Good Article re Politics of Hetch Hetchy Dam Removal

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 29 of total 29 in this topic
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.
karodrinker

Trad climber
San Jose, CA
Sep 14, 2012 - 07:46pm PT
Drain it!
Leggs

Sport climber
A true CA girl, who landed in the desert...
Sep 14, 2012 - 08:47pm PT
I had stitches in me balls!
DMT!!!! You have ME in stitches!!

GREAT photos... and you're right about the gray streak in the mustache... it DOES look like snot. (I am trying to keep a straight face... seriously)
{{smiles}}

~LM
Grampa

climber
from SoCal
Sep 14, 2012 - 09:37pm PT
OK, so the evil, manic, fundamentalist, crazy Republicans support removing the dam, and since they never do anything right, and it is, of course, Bush's fault, therefore, we as flaming liberal commie pinko "Friscan" liberal, always-right, sandal wearing, Trader Joe's shopping Democrats must vote to deny the Republicans and keep the damn dam.

If fact, lets teach those Republicans they cannot come to our state and try to change things with their radical conservative agenda, which is controlled by the oil companies and Wall Street, so, lets raise the damn dam level another 50 feet so we can store more water!

Heck, we have gotta keep those Frisco hot tubs full.
Patrick Sawyer

climber
Originally California now Ireland
Oct 13, 2012 - 12:52pm PT
Dingus I looked at those walls (Donnells) back in 1975, but things happened in my life. Kudos to Brutus and you for doing what I wanted to do. I do believe I did a couple of FAs downstream. I'lll never really know. As well as at Potter's Rock with Hank Ward, Jim Keating, Claude Fiddler and one or two others.

As far as Hetch Hetchy is concerned, I also think that my best friend Brian (not really a climber/leader, more of a belayer) and I did a couple of FAs, but that place is crawling with buzzworms. We hung out there several times from 1973-75.

As an aside, obviously small critters like water and rattlers like small critters. HH is perfect. Lower altitude than the Valley, sunshine much of the time, and water.

As for draining it, well I live in Ireland now. We have some water. But if I strike it lucky (read, rich) I'd have a house in Sausalito, and Marin county is always hurting for water.

But even back in the 1970s to this day I always thought that, like John Muir (not that I am in his league), it was a shame to use that particular valley for a reservoir.

I'd be for busting the dam and draining the reservoir. Nature will eventually return it to is original (whatever that is/was) state. I'd think.

Though it may take a decade or more to see some results. I did study some natural resources/hydrology courses at Columbia College, but I am not expert.

But... that land does belong to the US citizen, not a San Franciscan. And while I consider myself a liberal, I can see why it seems a contrast that some Republican politicians want to play the 'water game' and the SF Demos will cry 'foul'.

As much as I love SF, having been raised across the Bay and working in The City, FREE HETCH HETCHY.

And Grampa, found your dentures yet?

HH is a political ball game. The liberal SFers (of which I could have counted myself one at some point in time) want their clean water, the environmentalist/naturalist say "free HH), and the conservative Republicans will jump on anything (for their benefit, not the people's, IMO) that may be divisive in the other camps.

If it means dividing and conquering you opponents, the conservative BS usually wins out most of the time. Sad, isn't it.

And the oxymoron is conservative. The right wingers are not interested in conserving the environment, IMO.

Well, feck everyone, 'dumping' the dam and water would costs far less than the stupid conflicts our country have been involved in. Let nature takes its course.

To repeat, let nature takes it course, which could also be that the neanderthals (read old repugs) are on their way out.

Return Hetch Hetchy to its original state, (at least in might take some pressure off of the Valley, nah...).
Patrick Sawyer

climber
Originally California now Ireland
Oct 14, 2012 - 10:35am PT
Please correct me if I am wrong. But am I to understand that only people who can vote in San Francisco will determine the fate of Hetch Hetchy?

If so, that is bull. At the very least the voters of California, if not the nation, should have a say in HH's future. I think that it is a no-brainer that most SFers will want to keep HH Reservoir. Some environmentalists and liberals they are.

I am still a die-hard liberal, but I see that sometimes people of any persuasion will only want benefits them and not others. I suppose that is human nature.

FREE HETCH HETCHY.

NB I remember when we had the water crisis back in the 1970s, and East Bay Mud (East Bay Municipal Utility District) traded our (Walnut Creek/Lafayette) excellent water with Contra Costa Water District. It was quite noticeable the first few months that our East Bay Mud water was far superior to CC Water, but then the taste buds got use to the CC Water mixed with EB Mud water.
10b4me

Ice climber
dingy room at the Happy boulders hotel
Oct 14, 2012 - 02:39pm PT
At the very least the voters of California, if not the nation, should have a say in HH's future.

+1
Tobia

Social climber
Denial
Oct 14, 2012 - 04:03pm PT
As mentioned on another thread (what book) read Cadillac Desert and you will get a good idea of the S.F., L.A. and every other water system out west. Great read!
Patrick Sawyer

climber
Originally California now Ireland
Oct 14, 2012 - 06:07pm PT
I am going to keep bumping this thread. I may not have the right, or at least for the time being, of voting in my home state, but as I see it, the arguments for freeing Hetch Hetchy Valley outweigh the so-called benefits for San Franciscans (SF, a city I love and worked in and played semi-pro soccer in, and partied in, I love The City By The Bay, or as Herb Caen put it, "Baghdad By The Bay"). If SFers are going to vote in favor of keeping HH a 'prison', then these people are being selfish. There are alternatives. I have been reading just about every argument in the past few days.

FREE HETCH HETCHY

In John Muir's spirit, FREE HETCH HETCHY.

Hetch Hetchy is the nation's property, not the yuppies of San Francisco. Our collective property, not a bunch of West Bay Snobs. Up East Bay Grease. Tower of Power.

FREE HETCH HETCHY, for future generations. I have hung out in the HH Valley, climbed some there, dodged the rattler on occasion, soaked in the beauty of a valley inundated by the greed of water-hungry San Franciscans.

I am getting worked up about this, even though I am about 6,000 miles away. That valley needs to be returned to whatever original 'state' it was prior to SF meddling/mudding whatever waters there was.

We had the excellent movie and screenplay (always used as an example of scriptwriting) of Chinatown (1974) about the power of water struggles in SoCal.

I am trained in scriptwriting, I have three scripts on the back burner. Anybody interested in collaborating with me on a feature or documentary (two disciplines I have also studied and worked in) on Hetch Hetchy, contact me.

FREE HETCH HETCHY
Jon Beck

Trad climber
Oceanside
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 14, 2012 - 07:18pm PT
If SF does not free Hh on their own terms then there is the possibility of doing by state wide referendum. Or is that not possible because of Federal preemption?
Messages 1 - 29 of total 29 in this topic
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