Good Article re Politics of Hetch Hetchy Dam Removal

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 20 of total 29 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Jon Beck

Trad climber
Oceanside
Topic Author's Original Post - Aug 4, 2012 - 10:46pm PT
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48508018/ns/us_news-environment/?utma=14933801.1742109797.1342512623.1343331171.1344134145.13&utmb=14933801.1.10.1344134145&utmc=14933801&utmx=-&__utmz=14933801.1342512623.1.1.utmcsr=(direct)|utmccn=(direct)|utmcmd=(non

There is a vote coming up in November, apparently if the proposal passes there would be another vote in four years, gives SF time to plan. I think removing the dam would make a huge statement to say the least.
Minerals

Social climber
The Deli
Aug 4, 2012 - 11:32pm PT
Why is this vote limited to only ‘Ciscans? Because the city ‘owns’ the rights to Hetch Hetchy, for $30K a year? Are they the only people who visit Yosemite National Park? Why not allow all Americans to vote on this issue?


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.

Most recently the George W. Bush administration tried funding a feasibility study, but it was quashed politically by Democrats when Pelosi was Speaker of the House.

Hmmmm… I thought all you Pinkos were supposed to be environmentalists!?!?!


"On top of that staggering price tag, replacing the water supply is unrealistic when California already lacks infrastructure to provide enough water for its economy or environment," said Feinstein. "We should move past this debate and focus on real solutions to California's water challenges."

…Which would be to greatly reduce human population.

Duh.

This entire mess is all temporary anyways, and not in any sort of a ‘geologic’ time-frame, to say the least...

R.B.

Trad climber
47N 122W
Aug 5, 2012 - 12:28am PT
HereOn 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.

Yeah, the Repub's are ALWAYS wrong (not!)

DRAIN THE LAKE!
R.B.

Trad climber
47N 122W
Aug 5, 2012 - 01:02am PT
there are other alternatives that could assure a metro water suppy without flooding the other Valley.

No local government should ever have the authority to override Federal NATIONAL PARK lands, and as an American Taxpayer, I expect no less.

You can create a water system that achieves the same objective below the park boundaries (I didn't say it was cheap, it's doable though!)

DRAIN THE LAKE!
Jon Beck

Trad climber
Oceanside
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 5, 2012 - 01:07am PT
Smells like a wedge issue with a bit of Karl Rove sauce drizzled on it.

More sinister than wedgies would be what concessions can the right get out of Pelosi in exchange for not pushing the issue too hard. In all fairness to Pelosi I can see her concern regarding the water supply
R.B.

Trad climber
47N 122W
Aug 5, 2012 - 01:15am PT
There is no "Right" or "Left" issue about this. It was a nasty precedence to allow a local govt. to have rights over fed land, esp. in a national park. So what part of "Unconstitutional" does that not read?

In the Olympic N.P., they just removed two dams on the Elhwa River (for the Fish not the drinking water).

Past errors of the Govt is no excuse for the sins of today. Glen Canyon Dam (Lake Powell) was also a bad decision. So was the proposal to flood Dinosaur N.M. BITD.

Tell Congress to protect Federal N.P. from Land Development of all kinds. The time is NOW!
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Aug 5, 2012 - 12:17pm PT
At least it's encouraging that it's coming up for a vote.

It would be interesting to hear from a climber who lives in SF. What's worth more to them, their awesome clean water or restoring another amazing valley. How will they vote?

http://www.hetchhetchy.org/act
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Aug 5, 2012 - 02:40pm PT
There is no "Right" or "Left" issue about this. It was a nasty precedence to allow a local govt. to have rights over fed land, esp. in a national park. So what part of "Unconstitutional" does that not read?


The part that says that when they create parks, they often write in language that "grandfathers" rights already established. In other words, not allowing the Feds to CONFISCATE people's private land and land rights.

This is part of, for example, the Wilderness Act.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Aug 5, 2012 - 02:42pm PT
there are other alternatives that could assure a metro water suppy without flooding the other Valley.


Please start listing these simple and obvious alternative, so clear that they need not even be spoken?
Jon Beck

Trad climber
Oceanside
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 5, 2012 - 02:44pm PT
Please start listing these simple and obvious alternative

Reduce, reuse, recycle
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Aug 5, 2012 - 02:48pm PT
Studies by the federal Bureau of Reclamation, the state Department of Water Resources and others show restoring the valley is technically feasible. The cost estimates range from $3 billion to $10 billion.


So what is it that we are not going to do, to create the funds to do this?
klk

Trad climber
cali
Aug 5, 2012 - 02:57pm PT
constitutionality was never at issue. congress passed the authorizing legislation for the national park system. congress also passed the raker act that allowed for a one-time suspension of the earlier legislation. the raker act may or may not have been a bad idea, but its constitutionality wasn't in doubt.

but the raker act included language intended to guarantee that all water and power generated by the dam would be public goods. the ability of pg&e to circumvent the intent of the raker act, and sell publicly generated power back to the public that was supposed to own it, strikes me as the most outrageous development.

so far as i know, james watts was the first politician to seriously propose removing hetch hetchy dam. he made the proposal largely to put the screws to the sierra club and to an increasingly democratic california city.

bob righter's history is the single best introduction to the topic

http://www.amazon.com/Battle-over-Hetch-Hetchy-Environmentalism/dp/0195313097/ref=la_B001HMPFJQ_1_1_title_0_main?ie=UTF8&qid=1344193010&sr=1-1

R.B.

Trad climber
47N 122W
Aug 5, 2012 - 03:35pm PT
Wasn't the park established WAY BEFORE San Fran's water rights?
klk

Trad climber
cali
Aug 5, 2012 - 04:04pm PT
the yosemite grant was 1864-- it was named a national park in 1890.

but there was no national park system. yellowstone was the only other park.

the raker act was passed in 1913. the organic act that established the national park service and codified the terms of what could count as a national park wasn't passed until 1916. it was partly written the way it was in order to prevent future raker acts.

the hetch hetchy narrative is one of the most researched and discussed topics in environmental history.

anyone who cares about the general deal should read bob's book. and anyone who wants to better understand hetch hetchy in the larger context of water in california should read norris hundley, the great thirst.

norris's book is still the single best book on water in california-- and one of the best on water history in the us generally.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Aug 5, 2012 - 05:14pm PT
Pretty good info here.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/04/water/plumbing-california-animation
NorCalNomad

Trad climber
San Francisco
Aug 6, 2012 - 12:45am PT
As much as the National Parks System is one of my top things, if not the top thing I love about America. Being a resident of SF, I do love my delicious Hetch Hetchy water :P

And +1 on the advice on "The Great Thirst" took a California water rights class and man has CA had a sh#t show history, with the Hetch Hetchy trickery being only topped by LA's long history of duchebag-ery with water rights.
covelocos

Trad climber
Nor Cal
Sep 14, 2012 - 12:37am PT
http://www.hetchhetchy.org/theplan

VOTE!
limpingcrab

Trad climber
the middle of CA
Sep 14, 2012 - 12:38pm PT
Ya, but how are they gonna get those giant bathtub rings out?
karodrinker

Trad climber
San Jose, CA
Sep 14, 2012 - 01:07pm PT
Obviously climbers will have to get paid to go up there and scrub em off, new routin style. Have you seen how clean we have wiped the valleys popular lines?

Sure, the first few ascents would be gross, but thats what Jeremy, madbolter1 and those wacky Spaniards who drill wooden pegs are for. They climb crap like this already for free!

Going to be a Girdle Traverse Scrubfest folks, lets rise to the challenge.
karodrinker

Trad climber
San Jose, CA
Sep 14, 2012 - 06:50pm PT
Wow dingus really! I imagined it would be a grimy sediment layer.
Messages 1 - 20 of total 29 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta