Snug Harbor
     
INDEX   Reservations   Cottages   RV sites   Marina   Rates   Leases  Photos   Videos
Directions . Maps . About Snug HarborStore . About the Delta . News . Historic Delta . Fishing . To Do . Restaurants
 
2020 Update on Delta Barrier Planning and the name changes
September 2020:  This page will be updated periodically.  Please start by reviewing the Barriers Timeline page and documents and the Barriers and Gates page that has many of the past planning documents and maps.  You can also review the more extensive collection of historical Delta barrier and change maps at SaveTheDelta.org 
 
     As a quick summary, Metropolitian Water District of SoCal (MWD) and the State Water Contractors (SWC) proposed the use of physical barriers within Delta waterways, to better divert all the fresh water flow of the Sacramento River into the San Joaquin River system to validate export to other areas of the state.  By 2004 the water exporter/planners started using the language of the environmentalists to get funding.  Conveyance projects were retitled "restoration".  Other conveyance projects were retitled "flood control".  And physical barriers installed in navigable waterways were retitled "emergency response" and "fish protection" actions.  Barrier planning was split into "South Delta Improvement Projet or Plan, but included some North Delta barriers.  In other words, the proposed flow barriers in the North Delta would improve fresh water quality and flow in the Central and South Delta.  But destroy fresh water quality in the West Delta and parts of the North Delta.

Again, in all cases, look at the function of any project that is proposed, and look at the bigger picture outside the Delta, so you can better understand what has been proposed...it's about money and control.
     In 2020, California Department of Water Resources (the taxpayer agency that functions as a lobbiest for MWD, WWD and the SWC, released a map series of locations they plan to do soils boring tests related to the lasted "Delta Conveyance" plan, referred to as Tunnel Plans and/or Waterfix and/or Bay Delta Conservation Plan and/or CalFed plan.  No matter what the name is, the function is the same:  divert excessive fresh water flow from the Delta, thereby permanently intentionally destroying Delta aquatic ecosystems, eliminating recreation resources of the Delta, and eliminating many native fish species as well, including all salmon species that spwan in the Sacramento witershed.  It is cheaper for SoCal water gamers and traders to take the fresh water of NorCal than to desalinate water from the ocean.  So they go after the "cheap" water, ignoring the true cost from the damage they do to the Sacramento River watershed area and all of NorCal.
     There are simple legal solutions, like prohibit the resale of any subsidized farm water.  Prohibit water transfers for future water since no one can predict water availability from year to year.  Require accurate accounting of water DIVERSIONS, using modern sensor technology, and use side scan sonor and GRP to correctly map and categorize all intakes and diversions from all California rivers, lakes, reservoirs and subsurface resevoirs.  Reader challenge:  double click on the graphic to see full size to determine how much $$ value per year is diverted from the Delta and Sacramento River watershed for use and resale by state water contractors.
      2020 BARRIER PLANNING:  The 2020 boring plan included many in-water boring locations.  The written documents for the boring planning briefly referred to boring in the waterways to determine best locations for barriers.  The barriers are supposed to be to divert fish species into preferred migration waterways.  Another reported function of the barriers is to prohibit salt water intruision into the areas of the Delta where export fresh water needs to be separated from the saltwater intruision into the West Delta due to a lack of fresh water outflow to the SF Bay.   The boring plan documents only briefly mentioned Delta barriers, but there are at least 20 in-water boring locations.  When DWR or other planners were questioned about the purpose of the in-water borings, the answer was "fish barriers", even in waterways determined to be important salmon migration pathways.   At the same time, Franks Tract planning documents from the 2012 time frame have been reintroduced as more "restoration" actions.  However, if you look at the function of the proposed Franks Tract plans of 2020, the entire project is designed to keep salt water intruision out as the Central Delta becomes a very large cluster of water storage islands.
images-2020/barriers/IS_MND_Soil_Investigations_20191119.pdf      images-2020/borings/2019drillplanDWR.pdf
      This page provides copies of the 2019-2020 planning documents, maps found in those documents, and links to other resources.  Note that the water survey locations seem to be different than the tunnel location per the map submitted to USACE in August 2020. 
 
 
FloodedIslandFeasibilityStudyBaselineReport.pdf
2003conveyanceandbarriers.pdf

InDeltaStorageandFranksTract.pdf
Franks Tract Engineering Feasibility Study.pdf
Franks Tract Locally Proposed Conceptual Design.pdf

2007USGSbarriers-psmith_presentation.pdf
images-Emergency_Drought_Barriers_2015.pdf
barriers/2014deltaflowsandbarriers.pdf
barriers/soilstests2011.pdf
barriers/Phase I Final Report.pdf
Soil investigations.pdf
     
     
     
 
     
Steamboat Slough 1906 depth  
     
     
 
   
     
borings/antidegredationanalysislaw.pdf
borings/usgs-groundwater.pdf