Save the California Delta Alliance (STCDA)

Please email your comments to the
Delta Stewardship Council, oal_amendRRP1@deltacouncil.ca.gov today or early tomorrow, before their 1 p.m. Delta Levees Investment Strategy meeting. Tell them you object to prioritizing the water export levees over Delta communities and schools, exports over people.

What’s happening?

The Delta Levees Investment Strategy regulations target state funding for upgrading levees on 17 “Very High Priority” islands in the Delta (out of 144 total.) Under the proposed regulations, state funds can be spent for upgrades to the 36 “High Priority” and 91 “Other Priority” Delta islands only after all the levees on the 17 “Very High Priority” Delta islands are fully upgraded.

Funds are not anticipated for Discovery Bay, population 15,525, and Rio Vista, population 9,009, and which are second priority for levee improvements. And the Delta legacy towns of Clarksburg, Courtland, Locke, and the eastern bank of Walnut Grove are the lowest priority, even though Clarksburg and Courtland have public schools. (Walnut Grove is on both sides of the Sacramento River.)

What is getting higher priority than Delta towns and schools? Islands marked as “critical for Delta exports,” and most of those have low populations, if any. Why aren’t the State Water Contractors paying to protect their infrastructure?

See the maps.

According to the article below, Central Delta Water Agency attorney Dante Nomellini Sr. noted that as a result of the rigid regulations, no, or almost no funds will be available for improvements to “High Priority” Delta islands, and none for “Other Priority” Delta islands. Thus the proposed regulations basically defund levee upgrades on 88% of Delta islands. For this reason, the Delta Levees Investment Strategy is opposed by the Central Valley Flood Control Association, the Delta Protection Commission, Central Delta Water Agency, Local Agencies of the North Delta, many Reclamation Districts, and the California Farm Bureau Federation, as well as California Water Research and Delta Defenders.

If you want to attend the meeting in person, it’s Thursday August 22. The hearing will start at 1 pm at the Park Tower Plaza, Second Floor, 980 Ninth Street Sacramento.

Write to the
Delta Stewardship Council, oal_amendRRP1@deltacouncil.ca.gov today or early tomorrow, before their 1 p.m.

Read more from the California Water Research.

Governor Newsom is looking at a single tunnel option.

Some at the negotiating table are still failing to recognize the effect a through-Delta tunnel construction project would have on the Delta itself. On the Delta as a Place.

Let’s be clear: Construction destruction along a through-tunnel route will ruin the Delta communities, highways, waterways, and farms (from the north to the south) in all five Delta counties: historical towns in Sacramento County (Hood and Locke) and in Yolo County (Clarksburg), farmers in Solano County (Rio Vista), boating communities in Contra Costa County (Discovery Bay, Bethel Island), tourism, marinas, and water ways in San Joaquin County (Stockton and South Delta marinas).

Whether the water quality impacts of a single tunnel can be proven by the water contractors to be acceptable for the Delta environment or not, the fact remains that if a huge tunnel is built along the current through-Delta route proposed by the Department of Water Resources (DWR), construction destruction will rip up the entire Delta for years, from Hood in the north to Clifton Court Forebay in the south, leaving smelly tunnel muck in its wake.

This is not protecting the estuary!

The only way to protect the estuary, the legacy towns, Delta communities, waterways, waterfowl, fish, and farmers is to locate the destructive construction project around the Delta, not through it. Or, better still, abandon the effort altogether.

In December 2018, we won the battle!

Save the California Delta Alliance’s Legal Council, Michael Brodsky, successfully exposed the issues with the through-Delta-route as well as the water quality impacts. He did so for three years, arguing brilliantly and bringing expert testimony to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) tunnel permit hearings. The testimonies forced the SWRCB to defer on approving the tunnel permits until the Delta Stewardship Council (DSC) first approved the plan “consistent” with the Delta Plan. (Being consistent with the Delta Reform Act and the Delta Plan is a requirement for any project that affects the Delta.)

The Delta Plan has two co-equal goals, one of which is to “Protect the Delta as a Place.”

We proved the tunnel plan to be inconsistent with the Delta Plan:

• It was proven that the location of the pumping facility and intakes would cause blight to the legacy communities in the north, the historical communities the Delta Plan is to preserve.
• It was proven that gridlock on every Delta highway would occur from the construction traffic flooding into the small 2-lane rural levee roads, shutting down highways required for commuters, stopping goods from being delivered to Delta communities, and stopping Delta farm products from being able to be trucked out. A burden on the communities that could not be mitigated.
• It was proven that the inundation of barges, construction docks, pile driving, etc. would virtually end tourism and boating during the duration of the project, still estimated at least five to six years, causing economic ruin to a significant number of marinas and related businesses. The Delta Plan requires preservation of recreation and boating.
• It was proven that the barge traffic would require highway bridges to open that now never do due to commute traffic and/or the age of the old historic bridges; threatening to destroy historic bridges plus causing more commute gridlock.
• It was proven that muck ponds would cause long-term impacts to Delta communities, marinas, and farms.

It seemed obvious that the project would need to find another route, if it were to continue.

The DSC Staff listened, and recommended that the tunnel plan not be approved as “consistent” with the Delta Plan. In the Staff’s recommendation, they cited the compelling statements made by Michael Brodsky about the construction destruction – throughout the Delta.

The DWR then pulled back their permit request. That should have been the end of the through-tunnel route.

But after a hiatus, work is continuing (drilling and design efforts) along the same, flawed route.

Construction destruction to the Delta would be avoided by going around the Delta, instead of through it.

One of the DWR’s alternative routes was the Eastern Route. There may be additional issues with that alternative. And even if an alternative route is shown to be a good plan, proof that the exported water would not continue to damage the fisheries would still need to be proven.

Bottom line: The through-Delta route is totally unacceptable.

And the fight continues.

There’s a dangerous situation out on the water this weekend and for a few weeks to come. There is levee work being done around Woodward Island. Right now, there are large barges and tug boats moving along in the northern Twin Slough.

(Note: Officially, the parallel sloughs we call “Twin Sloughs” are named “Woodward Canal” on the north, and “North Victoria Canal” on the south, named after the islands they run next to.)

A boater was out there this week and came upon the barges. He slowed down but the tug’s powerful props were pulling his Mastercraft towards the barges, twisting it in the water. He said it was very difficult to control.

That leads to an even bigger concern that, since those parallel sloughs are favorites for waterskiing and wake boarding, if a skier/boarder drops when they get near the barge 5 MPH zone, the props could pull them in. Not good. In addition, Twin Sloughs gets very busy, particularly in the summer weekends. There isn’t room for boarders going two directions to pass safely on one side of the slough. So having barges fill up one of the canals is going to make it dangerous.

Please alert your friends and any of your younger clan that take boats out either for skiing/wake boarding or just to head to Ski Beach, to take caution around the barges that are working and moving through that area.

That area is a favorite due to the long, straight run and the partial tule berm in the middle that use to separate the two canals. That berm separates boat traffic in the two directions, a natural traffic control. It keeps the boaters safer when passing plus the tules calm the wakes. That coupled with a good wind direction makes ideal water conditions.

And it is the quickest way to get from Discovery Bay to Union Point Resturant.

We have been told it is open for boat passage, but recommend not skiing or wake boarding through that area while the barges are there. Even if you’re taking a weekday run and are the only boat, if your skier/boarder falls in that area, it could be dangerous for him/her.

Please pass this advice on to others.

We recommend instead skiing south on Old River. If you yearn for a long, straight run, head down to Victoria Canal. Another favorite of ours, not as straight but a good run, is the west side of Mildred Island. Or if not too crowded, railroad slough. (The north railroad slough gets crowded on weekends with big boats, and it’s not wide enough for two skiers to pass safely on the south.)

Why are the barges there?

They are doing levee work. The dirt is being dumped behind the levee to widen and strengthen it. They are going in a clockwise direction. When they finish along the south side of Woodward Island (Twin Sloughs), they will go north along the west side (Old River – they have a barge filled with dirt there now). They aren’t doing the north side (the slough along the Santa Fe Railroad trestle) but will do along the east (Middle River).

We have been airing our concerns with the people in charge, so hopefully in the future this kind of work isn’t scheduled in favorite recreational sloughs during prime recreational season.

The bridge construction

As you probably have noticed, there is also the bridge construction still underway on the east side of Woodward Island (Middle River). Its purpose is to replace the old cable ferry crossing.

Yes – we who fear the state is doing pre-work for the tunnels were suspicious about that high bridge, but the bridge is a San Joaquin County project. And San Joaquin County opposes the tunnels.

So, why a bridge to nowhere? The cable ferries are dangerous. A boatload of teens died years ago when they didn’t see the cable was up or notice the 5 MPH zone. Very dangerous, and not very efficient.

Who even goes to Woodward Island?

From the satellite view, there is only one farmhouse there.

However, the island has the two big, main water pipelines for the East Bay Municipal Water District (EBMUD), taking water to Alameda (Oakland, etc.) from (1) the Mokelumne River and (2) intakes on the Sacramento River near Freeport. You can also see the same two pipelines further west where they go near the Orwood Resturant and Marina. The island also has a major gas pipeline traversing it.

The county was worried if there was a major disruption to those pipelines, the old ferry wouldn’t be able to get repair people to the island quickly or efficiently. Hence the bridge.

The nice thing about the bridge was that boating needs were considered. It is 30 feet high in the center, meaning even large power boats and even the Rosemarie (Captain Morgan’s Delta Adventures large two-decker houseboat) can pass under without having to wait for an operator to open it, and without worrying about hours of operation.

For sailboats, cranes, other taller vessels, it isn’t as convenient but still possible. The center section can be removed by a crane.