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
California's latest Water Wars & news
(You might want to view the video linked to the right for an overview of the Delta)
Made in 2009 and still just as relevant
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
1/30/17 & 2/25/17 &3/25/17
People keep asking me for updates on the BDCP renamed WaterFix and
EcoRestore. Also those in-delta water storage islands>
Well, it appears with or without sound science, and without any follow-up analysis of restoration projects that failed, DWR
and MWD are moving forward with plans. In the meantime, here is the link to exhibits from WaterFix water right hearing only,
for SHR only...lots of work and data...and the volume of evidence from others is amazing. Of course, DWR/USBR will not
leave that evidence available to the public online so the persons, businesses and organizaiotns are left to post the data
themselves. In the meantime, those businesses, persons and organizations protesting or objecting to the tunnels continue to spend
huge amounts of time and effort and $$ for attorneys to produce documents proving all the damage that could happen to Northern
California environment, homes, lands, businesses and economies if the tunnels are built. Not good, folks! Take a look at what
the US Fish and Wildlife Service says...extinction of salmon. Summary. Take a look at the evidence provided by the California Water
Network water analysist (below) For the documents submitted by Nicky on behalf of Snug Harbor Resorts, LLC Go HERE.
3/25/17: Tunnel expert says : Tunnel joints could leak in a strong earthquake in the Delta, also when first brought up to pressure
An internal document shows that DWR’s Division of Engineering knew that the proposed tunnel design could be compromised in a large earthquake in the Delta. The tunnel liner is 40 foot diameter concrete pipes bolted together with gaskets. This is not the strongest design, particularly in deep, saturated alluvial soils. A preliminary analysis, never publicly disclosed, showed that the joints could “destress” and leak in a large quake. Tom Williams, a tunnels expert, will testify that this could to lead to tunnel lining failure. So in that widely played scenario where there is a large earthquake on the Midland fault in the Delta, with 20 island failures, the tunnel lining could break into multiple pieces. If breaks happened under levees or Delta channels, it could result in catastrophic impacts on the surface.
DWR’s own engineers proposed that the option of a second steel liner be retained until the feasibility of the design was demonstrated. It was not retained. The DCE agreement shows that the design was chosen on the basis of cost and construction time. The BDCP parties are cutting corners due to cost. Because of this cost-cutting, the tunnels could be just as big a disaster as Oroville in an earthquake. DWR may have to go back and re-design the tunnels. The tunnels will either cost a lot more, or DWR will have to reduce the size and/or move the tunnel location inland to better ground.
Deirdre from California Water Network testimony:
Deirdre from California Water Network testimony:
Bureau’s 18,000 cfs permit on the Sacramento may not extend to the tunnels
a.) The original max rate of 18,000 cfs included peak tidal diversions on the Delta Cross Channel, which was up to 13,600 cfs from 2012-2016, according to CDEC.
b.) The Bureau’s 1970 report of progress on their permits stated the only thing left to construct were Sacramento Valley canals.
c.) The JPOD is for diversions from Old River, which is the San Joaquin. Doesn’t transfer to Sacramento.
News is saying that there will be lots of rain in NorCal, and that we
could see flooding in areas. I expect
to hear news that Staten Island, Bacon Island, maybe Webb Tract, Boudin and other islands will "flood"
or have levee failures. However, note those islands have been DESIGNATED as new reservoir islands,
so the plan is to fill up those islands to use for water storage. However, media might call it flood or
make it sound accidental so the politicians can use "flood protection" federal $$ for what is really a
conveyance and export plan. Here's a pdf with the history of in-delta water storage planning, and you
also can go to the following links if you want to see some of the maps showing the planned islands to be
used for water storage. Hopefully they do not add Ryer Island that list, even though in 2010 that is
what CalTrans indicated would happen.
To watch flows into the Delta, go
To watch flows into the Delta, goto the flow gages
http://cdec.water.ca.gov/stage_maps/joaquin_0hr.html flows on the San Joaquin and also East Side, Mokelumne River
SHR and basically any organization or individual who filed a protest
against the Tunnel/diversion plans,
cuttently named "Waterfix" has received notice that MWD and Westlands Water District, and their
cronies DWR object to the evidence we've all submitted. It is really amazing to me that the organization
called California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is even allowed to exist as it has so clearly FAILED
in every way to protect ALL of the people of the state of California...DWR attorneys are only looking to add
water rights to fill the pockets of the water contractors in other areas of the state. Time for Northern
California to wise up. 60 years of this battle is enough. Even though some of the persons on the board of
the SWRCB appeared to listen and seek a fair hearing, the process is fatally flawed. Why waste so much
tax payer dollar when the whole matter belongs in federal courts where there is actual written procedures
for protecting the rights of the "little farmers" and land owners of the North State against the heartless
and careless water contractors/developers of other areas of the state trying any way they can to divert
more Sacramento River for more housing, more fracking, more almonds and grapes in the dessert.
Battle just lulled.
DWR and USBR released the "final" version of the Bay Delta Conservation
Plan (BDCP) which is the same thing
they have been talking about...divert Sacramento River fresh water to other areas of the state, and ignore the
negative impacts to NorCal humans, fish, trees, animals, drinking water aquifers and so much more. (summary maps here )
Here is a page with screen prints of some of the maps, and info, and the links to the 80,000+ pages of information
that DWR/USBR provides in an effort to convince people who are not wearing blinders that it is OK to drain
the rivers of Northern California for the benefit of SoCal dessert farmers and housing developers.
The really GOOD thing about this round of the plan is that the SF Bay area community finally woke up and
are paying attention to what is being said, and what could happen to all of the Bay Area, not just the Delta.
Napa, Contra Costa, Sacramento and Alameda counties...want your drinking water wells to go dry?
See screen prints from 2016 BDCP: here
December 16, 2016 will go down in local history as the day Prez Obama
handed a fat "infrastructure" check to the
lower Central Valley farmers and SoCal developers. While some of the funds are slated for "flood control" which
is water conveyance also, it appears there is funding for tunnels or replumbing of the conveyance through the Delta.
Today DWR and USBR filed with USACE for permits to divert MORE water from the Delta in July, August and Sept
which is the WORST time for diversion for us. They had been saying they want the water during the heavy winter
flows and instead they file this?? See link below:
SHR is one of the businesses
protesting the diversion of
more Sacramento River water
from the North Delta, by
any conveyance method.
NSS list of exhibits.
12/15/16 The "impacts to water rights" portion of the hearings
ended today. I do not believe anyone with a conscience
could say legal users of water in the Delta and surrounding cities won't be harmed by the proposed "WaterFix".
DWR/USBR provided no proof that the drinking water wells of the businesses and residents of the Delta were analyzed.
They just ignored our existence and the potential impacts to all of us. Media makes it out to be "fish vs farmer" but the
truth is that it is "developers vs. NorCal humans" at this point. Oh, by the way, if you read the documents it will not use
the words "impacts to humans". We're called sensitive receptors.
DWR and USBR has applied to State Water Rights Control Board for the right to take more SACRAMENTO River water,
even though they say it is simply a "change in points of diversion". The Delta's natural and aquatic environment is ALREADY
being slowly destroyed by too much diversion of Sacramento River flows, so taking more water would simply expidite the
disaster. DWR and USBR will be blaming the extinction of smelt and coho or chinook salmon on "the drought" but in
reality they have been managing the flows of the Delta as if in a "drought" year since at least 2007. In any case, if you
want to read the documents being circulated to see what Delta families and businesses are having to deal with, go to http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/california_waterfix/exhibits/index.shtml#staff
DSC responds that the corrections will be made, and INSTEAD they make it
worse, confusing facts about
Ryer Island even more. Go here for details
|July 29, 2016||
In 2006 DWR hired URS to compile the data and do a report called DRMS
Phase 1. It was released in 2007, revised and a "final"
version was released in 2008, in March 2009 with some changes and in December 2009 with changes again. No eratta data was
provided to viewers, so scientists utilizing the baseline data do not generally recognize that they are using false data to make
decisions regarding important matters ... like how much $$ to spend on which levees. Here is a short slideshow showing the
ongoing use of the false data regarding Ryer Island: this example is from the ongoing incorrect data used by Delta Stewardship
Council in July 2016. 2ryers2016.pdf For the documents: Pages 1, map page 58, 64, 84, 128,190 , 359***, 475, 483, 495
http://deltacouncil.ca.gov/docs/delta-levees-investment-strategy-dlis-risk-analysis-methodology-report-july-2016-37mb DRMS references: 386, http://www.water.ca.gov/floodsafe/fessro/levees/drms/docs/Flood_Hazard_TM.pdf Page 1, 68 map, 92 flow stations,
http://www.water.ca.gov/floodsafe/fessro/levees/drms/docs/Risk_Report_Section_13_Final.pdf page 31, map page 47 missing other ryer, 59 frequency, 60-corrected map so show the properties,
WaterFix hearings start July 26 and on July 27 North Delta Cares begins
presenting policy letters against the tunnels or any additional
Sacramento River diversions.
Snug Harbor comment: SnugHarborPolicyStmt.pdf
Snug Harbor is also one of the listed "Protestants" in a long list of persons, groups and businesses who are against the proposed taking of Sacramento River water from the North Delta, where huge intake structures are proposed to siphon water into huge tunnels. DWR and USBR keep saying they are not asking for "more" water, just a change of location where they take the water. What has become clear in the process is that both DWR and USBR do not disclose exactly how much water is actually being DIVERTED from the Sacramento River and NorCal. They will report "deliveries" in acre feet, and flows in cubic feet per second, but try to get consistent numbers on how much water is DIVERTED to result in the DELIVERIES as well as groundwater and surface water storage. If you see a huge decline in Delta water quality, huge decline in salmon and other fish species, oaks dieing along Georgiana Slough, non-native water weeds in many waterways of the Delta, perhaps it is because DWR and USBR are turning a blind eye to the diversion of 2 million more acre feet of water than the highest levels before 2001. More later on the flow and diversion calculations.
|*** June 1, 2016 and June 11, 2016***||
DWR and USBR have released many, many documents that they will be using
as their "evidence" that taking more Sacramento River water for export
to other areas is a good idea and won't have negative impacts on NorCal.
I don't think even the people who work for DWR, who have even a sliver
of an honest bone in their body, believe the "no significant impacts" or
the veracity of the computer modeling. However, if you are
interested in seeing what is being said, here's a
link to a document provided by a government agency with links which then links to many other
documents when then refers to past documents, and the faulty computer
modeling used for BDCP, which is the same plan with a different name ....
Some of the important maps.... http://cms.capitoltechsolutions.com/ClientData/CaliforniaWaterFix/uploads/dwr_331.pdf
No amount of computer modeling can validate diverting most of the Sacramento River into export pumps headed to SoCal. Over time there will be saltwater encroachment into the Delta, and the whole San Francisco Bay aqifers. Groundwater recharge using runoff and treated water won't make up for the loss of natural rainwater penitration due to overcapture for export. Don't Drani the Delta ... of its fresh water. Diverting the fresh water and replacing it with brackish water in part of the west Delta is NOT "ecosystem restoration". It is creating a whole new saltwater ecosystem where one does not belong. And of course it will cost billions of dollars that no one will be able to track where the funds went...
In the meantime, volumes of documents have been uploaded by DWR and USBR, and many of the "protestors" have filed request for extension due to the fact the data from computer models appear to be based on the "Whatever" process perfected by the Saladbar Scientists of DSC and BDCP. If interested in some of the letters to Waterboards, here's mine but it is insignificant compared to what has been submitted by others. extensionrequest-corrected.pdf
|May 12, 2016
||DWR posted new "EcoFix" details and listed projects being done now, and projects planned for the future. The latest map (they change very often) indicates Steamboat Slough and a Section of the Sacramento River, between Walnut Grove and Clarksburg, are proposed for "channel margin enhancement" meaning planting of more trees, tules, water weeds, etc to "restore ecological function". At the same time, ongoing actions, that appear to not be working, attempt to get migrating adult salmon to use the Yolo Bypass area instead of their natural swim pathways of Steamboat Slough and Sacramento River. Interesting that DWR, USBR, MWD, USFWS would be experimenting with a salmon species that could go extinct in the next few years-is it wise to experiment during a drought? And yes, despite all of the rain of winter 2015, and spring 2016, they say we're still in a drought.... In the meantime, a "not for profit" organization that in 1998 started the CalFed ball rolling appears to entirely relocate the Delta on its maps. Is this the actual long term goal of the people who control the media who control the elected officials or non-elected decision-makers regarding California's water? And 10 years later, the false baseline data from DRMS report, which purported to assess risk and values of Delta islands, STILL ignores facts about Ryer Island.|
|March 11, 2016||Walnut Grove bridge is going to be closed or blocked for "emergency repairs" for a few days...that is a major problem for local Delta traffic. What is the "emergency" is not clear. At least we have more than a weeks' warning. Large ship with cargo was reported going up the Sacramento Ship channel with almost no lights, which could confuse some of the anglers in small fishing boats in that area. Be careful and watchfull at night when on the river!|
|March 5, 2016||FINAL 030416 CWF ruling.pdf gives the schedule for those who wish to "protest" the proposed "WaterFix" tunnels that would take even more Sacramento River water and divert it to other areas of the state, thereby draining the Delta of its fresh water resources. It appears May 10th may be an opportunity for those who object to provide a written and verbal "policy" statement to Waterboards. If you live or work in the Delta, if you are a human being who cares about natural aquatic fish species like salmon, if you own property or a business in Northern California, you might want to speak up. What is being proposed affects YOU directly over the long term.|
|January 5, 2016
DWR and USBR filed peititon to divert more water out of the Sacramento
River north of the Delta Cross Channel gates.
Many agencies, environmentalists and North Delta property owners are
protesting the water diversion request dubbed
"WaterFix" instead of "Bay Delta Conservation Plan". It is also
being referred to as "system reoperation" when one wishes to look at
water conveyance planning statewide. Much of the funding may come
from "Flood Control" designated $$. Flood control is conveyance
of water for a different purpose. So now they propose more exports
from the Sacramento River in the name of "system reoperation"
and flood control...but it is all about water supply to areas south of
the Delta. The issue is HOW MUCH Sacramento River water
is diverted, not just HOW it is diverted. Of course we
protested the proposed diversion from Sacramento River and therefore
Steamboat Slough. We've watched as scientists have done studies here on Steamboat Slough since about 2005, and we have experienced the negative impacts and can speak to real impacts, not computerized guesses. more here
public draft of new plan for navigation and flood control, based on the
false data developed and published during the “DRMS Phase 1 Report” by
DWR/MWD/USFWS WHY was
Steamboat Slough and Sutter Slough flow blocked during the salmon
migration studies?...perhaps one reason is to influence the data and
reports of CalFed/BDCP, which in turn has been used to validate the
decisions of the “WaterFix” and USACE 21st Century water
conveyance and flood planning. In any case, proposals include
setting back levee(s) of Sutter Island, some changes to Ryer Island
levees, changes to Grand Island, expansion of use of the Yolo Bypass
area for water conveyance and storage, and more. Take note of the
plan schedule...could they start building in 2016?!
Page 329 proposals
Also called “System Reoperation” by DWR http://www.water.ca.gov/system_reop/
http://www.water.ca.gov/system_reop/docs/system_reop_phase1_plan_of_study_6-2011.pdf page 11 map of major resources, page 45 shows schedule but published online 2014 or?
More information and maps or data here
Email received from DWR representative for the "temporary barriers"
proposals that DWR is NO LONGER proposing a barrier across Steamboat or
Sutter Sloughs, since there has been rain and there is good snow pack
now. However, there is still no explaination as to WHO installed
the sub-surface flow barriers on Steamboat Slough, Sutter Slough and the
Sacramento River below Geogiana Slough, and when...I am guessing after
2008. The sub-surface barriers block normal flow into or through
the waterways, so that the fresh water is diverted to another
direction...follow who gets that water and you can guess who installed
the subsurface barriers and why... Videos showing the results of
the side scan sonar are located at the following links:
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
|**Click or double-click on the maps and graphics to go
to full size of each one**
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?
|Go to previous 2015 documents and planning processes: 2015 to 2013 2012 2011-2009 Unanswered Questions of BDCP 2015 2009 "Don't Drain the Delta" back to receint Water Wars Barriers in the Delta planning: MWD plans Subsurface barriers Barrier info|