Steamboat Slough infront of Snug Harbor
and infront of Simpson Tract? In addition, the document maps look different than the one to the left, which provides better information than the one in the ceqa document.
DWR says drilling into the drinking water aquifer won't have
any negative impacts on the people in the area. Just like drilling in 2010 on Ryer Island didn't have negative impacts?
For those of you who want to exactly locate the land and water DWR proposed borings, see the pdf below
of the gps coordinates. The proposed boring by Snug Harbor peninsula is just off the sandy beach area north
of the access road onto Snug Harbor Drive.
Map from the "revised" tunnel plan which looks like only thename changed to simply "State Water Tunnels".
Draft plan just came out, and it does not look any different than
WaterFix except there are 7 different intakes supposedly proposed,
perhaps a bit smaller intakes?
In the meantime McCormack-Williamson Tract "North Delta Improvements"
conveyance project continue the construction phase. Go to the YouTube
videos...looks a bit like how they built the Clifton Court Forebay, doesn't it?
The map from the draft state plan indicates ownership of different lands,
which appears to have changed since the last time they published ownership
data. Notice also how the Delta land area has expanded, and the flood
history, flow data, etc therefore will not jive with historical data.
Designed to confuse, hide the facts or ?
In the meantime EBMUD wants to do a Delta Tunnel for the same pipes
they just replaced a few years ago. Odd.
the Delta region....for a reason. There are so many different agencies focused on surface water and ground water,
and all the boundaries of those agencies are different. So now each one of those agencies will need to respond
to the DDP draft upcoming. (Waterfix renamed "Delta Destruction Plan").
I do not expect 2020 to be a peaceful year in California. The Bay Area woke up.
DWR-MWD-Westlands continues to plan, as reported, a single tunnel diversion of Sacramento River shed water. HOW MUCH water is diverted impacts the long term viability of the Delta and Bay area drinking water aquifer. In the meantime, more persons from NorCal are getting involved and have realized the long term impacts to the economic future of NorCal if the primary asset of water is diverted to SoCal desert farms, leaving insufficient fresh water flows for NorCal drinking water, NorCal communities, NorCal businesses and NorCal environment.
New
video on the same subject: go to
http://www.vimeo.com/bluevillage and look for "California's Delta of Change" by Leah Rogers. However note the video unfortunately used an incorrect map of the Delta waterways-it shows a DWR graphic naming the Sacramento Ship Channel as the Sacramento River, which is a misrepresentation of the actual location of the historic Sacramento River. Other than that, the video is a good basic summary of some of the primary impacts for the ongoing excessive diversion of Sacramento River watershed flows into the San Joaquin River watershed for export to SoCal. There are MANY series of maps I want to post online, so please go to 2019 discussion maps page to see the latest Water Heist Planning under then name of "flood protection" and "restoration" so the projects can scam off public funding. As always look at the FUNCTION of the proposed project, not the labels or titles of the project.
as a taxpayer funded lobby agency with the sole focus of diverting NorCal water assets to SoCal corporate
developers of golf courses and export crops. Even though the current governor has said he is against the twin tunnel
project, and ordered the DWR-WaterFix request to be withdrawn, the "joint powers" authority is still moving forward as
if the Governor and the people of NorCal have said nothing. DWR/JPA/MWD contractors have tresspassed on
private farm lands to continue to drill into the soils, and continue the pattern of destruction of NorCal groundwater
and surface water quality. JPA and DWR representatives are also scheduling meetings with different Delta persons who
are not the spokespersons for the persons impacted by the water diversions.
However, more and more NorCal communities outside of the Delta have realized the impacts to them if DWR-MWD
continues to divert so much water from NorCal. Do not trust the short blurbs from main stream media. Look into
YOUR OWN COMMUNITY groudwater impacts.
Want to know WHO to talk to about this? Link to the series will be posted here in Sept.
off the Sacramento River, or some variation of that. New governor Newsom says he favors
a 1-tunnel option but they have to go back to the drawing board and go through a new permit
process. Hopefully the water lords will think twice about planning for a project that would
destroy the Delta's legacy towns and farming families! The issue remains: HOW MUCH WATER
can be taken from the Sacramento River watershed without causing damage to NorCal
environment? They are still going to push for "water supply reliability" but lets hope this time
they base the plan on facts, not computer-generated false historical data and flows.
However, there is still alot of "restoration" work and "flood & conveyance" work going on
so click on the maps to get an idea of the projects...Frank's Tract, Lookout Slough,
SouthSac setback levees, McCormac-Williamson restoration, etc.
statement that he did not favor two tunnels. In the meantime, lots of work is being done in the
Delta that makes it appear the BDCP is still moving forward as many smaller projects.
Lots of flow into the Yolo Bypass for "restoration experiments". Moving forward with the
plans for Franks Tract to be partially "restored" with sand fill at the west side to help stop
saltwater encroachment when the fresh water is diverted to the export pumps. DWR map
indicates a new intake on Sutter Slough, Merritt Island, is already built. Expecting DWR
and USBR and MWD to come up with a "revision" which means they change the name
of the project and keep moving to drain NorCal of its fresh water. As soon as DWR
announces the new name and "new" project I will do an update to the "Name Game"
video I first made in 2009 and have updated several times. NSS
purpose of "restoration" projects. Note the title for the combination of projects being done as I
write, over in the Yolo Bypass area: "Potential for Flood Storage and Conveyance".
The FUNCTION of the combined projects is to store more water from Oroville in the
Liberty Island Reservoir area. Yes, the computer models call the large open water body
a reservoir, so why don't the planners just admit it and require it to be shown on maps consistently?
Click on each thumbnail of the maps to the left and immediately below to see what work is being
done and the logical end result: expanded storage area of flood flows. However, the restoration
of Lindsley Slough has resulted in a beautiful place to gunkhole if you have a low profile boat
to get under the bridge at the Liberty Island area. Note the huge "restoration" area that goes
all the way to including all of Suisun Marsh and Bay. New governor said he is against the twin tunnels
so watch for the plans to create a west side single conveyance route. (My guess-not official)
floating down the Sacramento River and Steamboat Slough, but not on the Mokelumne River. Odd.
So much floating junk ended up stuck at the cable of the J-Mac ferry, that the cable broke and sent the floating
debris down river. This is "restoration"?
In the meantime, the new Governor's office seems to indicate he is not in favor of two huge tunnels on the east
side of the Sacramento River (which would so negatively impact the Delta legacy towns) to divert more
export water to SoCal, but may look at less damaging options, to protect NorCal drinking water aquifer perhaps?
West side conveyance is certainly the more reasonable route, to lessen construction impacts to areas below
Hood and Clarksburg.
which has given all of us a breather for a few weeks. But they will just rename the project and find
some other way to validate taking more water from NorCal to grow grapes in the lower Central Valley,
with the California tax payers footing the bill to transport that water. Save the Delta!
hearings to certify the twin tunnels plan under the "co-equal goals" mantra when quite clearly
WaterFix is only about sending water to SoCal and lower Central Valley farmers and
frackers, leaving more environmental disasters for NorCal to grapple with.
The California water scams continue on as the Delta and and Bay Area drinking water aquifers
continue to degrade. SWRCB is charged with protecting everyone's drinking water. Lets
see what they decide on the "twin straws" plan, as one writer called the tunnels.
_Page_2.jpg)
_Page_1.jpg)
Screen print below shows the planned spending on the tunnels project...they already started spending before getting the Waterboard approval ...so all that noise from electrical work in the North Delta in February through early May? Probably shifting electrical lines to provide the power needed for running a tunnel boring machine or the intake pumps?
actions and activities related to the ongoing attempt by MWD and its flunky DWR to continue to divert excessive flows from the Delta and SF Bay area counties, leaving very low flows on Steamboat Slough in a normally high flow months:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/california_waterfix/transcripts.shtml
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/california_waterfix/change_petition_updates.shtml
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/california_waterfix/exhibits/index.shtml
http://cms.capitoltechsolutions.com/ClientData/CaliforniaWaterFix/uploads/FIX_BA_TOC_Rev.pdf
Metropolitan Water District of SoCal has voted to fund the bulk of the cost of the tunnels ... meaning SoCal rates will go up drastically if the tunnels are ever built. NorCal is finally speaking up and expressing how many ways taking that much water from the Sacramento River from the proposed locations would do unacceptable damage. Just because some water managers want more control. Like the movie Avitar but the target is the Delta water, minerals, farm lands and great places to vacation, as least for now!
DWR is already advertizing for tunnel contractors and expects to name the contractors by April 1 2018. Mr. Bernarski of MWD said that they could hire 6-7 tunnel contractors and they would build all sections of the planned tunnels all at once. The 3 intakes could be built all at once too but why wait for other things like power needed to move the water? Hence projects like what is going on right now on Grand Island where there is a major power upgrade going on gives an example of the noise levels one could expect in the areas of the intakes and tunnel pathway.
Note there is also discussion of building 2 intakes and 6,000 cfs of diversion. Bottom line: they have been taking too much water from the Sacramento River watershed and now the salmon are showing signs of serious decline in populations. There are so many documents and schenagans going on, you need to go to this side page to review some of the info if you are interested. Governor Brown and MWD of SoCal are trying to ram this plan through ... more in days to come.
In the meantime, Waterboard hearing officers and personell have been meeting on the side with the DWR computer modelers and attorneys to discuss changes to testimony and presentations, which is contrary to legal procedures according to all of the agencies and their attorneys who have filed protests about the ex parte communications against Waterboard and DWR. It is important for the viewer to recognize that DWR-Dept of Water Resources works for and on behalf of Metropolitian Water District of SoCal, and other state water contractors. DWR does not at all represent the interests of most humans living in the SF Bay area, the Delta or the Sacramento River watershed all the way up to the Oregon boarder.
News articles about what is going on:
https://www.newsreview.com/
https://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/why-save-the-delta-unknown/content?oid=24933875
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLmpVV3bq9M
Made in 2009 and still just as relevant. In 2009 DWR was proposing basically 15,000 cfs or most of the Sacramento River water to be diverted year round unless the flow was to low. Now the tentative plan that could change any time is to take 9000 cfs from three 3000 cfs screened intakes, PLUS USBR would be taking their maximum allotment. DWR documentation introducted in the phase 1 of Waterfix hearings indicates flows on the Sacramento river past the proposed intakes could be as low as 6000 cfs to be split between the 5 "Mainstem" waterways in the North Delta, basically suspending the Delta into a permanent worst-case drought flow.
Lots of past documents available at previous documents uploaded per links below, or more general and historical information can be viewed at http://www.deltaREvision.com