Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

San Francisco Hypocrite Alert: Yosemite's lost valley will be subject of vote
Associated Press ^ | Aug. 5, 2012 | TRACIE CONE and JASON DEAREN

Posted on 08/05/2012 12:11:27 PM PDT by jwsea55

YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK, Calif. (AP) — This fall San Franciscans will vote on a local measure with national implications: It could return to the American people a flooded gorge described as the twin of breathtaking Yosemite Valley.

Voters will decide whether they want a plan for draining the 117-billion-gallon Hetch Hetchy reservoir in Yosemite National Park, exposing for the first time in 80 years a glacially carved, granite-ringed valley of towering waterfalls 17 miles north of its more famous geologic sibling.

The November ballot measure asks: Should city officials devise a modern water plan that incorporates recycling and study expansion of other storage reservoirs to make up the loss?

The measure could eventually undo a controversial century-old decision by Congress that created the only reservoir in a national park and slaked the thirst of a city 190 miles away.

The battle over Hetch Hetchy, first waged unsuccessfully by naturalist John Muir, had turned the Sierra Club from an outdoors group into an environmental powerhouse. The fight gained momentum in recent years when unlikely allies joined forces.

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted2.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; History; Local News
KEYWORDS: california; feinstein; hetchhetchy; johnmuir; pelosi; sanfrancisco; sierraclub; yosemite
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-73 next last
Democrat party does as much as it can to get rid of power generation in CA except when it directly serves them.
1 posted on 08/05/2012 12:11:41 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

What a stunningly idiotic idea.


2 posted on 08/05/2012 12:17:12 PM PDT by Psycho_Bunny (OWS = The Great American Snivel War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

Let them drink Perrier.


3 posted on 08/05/2012 12:19:10 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny

This is an idea that has been out there for decades. I think only now were Bambi and his environmental czar were able to empower them to get this thing out on the ballot.

It will cut off all of the water supply of San Francisco and Peninsula cities, and will leave a gaping, dead chasm that will take hundreds of years to ever look like Yosemite.


4 posted on 08/05/2012 12:20:09 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny
What a stunningly idiotic idea.

We are living Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm. All pigs at the trough are equal, except some of them are more equal than others.

5 posted on 08/05/2012 12:21:14 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

Power for me but not for thee.

They’re going to retrofit two dams in Ann Arbor Michigan with generators. Its the other 3000 dams in the state that need to come out.


6 posted on 08/05/2012 12:23:00 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius
It will cut off all of the water supply of San Francisco and Peninsula cities, and will leave a gaping, dead chasm that will take hundreds of years to ever look like Yosemite.

Sounds like something you could support?

7 posted on 08/05/2012 12:23:15 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

Power generation and drinking water....

SO how’s will they take if they remove their source???


8 posted on 08/05/2012 12:23:36 PM PDT by TheBattman (Isn't the lesser evil... still evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

The scary thing it that SF will vote to get rid of its water supply, then it will go to court to take somebody else’s water. Let’s not even start with the lost electrical power.


9 posted on 08/05/2012 12:24:04 PM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

They oughta put the useless Yosemite under water too, no? More water for everybody.


10 posted on 08/05/2012 12:27:31 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USNBandit

Lets not forget the hundreds of billions in restoration grants that will be required to return the valley to its natural state.


11 posted on 08/05/2012 12:29:21 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: USNBandit
The scary thing it that SF will vote to get rid of its water supply, then it will go to court to take somebody else’s water. Let’s not even start with the lost electrical power.

But where are they going to get a conduit to feed them the water? It is amazing these mental geniuses don't mind doing this to the rest of California but Heaven forbid they do it to themselves. It does show there is some sort of mental capability with these people. So that would infer they have an agenda?

12 posted on 08/05/2012 12:31:23 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55
But where are they going to get a conduit to feed them the water?

That's the coming surprise, they won't be getting the water.
13 posted on 08/05/2012 12:34:36 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
But where are they going to get a conduit to feed them the water?

That's the coming surprise, they won't be getting the water.

There's always "reclaimed" water.

14 posted on 08/05/2012 12:36:15 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

LOL this is too funny.

They can replace the electric power with coal plants or just do without and have brown-outs. They can just do without the water like the farmers they screwed had to do.

Plus, they shouldn’t complain about extra $2,777 per household a year that their water will cost it’s less than Obamacare will cost them.


15 posted on 08/05/2012 12:36:21 PM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
This is truly getting too bizarre.
16 posted on 08/05/2012 12:39:00 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

I love it. I hope this turns San Francisco and the Peninsula cities into ghost towns.


17 posted on 08/05/2012 12:42:16 PM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny

I always thought that it was stunningly idiotic to have allowed San Francisco reparian rights along the Tuolumne River in the first place. What a scam! If you think California voters (generally) are lunatics, S.F. voters are by orders of magnitude far crazier!


18 posted on 08/05/2012 12:45:33 PM PDT by old school
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55
From the story.

On one side are Republican lawmakers and environmentalists, including Ronald Reagan's former interior secretary, who want the dam removed and valley restored. On the other are Democratic San Franciscans, led by Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, fighting to hold onto the city's famously pure drinking water in a drought-prone state.

The oh so saintly republicans are doing this.
19 posted on 08/05/2012 12:46:30 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

Not sure you gain all that much, other than another place to put tourist attractions and the valley will be silt.

20 posted on 08/05/2012 12:50:34 PM PDT by Mike Darancette (Obamaid has to go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
On one side are Republican lawmakers and environmentalists, including Ronald Reagan's former interior secretary, who want the dam removed and valley restored. On the other are Democratic San Franciscans, led by Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, fighting to hold onto the city's famously pure drinking water in a drought-prone state.

The oh so saintly republicans are doing this.

This is truly to bizarre to be true. Are all of us having the same bad dream?

Years ago, Michael Savage claimed 'they' were using bleach to disinfect SF streets.

21 posted on 08/05/2012 12:51:37 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mike Darancette
Thanks for the pics!!

Not to start any rumors, but where do you think SF politicans bury the bodies? Just a question.

22 posted on 08/05/2012 12:54:23 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55
The time for this decision was 100 years ago, when it still could have been implemented at a reasonable cost. While I tend to side with John Muir on the matter, it's a little too late to turn back the clock at this point, at least if the welfare of the inhabitants of the Bay Area is foremost in mind.

The bill in question directs the city to "devise a plan", and if this is anything like other eco-fantasy pipe dreams that's going to be quite a plan. They will follow it at their peril, and it shouldn't be up to the rest of us to bail them out when the cost of feeling good about themselves starts to become apparent.

Nevertheless, so long as the recourse isn't simply to pull power from the grid elsewhere, and expropriate other people's water, then I say go for it. Its proponents may find that "sustainable" really does have a meaning.

23 posted on 08/05/2012 12:56:43 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

Not really. There are many good people who live out there as well. And California has a huge economy (one of the big problems is that California’s economy is so bad, precisely thanks to projects like this, that it’s affecting all of us) and this could really bring it down.

This is an environmentalist weirdo thing. They’ve already induced a drought in the San Joaquin Valley, in case you wondered why your veggie and meat prices were rising...


24 posted on 08/05/2012 12:56:58 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

In Michigan our governor is one of these Green Republican morons who is using state and federal matching funds to buy private land for “preservation”.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/08/gov_rick_snyder_oks_38m_for_re.html#incart_river_default


25 posted on 08/05/2012 12:58:32 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

So these lunatics are going to vote to eliminate their own water supply. Is there a downside to this?

Pray for America


26 posted on 08/05/2012 12:59:05 PM PDT by bray (If you vote for a Communist, what's that make you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

Here’s the thing...if someone would fund a eight-foot pipeline from Hudson bay....across most of Canada and down to central California...they’d have more than enough water for just about everyone. But the environmentalists would get involved and demand a forty-year research project, and it’d never be done.

My guess here is that San Francisco will vote to undam the valley...and then wonder in two years how and why their water supply is now very limited and tripled in price.


27 posted on 08/05/2012 1:04:35 PM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: livius
Not really. There are many good people who live out there as well. And California has a huge economy (one of the big problems is that California’s economy is so bad, precisely thanks to projects like this, that it’s affecting all of us) and this could really bring it down.

This is an environmentalist weirdo thing. They’ve already induced a drought in the San Joaquin Valley, in case you wondered why your veggie and meat prices were rising...

Only (half) joking. I would assume the good people would see the writing on the wall.

It is tragic what has happened to the Valley through environmentalism and the endangered species.

28 posted on 08/05/2012 1:05:17 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks jwsea55.
The November ballot measure asks: Should city officials devise a modern water plan that incorporates recycling and study expansion of other storage reservoirs to make up the loss? The measure could eventually undo a controversial century-old decision by Congress that created the only reservoir in a national park and slaked the thirst of a city 190 miles away.
Sure, and if you remove one dam, you can make up for the lost power generation with the remaining dams. What assholes.


29 posted on 08/05/2012 1:11:25 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
Here’s the thing...if someone would fund a eight-foot pipeline from Hudson bay....across most of Canada and down to central California...they’d have more than enough water for just about everyone. But the environmentalists would get involved and demand a forty-year research project, and it’d never be done.

So what would be the point of pumping seawater across country?
30 posted on 08/05/2012 1:13:37 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Does Lansing still claim ownership to Detroit?

Charlie LeDuff golfs the length of Detroit ...video only too funny.

31 posted on 08/05/2012 1:14:22 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

They are going to take a dam out up here, one that could have been a decent producer of power. It will leave a muddy mess when they do, but they’ll surely make up for it with the pretty windmills they install.........


32 posted on 08/05/2012 1:19:45 PM PDT by Lakeshark (I don't care for Mitt; the alternative is unthinkable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

LeDuff is great. I suspect he’s liberal but he’s not above beating the crap out of detroit politicians.

Here he beats up on the Conyers Clan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_t6x3h8vLI


33 posted on 08/05/2012 1:20:12 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: bray
So these lunatics are going to vote to eliminate their own water supply. Is there a downside to this?

BUMP

34 posted on 08/05/2012 1:21:17 PM PDT by Lakeshark (I don't care for Mitt; the alternative is unthinkable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark; cripplecreek

I wonder if the dams were put there for any reason originally?


35 posted on 08/05/2012 1:22:25 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55
These people must be insane..... It will take decades for the valley to be restored to it's natural beauty.....

Not to speak of the higher cost associated with water and power that goes with no longer using the resource for dirt cheap ....$30,000 a year... Liberalism is a mental disorder....

36 posted on 08/05/2012 1:25:12 PM PDT by Popman (In a place you only dream of Where your soul is always free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

Water has always precipitated bitter conflict in California; not for its lack of availability but for the manner in which it’s distributed. What enviro-nazis and their lap-dog politicians have done in this state is enough to make you scream! Jerry Brown is re-submitting his peripheral canal proposal (nuanced, of course) and the enviros are apoplectic!


37 posted on 08/05/2012 1:26:12 PM PDT by old school
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

Is that the Boardman dam?

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/07/massive_boardman_river_dam_rem.html

This crap needs to be stopped. We have hundreds of dams in Michigan that could be producing power (Many once did) and the environmentals on both sides of the aisle can’t tear them out fast enough.

Meanwhile in the heart of Michigan liberalism they are actually going to use the existing dams. Here is the feasibility study.

http://www.a2gov.org/government/publicservices/systems_planning/Environment/hrimp/Documents/Final%20Stantec%20Report%20-%20no%20appendices.pdf

I wonder how often windmills run above capacity?


38 posted on 08/05/2012 1:28:49 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
LeDuff is great. I suspect he’s liberal but he’s not above beating the crap out of detroit politicians.

Here he beats up on the Conyers Clan.

...and Conyers' wife getting publicly assisted meals and housing at a Fed penitentiary.

LeDuff has done some great pieces!

39 posted on 08/05/2012 1:28:57 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

This one was a hydro power dam put up in the 1920’s, it could have been easily restored to be an actual generator of power, but the greenies teamed up with a few fisherman to tear it down. They want to tear down every dam in America, to bring us closer to a pristine state.


40 posted on 08/05/2012 1:32:45 PM PDT by Lakeshark (I don't care for Mitt; the alternative is unthinkable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
greenies teamed up with a few fisherman

I'm not sure I would call trout unlimited "Fishermen". Besides, there is hardly anywhere in the state that isn't within an hour's drive for decent trout fishing.

I've even heard chatter about removing the Tippi dam.
41 posted on 08/05/2012 1:37:43 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
This one was a hydro power dam put up in the 1920’s, it could have been easily restored to be an actual generator of power, but the greenies teamed up with a few fisherman to tear it down. They want to tear down every dam in America, to bring us closer to a pristine state.

The enviros are also after most of the Bonneville dams, too. BPA provides huge, cheap Western US generating capacity. Sweetheart deals with various locals and, of course, the aluminum industry and Boeing. The Northwest power rates are cheap compared to CA's.

If BPA becomes castrated, bring back Dandy Don Merideth to sing "turn off the lights..."

42 posted on 08/05/2012 1:40:01 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

At the same time this $14 billion water project to drain the Sacramento Delta sending more water southward is in the works:

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/jul/25/california-embarks-on-massive-water-project/


43 posted on 08/05/2012 1:44:24 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Yep, the Boardman. I heard a guy talk about it a few years ago, how he had shown everyone involved how they could use the dam to generate power with the existing components (he was an electrical engineer), and how the greenies just ran him over.

Having lived by Ann Arbor once upon a time, I'm floored they are doing this. Has it finally happened?


44 posted on 08/05/2012 1:45:28 PM PDT by Lakeshark (I don't care for Mitt; the alternative is unthinkable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
"a few fisherman" = *damning with faint praise*

Too much great fishing up here to take that group seriously, I doubt more than "a few" would ever fish there, it just gave the greenies some cover.

45 posted on 08/05/2012 1:49:20 PM PDT by Lakeshark (I don't care for Mitt; the alternative is unthinkable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: livius; jwsea55
It will cut off all of the water supply of San Francisco and Peninsula cities,

Not quite. In the late 80s I lived above Los Altos Hills, right on the San Andreas fault, and commuted to SF via a drive to a Caltrain station in Palo Alto, took train to SF and walked to workplace. On the drive to and from home to Caltrain station I passed Crystal Springs reservoir, fed by water from Hetch Hetchy as well as local watershed.

Loss of water from Hetch Hetchy would represent a large but not total loss for the peninsula. As well, SF could bring in some water from Marin County, where I've lived as well.

Loss of Hetch Hetchy water would be a big loss, but not the total disaster as represented in this article.
46 posted on 08/05/2012 1:52:46 PM PDT by caveat emptor (Zippity Do Dah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

I used to live a bit south of there in Evart. Just about anywhere there was water, there were trout. In fact I used to catch trout at the Hershey dam (which is now gone to return trout to the river)


47 posted on 08/05/2012 1:54:24 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
LOL.

They probably think they've made the water wetter too........

48 posted on 08/05/2012 2:01:59 PM PDT by Lakeshark (I don't care for Mitt; the alternative is unthinkable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: jwsea55

When they undam the valley, the years and years of silt buildup will go down stream and destroy all the fish all the way to the sea.

But hey, California has Billions of dollars in the bank to go replace perfectly good power and water systems for the fun of it right?


49 posted on 08/05/2012 2:03:02 PM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
At the same time this $14 billion water project to drain the Sacramento Delta sending more water southward is in the works:

That's the problem with these states so flush with money they don't know what to do with it. At least it is not like the state of Kalifornia that is heading towards bankruptcy...with a pension system $1 trillion underfunded.

Out of 36 million people, twentyfive percent of Kalifornia's budget is paid for by 144,000 residents. Another way of looking at that number is 144,000 residents pay 50% of the state's income taxes.
Over 20 years, from 1984 to 2004, Kalifornia's poplulation increased by 10 million people (from 24 to 36 million). During that period, only 100,000, or so, were added to the tax roles.

50 posted on 08/05/2012 2:10:12 PM PDT by jwsea55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson