Facts on the Water Rights Question in the Central Valley Project

California Farm Bureau (CFB) | March 11th, 1948

Feasibility Study for a Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area

Delta Protection Commission (DPC) | June 4th, 2012

In Fall 2009, the California State Legislature passed a comprehensive package reforming governance of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) and related aspects of stat

In Fall 2009, the California State Legislature passed a comprehensive package reforming governance of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) and related aspects of statewide water management. In Section 85301 of Senate Bill X7-1 (Delta Reform Act of 2009), the Legislature charged the Delta Protection Commission (DPC) with developing: “A proposal to protect, enhance, and sustain the unique cultural, historical, recreational, agricultural, and economic values of the Delta as an evolving place....The Commission shall include in the proposal a plan to establish state and federal designation of the Delta as a place of special significance, which may include application for a federal designation of the Delta as a National Heritage Area.” This feasibility study has been undertaken in order to fulfill this legislative mandate, which upon acceptance of this study by the DPC, it will be submitted to a Delta Congressional Representative to introduce legislation to establish a Delta National Heritage Area (NHA). The study inventories and describes resources of the region which are supportive of the proposed NHA’s story and themes that make the area a place of national significance. The study also proposes how the NHA will be managed and organized to coordinate heritage area activities. Additionally, local groups who support the NHA are listed, along with letters of support; and organizations who are interested in potentially serving as partners on NHA activities are described, along with letters of partnership commitment. During the course of this process a separate effort was initiated to establish a Delta NHA. In January 2011, Senator Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation into the Senate, with companion legislation introduced by Congressman John Garamendi into the House of Representatives to designate a Delta NHA, with the DPC as the management entity. The DPC has been monitoring the progress of this legislation while continuing to work on this feasibility study. A NHA is a place designated by the United States Congress where natural, cultural, historical and recreational resources combine to form a cohesive, nationally-distinctive landscape arising from patterns of human activity shaped by geography. These areas tell nationally important stories about our nation and are representative of the national experience through both the physical features that remain and the traditions that have evolved within them. The DPC developed this study with a process that incorporated public involvement throughout its entirety. A variety of activities were undertaken to acquire stakeholder input, including: public meetings, public presentations, stakeholder interviews, public review memos, and project study team meetings.

Federal Investments for the California Bay-Delta Region

U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) | February 5th, 2014

The San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Bay-Delta) region of California is an ecosystem of national significance. It is also the hub of the nation’s largest

The San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Bay-Delta) region of California is an ecosystem of national significance. It is also the hub of the nation’s largest water delivery system—infrastructure that is the foundation for economic activity in the agricultural, industrial, and recreational sectors of the economy, and provides drinking water to a population of over 25 million Californians. This document is intended to provide an overview of the federal land and water programs in and around the Bay-Delta region, their purpose, options for future programs or actions, and an overview of the actions in which agencies are engaged already. Successful long term management of water resources and the environment to achieve the co-equal goals of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and overall Delta sustainability requires continued improvement in managing California’s finite water supply. Contents I. Introduction II. Bay Delta-Big Picture: A Holistic Approach • State and Federal Integrated Water Management • Reducing Water Demand • Increasing Water Reliability and Supply • Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers/Exchanges • Potential Federal Water and Ecosystem Management Actions III. Role of the Federal agencies • Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Environmental Protection Agency • Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration • Army Corps of Engineers • Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service U.S. Forest Service Rural Development Farm Services Agency Agriculture Research Service IV. Conclusion

Field Operations Manual for the Regional Monitoring Program (Version 1, Sediment)

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | August 1st, 2018

This Field Operations Manual (FOM) of the Regional Monitoring Program (RMP) is intended as a reference document for each sampling effort. The FOM describes in detail how

This Field Operations Manual (FOM) of the Regional Monitoring Program (RMP) is intended as a reference document for each sampling effort. The FOM describes in detail how field staff should collect water, sediment, bivalve, bird egg, and sport fish samples for all RMP sampling efforts.  Sampling conducted by the RMP should also reference the QA Program Plan (QAPP) document, which describes the entire program, and is the repository for details about laboratories, analytical methods, MDLs, sample handling, sample preservation, and quality assurance procedures. The FOM is a companion document to the QAPP, and provides a more detailed description of sampling methods that are only outlined in Section 11 of the QAPP.  In addition, each individual sampling effort will have a unique Cruise Plan or Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP). The SAP describes the details of each sampling effort, including dates, times, places, and staff, as well as the parameters that are being collected and analyzed. The SAP will reference this FOM for the detailed sampling methods. If different sampling methods are needed for a particular study, the SAP will describe deviations from the normal methods described in the FOM. 

Final Environmental Assessment Sacramento River Winter-Run Chinook Salmon Management Measures for Fisheries Managed under the Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery Management Plan

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) | March 1st, 2018

Final Environmental Impact Statement: Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project Central Valley Project, California

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | November 15th, 2024

The United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) prepared this environmental impact statement (EIS) for the 2021 Endangered Species Act R

The United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) prepared this environmental impact statement (EIS) for the 2021 Endangered Species Act Reinitiation of Section 7 Consultation on the Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP). This EIS is meant to inform the public and decision makers on potential federal actions by examining a range of reasonable alternatives and the potential effect on the environment. Reclamation manages the CVP. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) manages the SWP. Collectively, the operation of the CVP and SWP provides flood control and navigation; delivers water to 30 million people; supports 4 million acres of agriculture; maintains 19 wildlife refuges on the Pacific Flyway; protects numerous iconic and endemic species such as Chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead, sturgeon, and smelt; generates 4.5 million megawatt hours of electricity; maintains water quality for beneficial uses in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Estuary (Bay-Delta); and supports recreation throughout Northern California. 

Final State Water Project Delivery Capability Report 2023

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 31st, 2024

This Delivery Capability Report presents California Department of Water Resources (DWR) analysis of the State Water Project (SWP) system and provides important planning i

This Delivery Capability Report presents California Department of Water Resources (DWR) analysis of the State Water Project (SWP) system and provides important planning information for users of SWP water. The analysis provides information about how changing climate, regulatory, and operational considerations impact SWP delivery capability.

Final Value Planning Study Report for Through Delta Facility, Sacramento, California

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 1st, 2007

Financial Statement Analysis of CVP Contractors

Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force (Delta Vision) | July 20th, 2008

This report provides an analysis of the condensed financial statements of the 10 largest Central Valley Project (CVP) irrigation contractors in the San Joaquin Valley (Va

This report provides an analysis of the condensed financial statements of the 10 largest Central Valley Project (CVP) irrigation contractors in the San Joaquin Valley (Valley). The 10 were selected because of their size measured by CVP water deliveries, relative to both aggregate CVP deliveries in the Valley and for all of California. The report includes, for those contractors, a summary of those financial statements for eight years, respective net capital repayment obligations, and acre-feet (AF) of water delivered. This is the third of several written reports which ENTRIX will complete relative to CVP Financing and Repayment Issues. Subsequent reports will include an analysis and discussion of the generation and distribution of hydroelectric power from CVP facilities and a comprehensive document summarizing revised forms of all reports submitted.

Financing Delta Improvements and Environmental Mitigation

California Research Bureau (CRB) | September 1st, 2008

Resolution of the Delta’s water supply, water quality, and fish problems may involve building various structures, possibly including gates, pumps, canals, levees, and d

Resolution of the Delta’s water supply, water quality, and fish problems may involve building various structures, possibly including gates, pumps, canals, levees, and dams, and undertaking landscaping rearrangements to improve habitat for several species of flora and fauna. Resolution also involves changing water flow regimes in ways that would make more or less water, but probably less, available for human uses. This work and these changes will cost serious money. Cost estimates for many of these actions have not yet been developed. This paper explores approaches to financing these “improvements” and “mitigations.” While a little abstract, this is abstraction that matters. It will determine from whose pockets a good deal of money will come. California has a long history of financing water projects. The first section of this paper reviews this history, in hopes of identifying water-financing principles that might be adapted to Delta improvements and mitigation. Some deep-seated controversies about how Delta improvements should be financed have roots in this history, and it may be helpful to point them out. A core idea in California’s approach to financing water projects is that beneficiaries should pay for them. Decades ago, this was a straightforward proposition – people or water districts should pay for the necessary dams, canals, and pumps and the costs of operating them in proportion to the amount of water they received. In the current age of rising environmental sensitivity, it is a little muddier. An alternative formulation that applies, at least crudely, to housing developments and highway projects, is that project proponents should pay to mitigate at least some of the environmental harm that their project is likely to cause. The second section of this paper explores this controversial subject. It seems unlikely that any consensus can be reached about how to finance facilities in the Delta without reaching some agreement about how to deal with this matter. This paper was first issued in July, 2008. This version contains a few clarifications made in response to the Blue Ribbon Task Force’s reviewers. The author is grateful for their suggestions.