Posted on 08/26/2013 9:28:46 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
The wildfire that’s been raging in Yosemite National Park for 10 days came within two miles of a reservoir that supplies most of San Francisco’s water on Sunday, Reuters reports.
The “Rim Fire,” as it’s called, has already burned 134,000 acres, including 11 homes, and threatened both water and power supplies to the city, about 200 miles to the west. Nearly 3,000 firefighters on the front lines had about 7 percent of the fire contained Sunday.
(Excerpt) Read more at nation.time.com ...
So correct you are!
water don` burn
steel towers don` burn neither
hetchy hetchy concrete don` burn neither
High time the city dwellers in CA feel the pain from the assinine policies they push on the rest of the state. How’s that forest management lookin’ now SF?
They want to remove the Hetch Hetchy dam and really dry things out.
We’ll see if the EPA lets them ‘repair’ this area if it does something to their water supply.
Anybody know if they’ve let Tombstone, AZ repair the water supply for their town after the forest fire that wiped it out? Last I heard the EPA was going to make them do it via horse and ‘manpower’ (ie, no heavy equipment) because the area was ‘environmentally sensitive’.
I’m betting that ‘some animals’ are more better better than others here.
Hetch Hetchy. Beautiful place. The lake is pristine, and there is never any fishing or boating of any kind. And it is huge! The hiking there above the lake is outstanding, and there are some awesome waterfalls.
If San Francisco had had its way in the day, they would have turned Yosemite Valley into a lake too. Luckily, they failed, and they nearly failed at claiming Hetch Hetchy. I don’t see how a city can go 200 miles across a bay, past another really big city, over some mountains,across a really huge valley, and into another range of mountains, and just dam a river and call it their own. I am totally against San Francisco owning a reservoir outside of their city limits.
All those lefty San Francisco liberals should get together and vote to let Hetch Hetchy go back to nature. It would nonly take 150 years for it to revert to its natural state. But lefties are selfish. They go by feelings, with their own feelings being the most important.
Praying for the firefighters, homeowners, animals and Sequoias in harms’ way..
I read somewhere that some Federal budget for firefighting was cut...of course they are blaming sequestration. Pray for a tropical storm to reach the area...sometimes that’s what hurricanes are good for. Back in the Northeast for a couple of years I a row, we were in drought conditions...only to have one or two hurricanes to bing the water tables back up.
“The “Rim Fire,” “
OK, who didn’t see that little ditty in relation to the faggotry of SF? ROFL.
Too bad there’s no fishing or boating. Damned extremists rule. As for owning it, a city, like any incorporated entity can acquire and own land, that’s fairly mainstream law. You might want to check where NYC gets its water, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, etc.
There is usually a large population center, and the water comes from elsewere via a delivery system. Many times it is all owned by the using city who has obtained rights to it.
As to 15 years, it would certainly not revert to any state John Muir would recognize. Silt, erosion, watermarks on the cliffs, etc.
In circa 1900, people indeed would wipe out the last buffalo, harvest every last redwood, dam up Yosemite valley, etc. But just because the west is full of things done back then that we might not do today doesn’t mean it should all be dismantled.
We shouldn’t dam up Yosemite, and we should maintain Hetch Hetchy just as it is.
Oh My, is it going to burn up SF water in the lake? Must be a hellofa hot fire, maybe like the super hot fire SF so deserves.
the natural part of me would love san fransodom to run out of water.
"Wow, our 'Save the Trees, Kill the Humans' program is working beyond all expectations. Congrats to all Team Members. Good work. Keep it up. We're winning."
- Your Leader, Greenie Freak (Burn baby, burn)
When a forest fire burns the drainage in the miles above a lake, the next rains brings a sludge of mud, ash, soot, burned logs, etc. All kinds of crap wash down. It does it to the point that it can utterly choke a lake and any water delivery system coming from it.
In recreational lakes it’s a nuisance that takes a couple of years to clear out well. In a water supply lake its a much bigger likely problem.
Yeah, I know all about runoff contamination.
Do you believe in “actions have consequences”? Did not the SF liberal-weinies make it impossible to do control burns or clean-up logging that now have led to such forest fire threatening their water supply?
Their lack of (logical) planning does not constitute an emergency on my part.
I’m guessing their main concern for the water supply are the ashes and maybe gumming up the filters. One would think they would have self cleaning centrifugal filters in the intakes, but my guess is they don’t
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.