.
Feedback

Poll: Should Hetch Hetchy Reservoir Be Drained?

A November ballot measure in San Francisco will ask voters to decide whether the city should draw up a plan to open O’Shaughnessy Dam, eliminating a huge source of drinking water for the Peninsula.

 

The liberal-leaning San Francisco Chronicle calls the idea "insane."

The proposal: a November ballot measure that would ultimately, if passed, move us closer to the idea of draining the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir in Yosemite National Park.

The reservoir is the main water source for about 2.5 million Bay Area residents in San Francisco, on the Peninsula, and scattered throughout other parts of our immediate region.

On the Peninsula, we see the end result of water that flows from Hetch Hetchy along Interstate 280 at the Crystal Springs Reservoir.

This week, a conservation group called Restore Hetch Hetchy submitted more than 16,000 signatures from registered San Francisco voters in support of a ballot measure that would require a study of how to drain Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, and replace the water lost with other means.

Restore Hetch Hetchy quotes naturalist John Muir as saying the Hetch Hetchy Valley is “one of nature’s rarest and most precious mountain temples.”

The battle over Hetch Hetchy Valley is not new. The debate began in 1913 when the city of San Francisco won congressional approval to build O’Shaughnessy Dam, which buried the wilderness valley under some 300 feet of water ten years later, in 1923.

A 2006 California Department of Water report indicated the valley could be drained, but the cost would be extraordinary: somewhere between $3 billion and $10 billion.

If the ballot measure passes, what's not clear is how 2.5 million gallons of water - especially in dry, drought years - would be replaced.

Hetch Hetchy also produces about 300 megawatts of carbon-free hydroelectric power for the Bay Area.

Several area politicians, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, are critical of the the ballot measure, saying the region can't afford to drain the reservoir.

Restore Hetch Hetchy counters by stating "Modern engineering advances afford us the opportunity to remove the reservoir and create one of the most ambitious and exciting environmental restoration projects in human history. As a living laboratory, Hetch Hetchy will advance the science of restoration by providing biologists, ecologists and botanists from all over the world with the chance to apply cutting-edge science to re-establishing lost habitats."

What do you think? Should the Hetch Hetchy Valley be restored to its original state, and add to the beauty of Yosemite? Or is this a bad idea in this day of few dollars and large water needs?

Tell us in your comments, then vote in the poll below.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Bruno Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Cid Young August 11, 2012 at 12:03 am
"It needs to be drained as soon as possible."
Then get out yer wallet Big Shot. Sheeze!
Ben Toy August 11, 2012 at 12:38 am
'....Restore this natural treasure to it's pristine state now!...." can not be done
It will take decades to centuries for it to come back to a level 'similar' and not like it was before...it never will be like it was before. How much are you willing to pay for a desalination plant the size to replace the current water flow? Do you know that the higher salinity level (yes, the fresh water had it's salt tossed back into the sea water) in the area will adversely affect the life in there? Then the new power plant to run that desalination plant? Maybe a nuclear plant. Then where would they build that desalination plant? It will NOT be a small building Oh, how about all of the new plumbing to deliver that desalinated sea water? It would be logical to send it to the three lakes, but then they would have to dig up lots and lots of private property to lay in those new pipes. Then can anyone imagine the size of the pumps needed to pump that desalinated water from sea level up to Crystal Springs? Oh, there will be HUGE power requirements and maybe another nuclear plant(s). The current system is all gravity fed? Since all of that would cost money to build, would the cost of water to all increase along with the bond re-payments. Lots and lots of money and do you really think the public would pass such a series of bond measures? How's about the eminent domain properties ? New agencies? How many wrongs will make that old, old, old wrong a right ?
Sree September 22, 2012 at 03:45 am
An antique musket, when properly repaired, can be worth almost as much as an original musket. This depends greatly on the quality of the restoration and the skill of the restorer. Do you wish to have your antique musket restored. Thanks.
Regards, http://www.my-thesis.net/who-will-edit-my-thesis/ | edit my thesis
santa September 26, 2012 at 03:44 am
Reservoirs may be created in river valleys by the construction of a dam or may be built by excavation in the ground or by conventional construction techniques such as brickwork or cast concrete. Thanks.
http://boxlinks.info/the-best-news-on-moroccan-and-argan-oil/ | argan oil goats
Chris Parkinson September 26, 2012 at 11:16 am
Right on. These studies are always cooked. Not a single one comes from an unbiased source. The lead agency seeks out consultants that are friendly to their cause, not ones who have diversity in thinking. It is why our state is constantly broke. One pays for what you want to hear just like in real estate (I am a broker) you get nothing. One has to listen to honesty and what the market bears. Instead like the high speed rail, the few who are wealthy and have 30 people at their disposal (a typical PhD) get on committees people who share these views and shove pure garbage down the taxpayers throats. Our state has been hijacked by these !##holes. Time for a revolution, but alas John Lennon is dead.
Chris Parkinson September 26, 2012 at 11:19 am
Your right. Anything but the status quo will end up in the courts and like prop 187 will be deemed unconstitutional. These dreamers think they have the answers. The answers again are for a few campers not for the millions who drink safe and healthy water.
Chris Parkinson September 26, 2012 at 11:20 am
LOL
Chris Parkinson September 26, 2012 at 11:28 am
Actually not, The status quo in regards to water in Northern California is fine. I would like to see more salmon runs like on the Columbia. In fact these nutcases advocating for river lakes would further destroy the salmon. I recently went up the the Klamoth area. Completely sustainable because of millions of acres of water. We down here are just not so lucky, so in the 19th century some brilliant people innovated. Today it is still brilliant. The status quo is what we want, everything else results in filthy water and destroyed salmon runs.
Chris Parkinson September 26, 2012 at 11:31 am
Prozac
Chris Parkinson September 26, 2012 at 11:37 am
You will kill off salmon doing that. You will create filthy water filled with pesticides, herbicides, arsenic and whole other witches brew including diesel soot and motor oil, heavy metal pollution like copper from brakes dust, etc, etc, etc. The end Hetch Hetchy people are after death, the leave it status quo people are after life. End of story.
Patrick O' September 27, 2012 at 01:07 am
Why on earth would humans give up arguably the best tasting water in the world to use re manufactured sea water.
Really? Is this how scientists think? or is it environmentalists? Or are they thinking at all?
Chris Parkinson September 27, 2012 at 01:43 am
Dubai has this method. It takes a nuclear power plant to provide for 7.5 million people in the bay area. Pre-processing is 250 hp electric motors through reverse osmosis filters. Then its carbon filtration and further post filtration, and with no gravity feed takes more electric motors, etc....... There is still a salty taste and not good for people with high blood pressure. The only answer is high mountain water, period. Writewood in the San Gabriel mountains should be LA's next choice for water sources just like Hetch Hetchy dam it up and use it for the public good.
Nitin Khare September 27, 2012 at 02:14 pm
http://plasticsurgery-orangecounty.com/
This was exactly what i was searching for. Have been fighting for a while to do this, thanks for have posted
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:03 am
Drain it now! The dam is nearly 100 years old. Let's modernize the system now while we have the chance. SF does not need the dam at Hetchy, it is only one of 9 dams that SF has to get Tuolumne River water to the City.
Get rid of that old dam at Hetch Hetchy and modernize the whole Tuolumne River water supply system! Vote Yes on Prop. F !
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:06 am
Do you not understand that the 100 year old dam at Hetch Hetchy is just 1 of 9 dams in the system? Just get rid of that one dam and modernize the whole system. It is the best of both worlds and SF still gets the Tuolumne River water via an improved more modern and reliable system. VOTE YES ON PROP. F !
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:06 am
Do you not understand that the 100 year old dam at Hetch Hetchy is just 1 of 9 dams in the system? Just get rid of that one dam and modernize the whole system. It is the best of both worlds and SF still gets the Tuolumne River water via an improved more modern and reliable system. VOTE YES ON PROP. F !
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:09 am
People will. You can count on it. There are some really deep pocket private interests just waiting to pay for this project. SF should take advantage of the opportunity to have its Tuolumne River water supplied at the same time. The Hetch Hetchy dam is just 1 of 9 in the system. And it is nearly 100 years old! Don't wait for it to fail...
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:10 am
Wrong. The place is now a bathtub. There is no eco-system there now. The dam needs to go.
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:12 am
Wow, have you ever seen photos of the reservoir? There is a bathtub ring around the top. You call that an ecosystem? Give me a break! The dam must go now.
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:12 am
Disagree.
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:13 am
That state study was just a summary of earlier studies. This would be a real feasibility study looking at revamping the whole system, of which the dam at Hetch Hetchy is just 1 of 9.
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:14 am
Do you not understand that the 100 year old dam at Hetch Hetchy is just 1 of 9 dams in the system? Just get rid of that one dam and modernize the whole system. It is the best of both worlds and SF still gets the Tuolumne River water via an improved more modern and reliable system. VOTE YES ON PROP. F !
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:15 am
Do you not understand that the 100 year old dam at Hetch Hetchy is just 1 of 9 dams in the system? Just get rid of that one dam and modernize the whole system. It is the best of both worlds and SF still gets the Tuolumne River water via an improved more modern and reliable system. VOTE YES ON PROP. F !
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:18 am
Do you not understand that the 100 year old dam at Hetch Hetchy is just 1 of 9 dams in the system? Just get rid of that one dam and modernize the whole system. It is the best of both worlds and SF still gets the Tuolumne River water via an improved more modern and reliable system. VOTE YES ON PROP. F !
John Lula September 29, 2012 at 05:19 am
There is no new habitat, just an ugly bathtub ring around the top of the reservoir. Take the dam out now!
Chris Parkinson September 29, 2012 at 01:27 pm
83% say no, what kind of world do you live in Mr. Lula? I live in one where the majority rules, not you campers. Sorry Prop. F is a loser by 83% and counting before we even vote on it. The whole Tuolumne River water supply is modernized. Hetch Hetchy is by far the most brilliant massive project modern mankind has ever done. It has no lead in the piping, like Rome extends for hundreds of miles, is clean sustainable water for millions. Your opinion is either based in a lack of education. If you are educated, you need to demand the money back from the university you last attended, you know nothing of what you talk about.
Join the majority and Vote No on Prop. F!
Ben Toy September 29, 2012 at 03:03 pm
Agree and hope you are correct with the 83% with sanity
Lula's thinking would have all the buildings/highways/bridges/airplanes/cars/trains/etc replaced before their useful life span is reached.
Tatter Salad October 21, 2012 at 08:18 pm
No! Water storage is an issue; -WHY do you think there has been such a big push to run a aquaduct around the Delta? The goal is simply creating a pipeline from San Diego County all the way to the Rogue. Seriously. Drinkable water IS a problem. Emphasis on 'drinkable.' If you enjoy the taste of S.CAL water, then add some dirt to Hetch Hetchy water, and you'll feel right at home.
The other issue is that the Cherry Lake damage HAS ALL READY BEEN DONE - 80 years ago. The species that became extinct in the area as a result (Brown Trout, and Giant Beavers) are NEVER coming back as they once were. I saw the beavers slowly dissappear on the Cherry Creek in the '70's. NOTHING will be improved except ACCESS to raftable rivers for the Southern California Crowd. This area is the closest potential rafting area for S. Cal; and THAT is where the money is coming from supporting this issue. This area DOESN'T NEED MORE PEOPLE. And yes, last August I hiked the area, and bears are at 5x what I've seen before. IF we lose 80% of Hetch Hetchy, WE will need water from the Rogue!
Patrick O' November 7, 2012 at 04:53 am
This may sound petty and spiteful but: MEASURE F IS FAILING in the polls!!!!
WOO HOO!
Chris Parkinson November 7, 2012 at 12:17 pm
All the so called campers who smoke their day's away were soundly defeated. WOO HOO is right! Thank you rational thinking people!
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Karin Cunningham June 17, 2013 at 11:08 am
Yep! Yep! You can get one at the San Bruno Chamber of Commerce!
Heidi Beck June 13, 2013 at 07:29 pm
I drove by on the way home from work -- if they're really opening tomorrow, they are going to haveRead More to work all night!
Mamarocko June 18, 2013 at 12:52 pm
I heard that Safeway was going to open at the end of the month.
Heidi Beck June 18, 2013 at 02:36 pm
They took down the sign that said they were opening on June 14 and I haven't seen a new one with theRead More new date go up. The website still says "Store Grand Opening is on target for June 14, 2013," so that clearly needs updating too.
Karin Cunningham May 30, 2013 at 05:34 pm
Yay! Back to San Mateo Ave.? That's awesome! Let's support! I might even walk down with my lawnRead More chairs and just hang out in the Citibank parking lot!