Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

HETCH HETCHY RESERVOIR: To drain or not to drain
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 6/13/5 | Glen Martin

Posted on 06/13/2005 10:27:33 AM PDT by SmithL

The debate over the proposal to breach the Sierra's O'Shaughnessy Dam, drain the reservoir behind it and restore Hetch Hetchy Valley to its former natural splendor is apt to intensify this summer with the release of a California Department of Water Resources study on the issue.

But preliminary comments from the agency indicate two things:

First, the restoration is technically possible without disrupting water supplies to San Francisco, Modesto and Turlock, the cities that are the beneficiaries of Hetch Hetchy water.

Second, it will cost a lot of money: From $4 billion to $8 billion, depending on whom you talk to.

"Regardless of what you do in terms of restoration, it will be expensive, " said Gary Bardini, the Hetch Hetchy project manager for the Department of Water Resources.

"People who want to restore the valley tend to pick the low end, and those against it favor the high end," said Larry Weis, the general manager of the Turlock Irrigation District. "So it might be wise to pick a figure in the middle."

For the Hetch Hetchy restoration true believers, Bardini said, "money isn't the issue, of course. The prospect of restoring the valley is what matters. But then there are going to be other people who say, 'Why make this investment when we already have a perfectly good (water delivery) infrastructure?' So it's hard to say how it will play out."

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: hetchhetchy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-80 next last
So, California, which is consistently short on water and power, is seriously thinking about spending Billions of dollars to get rid of both water and power?
1 posted on 06/13/2005 10:27:34 AM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

They want us to live in caves. Glad we have fewer of these kooks over here in Missouri.


2 posted on 06/13/2005 10:29:10 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

And after all the water is drained and the area is restored to its original splendor, it will be off limits to human beings, of course.


3 posted on 06/13/2005 10:29:31 AM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Furthermore, this won't "restore Hetch Hetchy Valley to its former natural splendor."

The valley is forever changed, and will be very different than it was before the dam was put in.

What's done is done. People should consider getting a life instead of wringing their hands over what was done years ago.

4 posted on 06/13/2005 10:30:36 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
It would certainly please the water corporations (Vivendi et al.) drooling to get the contracts for water treatment. Then there are the energy companies looking to cash in on a shortage of the natural gas fired electricity it will take to replace the lost hydro-power.
5 posted on 06/13/2005 10:31:25 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to be managed by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior

if a beaver who is part of nature builds a dam for it's purposes, it is ok, but if a man who is part of nature builds a dam for his purposes, it is not ok.


6 posted on 06/13/2005 10:32:05 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

There's a Federal wacko judge who's ruled against the administrations salmon plan and is now planning on taking over the water management on the Columbia River, which will include water releases and breaching several power generating damns.

The extreme hubris of this individual is breathtaking.


7 posted on 06/13/2005 10:32:36 AM PDT by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

I think an energy transfer tax is required. Those states that have off-shore oil, but refuse to exploit it, should have to pay a tax to the states like Louisiana, Texas, and Alaska that make the "sacrifice" of energy exploration.

California uses immense amounts of energy, but refuses to provide any. Tax the crap out of them.


8 posted on 06/13/2005 10:32:37 AM PDT by Soliton (Alone with everyone else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior

But of course! It will be available for use ONLY by members of the Sierra Club, Earth First, and the EDF for nude no-trace camping.

Who's money is it they want to spend?????


9 posted on 06/13/2005 10:32:58 AM PDT by nuke rocketeer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior
...it will be off limits to human beings, of course.

Not exactly. The Sierra Club et.al. will have their "Resource Centers" (you and I call them "cabins").

10 posted on 06/13/2005 10:33:35 AM PDT by randog (What the....?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
They want us to live in caves.

No, they want you to pay through the nose for water, like a good little serf, while they get to play in their socialized "natural" wonderland, at your expense of course.

11 posted on 06/13/2005 10:34:13 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to be managed by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

How many dams and canals are in Missouri? I live in Cali...

Does Missouri need irrigations for their farms.


12 posted on 06/13/2005 10:34:44 AM PDT by hmong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bigfootbob
You gonna post Jim's letter?
13 posted on 06/13/2005 10:35:03 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to be managed by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
The regulators in Washington State are requiring folks who mitigate development restore land to "Pre-Colombian" conditions. And they tell you with the most serious straight face. Bizarre.
14 posted on 06/13/2005 10:35:08 AM PDT by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior

Nothing in Yosemite is off limits to human beings.


15 posted on 06/13/2005 10:36:03 AM PDT by eddie65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Which one?


16 posted on 06/13/2005 10:36:16 AM PDT by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bigfootbob

People like Judge Hubris are why there is Pacific Legal Foundation.

Judgie Wudgie was reversed.


17 posted on 06/13/2005 10:36:45 AM PDT by GladesGuru ("In a society predicated upon liberty, it is essential to examine principles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PeterPrinciple

Beavers don't destroy whole valleys the size of Hetch Hetchy..... and all the other animals and plants. In 5-10 years man can destroy Yosemite Valley and turn it into a big lump of cement like LA, but a beaver can never do anything in that scale.


How much more money is needed to restore the vegetation etc....?


18 posted on 06/13/2005 10:37:36 AM PDT by hmong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
So, California, which is consistently short on water and power, is seriously thinking about spending Billions of dollars to get rid of both water and power?

So Californians, who are consistently short on water and power, continue to favor population growth from legal immigration?

19 posted on 06/13/2005 10:37:53 AM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
First, the restoration is technically possible without disrupting water supplies to San Francisco, Modesto and Turlock, the cities that are the beneficiaries of Hetch Hetchy water.

Don't you just love statements like this with absolutely no proof to back them up. All of their proposed solution would just be taking water from others.

Heres my solution for SF. Drink wine instead of water, bring back outhouses, and bathe in either the bay or the ocean, whichever is closer to your house.

20 posted on 06/13/2005 10:38:01 AM PDT by w1andsodidwe (Jimmy Carter allowed radical Islam to get a foothold in Iran.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hmong

We have lots of dams. I live at Lake of the Ozarks, created in 1930 by a hydroelectric dam built by a private utility. Above our lake is Truman Reservoir, built by the Corps of Engineers, also a hydro dam. Beyong that are two or three more.


21 posted on 06/13/2005 10:38:05 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bigfootbob
He just sent one out today on District Judge James Redden's decision.

A travesty, as usual.

22 posted on 06/13/2005 10:39:04 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to be managed by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
So, California, which is consistently short on water and power, is seriously thinking about spending Billions of dollars to get rid of both water and power?

Remember, they're consistently short of "Billions of dollars", also.

23 posted on 06/13/2005 10:40:30 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GladesGuru
True. We just contracted them last week to sue our county commissioners for thinking about expanding the Critical Areas Ordinance in my county to match the most egregious land theft county policy in the Nation, King County Washington's CAO.

We are very close to a revolution in this state, I've heard talk like that all of my 51 years, but it is beginning to get hugh and series here in the Soviet of Washington, and I'm not kidding.
24 posted on 06/13/2005 10:41:45 AM PDT by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bigfootbob

I think some people are living in a dream. These pre-columbian dreams are just "romantisizing" a time period that can never be again. Environmentally concerned folks have to be realistic, humans will never go away. $$$ concerned folks have to realize that $$$ is not all there is. Selling our national treasures/life lines for $$$= more water, more food, more houses/ more $$ is not moral.


25 posted on 06/13/2005 10:41:49 AM PDT by hmong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hmong

Powder..Patch..Ball FIRE

Yeah we have dams. And lakes, and canals. And the confulence of the two largest watersheds in the united states at our front door. Check out a map. Irrigation is also very widely used in Missouri.


26 posted on 06/13/2005 10:42:10 AM PDT by BallandPowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

And where will the Bay area get it's drinking water?


27 posted on 06/13/2005 10:44:09 AM PDT by HereInTheHeartland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Age of Reason

Can't we figure that moving water to a place that didn't have water will miss up other areas. Look at the Owens lake and Mono lake problems, with LA stealing all of their water.


28 posted on 06/13/2005 10:44:13 AM PDT by hmong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

He's a real asset that doesn't get the credit he deserves. He broke the story a few years ago about the Oregon's State Wildlife officials clubbing of endangered (yea, right), salmon that returned in high numbers. Can't have that now, can we, when we are telling property owners the fish are hurting so we need your property.


29 posted on 06/13/2005 10:45:56 AM PDT by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: BallandPowder

Thanks, Missouri folks. Didn't realize that.


30 posted on 06/13/2005 10:46:22 AM PDT by hmong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland

There is tons of water in their front yard (Ocean). :)


31 posted on 06/13/2005 10:47:52 AM PDT by hmong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: w1andsodidwe

I have heard that San Francisco does not want to lose the dam and Hetch Hetchy water, because they receive more than they need and make money by selling the surplus. Anyone know if this is so?


32 posted on 06/13/2005 10:48:40 AM PDT by SisBoombah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: hmong
Selling our national treasures/life lines for $$$= more water, more food, more houses/ more $$ is not moral.

Au contraire, collectivizing the care of nature into an armed government monopoly is what isn't moral. It destroys any prospect of private management, which doesn't survive by perpetuating problems as do government agencies.

See tagline.

33 posted on 06/13/2005 10:49:11 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to be managed by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: hmong

"Selling our national treasures/life lines for $$$= more water, more food, more houses/ more $$ is not moral."

Actually, selling land and natural resources in the free market would be the best control you could hope for. Try reading "Applied Economics" by Thomas Sowell.


34 posted on 06/13/2005 10:50:43 AM PDT by CSM ( If the government has taken your money, it has fulfilled its Social Security promises. (dufekin))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

This is why I'm strongly opposed to state-sponsored windmill farms. The environmentalists are nuts. First they spend billions on "clean" hydropower, and then they spend billions more tearing out the dams they pushed the taxpayers to build.

You know darned well that they would love to spend billions on windmills, and then spend billions more removing them and "restoring the landscape."

All with taxpayer dollars, naturally.


35 posted on 06/13/2005 10:50:43 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hmong

Beavers don't destroy whole valleys

You've not seen hungry beavers work have you? They do a lot of destruction.


36 posted on 06/13/2005 10:51:40 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
The liberals are truly insane. Maybe we do not need the water from the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir this year because it is a very wet year for CA. and the Sierras. But when the drought years come, which they most certainly will, we will need that water big time. The political correctness disease is truly dangerous to our health and other living things.
37 posted on 06/13/2005 10:51:42 AM PDT by Uncle Hal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: w1andsodidwe
Don't you just love statements like this with absolutely no proof to back them up.

Actually there's plenty of proof and. if we had the money, removing the dam would actually be economically beneficial to the area. The dam removal proposal suggests raising the dam at Lake Don Pedro, which could result in a net increase of storage capacity. Raising the lake level would also allow the Don Pedro overflow dam to be converted into a second powerhouse, matching and possibly exceeding Hetch Hetchy's power output. Also, since the Hetch Hetchy water pipeline runs alongside Don Pedro anyway, connecting the drinking water supplies at that point would be trivial. All told, the dam removal proposal wouldn't eliminate ANY water or energy supplies, it would just relocate them from Yosemite National Park to the foothills downstream. Whether it's worth several billion dollars to achieve no major gain in either power generation or water storage is another discussion...we'd spend billions and essentially end up with what we already have.

Politically, it's another story. The Don Pedro Dam and reservoir are owned by Modesto and Turlock, while Hetch Hetchy is owned by San Francisco. San Francisco makes a nice profit from their power station, and they don't want to lose control of that revenue source in favor of a profit sharing agreement with the other two districts. It's that profit, not concerns about water availability, that motivates San Francisco to keep the dam.
38 posted on 06/13/2005 10:53:46 AM PDT by Arthalion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

> California, which is consistently short on water and power

Bah. California is *not* short on water *or* power. It's got a freakin' OCEAN. If California can't be bothered to buld a few desalination plants, I can't be bothered to care about their predicament.


39 posted on 06/13/2005 10:55:31 AM PDT by orionblamblam ("You're the poster boy for what ID would turn out if it were taught in our schools." VadeRetro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hmong
"There is tons of water in their front yard (Ocean). :)"

That's fairly hard to use without huge infrastructure investments.
Hetch Hetchy provides some of the best water in the country to San Francisco. Its there and working.
This seems to be just another scheme by those who want to rid the earth of human life.
40 posted on 06/13/2005 10:56:51 AM PDT by HereInTheHeartland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: hmong
You mean concreteYes?
41 posted on 06/13/2005 10:59:24 AM PDT by al baby (Father of the Beeber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
"People who want to restore the valley tend to pick the low end, and those against it favor the high end," said Larry Weis, the general manager of the Turlock Irrigation District. "So it might be wise to pick a figure in the middle."

Well, in that case I think it'll cost about ten trillion dollars.

42 posted on 06/13/2005 10:59:47 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
From $4 billion to $8 billion, depending on whom you talk to.

That's peanuts here in Goofyfornia. It costs that just to build a bridge half-way across San Francisco Bay.

43 posted on 06/13/2005 11:01:06 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hmong

The trouble is America's population has doubled in the last 40 or so years.

And all but a fraction of that growth from illegal AND legal immigrants and their progeny.

We are increasingly running out of resources of all kinds.

But in a frenzy to pack even more immigrants in, they continually dream up new laws that FORCE us to conserve resources.


44 posted on 06/13/2005 11:03:53 AM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: al baby

Most people don't understand the difference between cement & concrete.

Cement is an ingredient (very much like flour) and concrete is the final product (like a cookie).


45 posted on 06/13/2005 11:06:14 AM PDT by Fierce Allegiance (This is not your granddaddy's America...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Our water bills here in Suburbia No Cal just went up over 40%

They finally got all the water meters in and started charging for what we use. Then decided we didn't use enough to pay for their graft and payoffs.

I'm going to stop my program of watering my lawn every three years.


46 posted on 06/13/2005 11:09:18 AM PDT by Syncro (*Watched* 24/7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance

I know the difference. it just ticks me off when people don't and also most newspapers screw it up. That and anytime a truck crashes they say it jack knifed also near misses doesn't that mean they hit


47 posted on 06/13/2005 11:10:07 AM PDT by al baby (Father of the Beeber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland
That's fairly hard to use without huge infrastructure investments.

I believe that a good deal of the water used by the humans in LA comes there as a result of the Hoover Dam.

We invested then, what's wrong with investing in desalinization now?

48 posted on 06/13/2005 11:11:17 AM PDT by HIDEK6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Syncro

Can you drill a well for your own use ?


49 posted on 06/13/2005 11:13:13 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: al baby

I figured you knew the difference basex on your comment. I just thought providing a simple descriptive example would be useful.


50 posted on 06/13/2005 11:15:04 AM PDT by Fierce Allegiance (This is not your granddaddy's America...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-80 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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