I'd guess that without maintenance and improvement of California's extensive water system, flooding of areas shown on that map would be more common, but it is actually a simulation of an extreme weather scenario similar to the storms of 1861-62. http://www.wunderground.com/blog/weatherhistorian/article.html?entrynum=13

The story about taking a canoe from Bakersfield to the bay is interesting. That wouldn't be my first choice of adventures, but it sounds like an adventure nevertheless and would beat walking, especially under flood conditions. He must have had a strong desire to escape Bakersfield.

butitsadryheat wrote:doesn't everyone have a strong desire to escape Bakersfield?

It was 86F at 1am when I drove through last night. You folks must have asbestos underwear.

Yeah, I remember the unusual rains October 2009. Flooding wasn't too bad that I recall near the bay area, but it was the only time I remember our cross country championship meet being postponed due to intense rain.

It's my understanding that the petitioned proposal would not require a new, magical water resource. The main water source would still be the same drainage, just recaptured in different ways and below Hetch Hetchy Valley. Am i understanding wrong?

markv wrote:It's my understanding that the petitioned proposal would not require a new, magical water resource. The main water source would still be the same drainage, just recaptured in different ways and below Hetch Hetchy Valley. Am i understanding wrong?

Rings a bell. There is a lot on the internet about it and there have been different proposals. Check the websites for the movement or for the Sierra Club if you want more details on what they are proposing. I couldn't open the link to the proposal from the article I posted. Money would still be an issue and would be a big issue in the near future. There are more pressing needs even just in the realm of water.

Just an idea (probably crazy): Could we build a dam few miles downstream of the current dam with the new reservoir level being just slightly below the hetchy hetchy valley floor?

The valley will be accessible and we get to keep our pristine water source.

In answer to a few of the questions:

The National Park Service Report suggests restoration of the riverbed and return of wildlife etc would take only 3-5 years. IMHO, it would be spectacular watching it come back to life - admittedly it would take a while to regrow a mature forest

It would cause only slightly diminish the amount of Tuolumne River water that would flow to the Bay Area - but the replacement supply must be developed before restoration would begin

It would be possible to put a whole in the dam to let the river run under, eliminating the expense and mess of dam removal.

see more at www.hetchhetchy.org

-Spreck Rosekrans
Restore Hetch Hetchy Director of Policy

San Francisco is in the dark ages when it comes to water recycling compared to other cities. It's unfair to hold Hetch Hetchy Valley hostage under these circumstances.

http://www.hetchhetchy.org/how/where-wi ... -be-stored

There are several good options for the restoration of the Valley that will not impact the City's supply. Of course City officials won't tell you that - the dam is a boondoggle for them!

If you fancy a climb at Hetch Hetchy and giving a shout-out to a good cause, register for Muir's climb!

More details here:

muir-s-climb-hetch-hetchy-aug4-2012-t62483.html

Sure, it will be a great long term legacy to restore Hetchy Hetchy. Obviously, short term funding, water, and political issues will require ongoing patience and persistance. It is interesting to follow the processes and strategies.