| || |Penninsula article about Prop F -
If RHH had not used clever "doublespeak", this prop would never have made it onto the ballot. SF'ers are fans of "sustainability" and usually have nothing against "restoration" - but no one I've talked with who signed the petition realized it meant the end of the dam at Hetch Hetchy, the end of Camp Mather.
These folks are tricksters - and RHH more truly stands for Ruin Hetch Hetchy
than it does for Restore HH.
Who will profit from expensive plans to re-source water, re-source electricity? Didn't we learn our lesson from the privatized electricity schemes that doubled our utility bills in the 1980's? Who wants a second valley full of tourists and car exhaust in Yosemite? Is that what John Muir shed tears for? Because there was not enough asphalt in that valley? In truth, the valley has already been restrored. It was originally a glacier lake, it is a lake once more.
There is no true return to the past - we don't pull down our cities because a historical figure extolled the pre-development views of a century ago - why pull down our source of water, power, life?
NO on F - F for FAIL!!
| || |SFgate has been drinking the koolaid...
Our response:NO on F - F is for FAIL.
Do we need a second valley full of exhaust-spewing cars in Yosemite? Do we need to pay thru the nose for water? Do we need to start buying nuclear power if our clean hydroelectric is destroyed? Do we need to make some clever entrepreneurs rich who are hoping to sell us their water and electricty? Do we need to do without our family camp, Camp Mather, when it is turned into a concrete disposal facility ?
Let's spend $8mil on the study of - studying! More money for education, don't waste our resources on duplicatie studies. The studies have been done.
No no no no no no no no on F. Just no. F for Fail. Vote no on F.
| || |
A new wrinkle in RHH's attempt to distract us from their ultimate goal of destroying the O'Shougnessy Dam. While flourishing "sustainability" and "restoration" an advocate, in the personson of Lundgren, has drawn the ire of the Sierra Club. So, if this destruction is using John Muir, founder of the Sierra Club, as their motivation - it is unfortunate for their cause that the Sierra Club is doing their utmost to unseat Lundgren.More here....
| || |Love this quote from PJ Johnston: “It’s like saying, ‘We’ll rip out your heart, but don’t worry because you’ve got other organs. "Read more at the San Francisco Examiner
NO on F - no second Yosemite valley full of cars and tourists - no nuclear power for SF - no overpriced water produced with dirty power - no. Just No.
No turning Camp Mather into a concrete processing plant - no turning away SF families from their mountain camp experience. No loss of a historic city camp that boasts the first building built by Curry and Company for the first (non-native) visitors to Yosemite. Just No.
NO on F.
| || |
Good old fashioned San Francisco street protest.
Help us preserve Glen Canyon Park trees
Thursday, Oct.11 from 5:00 – 6:30 PM
Dear Friend of the San Francisco Forest Alliance,
As a follow-up to our very successful meeting on Saturday at the Glen Park rec center we are holding a peaceful street protest at the corner of Elk and Bosworth Streets (corner of Glen Canyon Park near the baseball diamond) to bring attention to SF Rec and Park’s plans to remove 300+ viable trees from the park. We need to act fast - construction (and associated tree removal) will start on October 15th!Come and show your support for Glen Canyon Park
this Thursday (11th) at 5 PM!
Message limitation requests:
- Gather at the corner of Elk and Bosworth Streets at 5 PM. Map
- We encourage you to bring your own protest sign – we will have some extras if you cannot bring your own. Some tips:
- Bring a sign that can be easily read by those in rush hour traffic -- be sure to include www.SFForest.Net on your sign
- Keep the poster messages clean – we are family friendly
- Potential messages for signs could use the following themes
- Save Glen Canyon trees – call supervisor Wiener
- Stop the deforestation – call Mayor Lee
- Keep Glen Canyon wild – call supervisor Wiener
- RPD - Preserve our urban habitat
- RPD – get some common sense
- Save my taxes and save these trees
- More recreation, less destruction
- Kids and dogs (on leash only) are very welcome.
- We want a safe and peaceful protest – we must stay on the narrow sidewalk, not interrupt auto or pedestrian traffic and not use any loudspeakers.
If you cannot attend our rally please contact:Update on our Saturday meeting:
- The SFFA does NOT want to stop the long overdue upgrades to park facilities – we want common sense preservation of viable trees. Please do not bring a sign asking for a halt in construction.
- Please do not bring any signs with messages about the Parks Bond (Prop B). The SFFA negotiated language in the bond that will (hopefully) prevent 2012 bond funds from being diverted to NAP. As a result, we will not oppose Prop B; this rally is neutral on the bond.
We were clear we do not want to stop the long awaited improvements to park facilities. However, the plans for the upgrades to the tennis courts, playground and rec center include removal of hundreds of trees that could be spared. At our Saturday meeting we presented slides from Sunshine Act (SF freedom of information act) documents and data showing the vast majority of 300 + (closer to 400) tree removals for the various projects and the “natural areas” are not for safety reasons. There are some hazardous trees that do need to be removed and we do support removal for legitimate safety reasons. We also showed how removal of so many trees will change the character of the park forever.
Our audience agreed trading mature trees for saplings is a bad deal. We showed pictures and featured speakers who revealed Rec and Park’s extremely poor record of tree planting and sapling survival. At the very best, replanting = “restoration” in 75 years.
We heard from our audience that these extreme tree removal goals had not been communicated to them. The “community process” showcased the facility improvements while remaining silent on the extensive, expensive, and unnecessary tree removals. As a result, we have asked Rec & Park for a community walkthrough of the arborist plan.
When we showed we had support of 20 other neighborhood organizations against NAP and unjustified RPD tree removal plans many who participated wanted a more independent analysis and position from the Glen Park Association. The Glen Park Association is currently highly supportive of RPD’s plans to remove trees. A reminder:
The San Francisco Forest Alliance is an authentic grassroots organization with a membership that has no professional or financial dependencies or relationships with our City or SF Recreation and Park Department. The SFFA is also fighting against the plans that the SF RPD Natural Areas Program has proposed for our city parks as a whole:
- Trees - removal of over 18,500
- Trails – loss of 9+ miles of recreational trails to fenced-off native areas
- Toxins – high-maintenance plant species requiring ongoing pesticide applications
- Taxes – “20-year plan” diverting $ tens of millions from traditional park programs
Many thanks for your support!
San Francisco Forest Alliancewww.SFForest.Net
The Sac Bee thinks SF should be big-hearted about Hetch Hetchy, to which I say:
| || |
"Not only should SF lose its pristine drinking water and clean hydropower, but the taxpayers should also pay for the provilege? And to get what? A second Sierra valley choked with automobiles and tourists? High priced filtered water (who would be selling it?) and nuclear power? It would be great to see that kind of money poured into our schools, healthcare - anything but a rush to the past. Should we also "restore" our cities? Tear down the Marina neighborhood of San Francisco because it didn't exist in 1913? 1849? Who's picking these dates? The Hetch Hetchy Valley was a lake before it was dry - so hasn't it already been restored??"
OK - so I misspelled privilege as provilege - a Matherite is bound to lose her spell-ability a little when the camp and our water and power are at stake.
Did I mention...NO on F!!
From USA Today, October 6, 2012 -
"This is such a colossal waste of money," says P.J. Johnston, spokesman for Save Hetch Hetchy, which opposes the initiative. Given that water is a scare resource and major source of conflict in California, "The idea that we could voluntarily eliminate the single largest water resource in the state and spend $10 billion to do it is just irrational." more here...
"That's Chinatown, or, to be more specific, it's water wars. While Jack Nicholson's character in Chinatown is embroiled in the dark intrigues of the water wars in 1937 LA in - the Bay Area is facing its own devious water wars. A massive water war is heating up over the delta
- and then there are those who are trying to shut down SF's water from the Tuolumne River, to tear down the dam and abandon SF's water supply. What will it get the privileged luddites behind this plan, this Prop F? A nice view? A new valley full of tourists? A pretty hike on a warm day? I keep wondering if any or all of the moving forces behind the push for Prop F have an interest in desalinization equipment to sell us, or other schemes to profit from...? They seem to be a pretty connected
F for FAIL. Just plain no. No on F.
if it will take a very very long time
, per the SJ Mercury, to send the HH's valley back to pre-1920, what's the hurry? Let us, and all the folks who come to visit, continue drinking clean delicious water, let us continue to use clean hydroelectric power.
Let us continue to go to Camp Mather with our neighbors and families. Let's keep it from being turned into a cement processing facility.
Save Camp Mather by saving O'Shaughnessy.
How funny, This old video
with its heart-wrenching musical score, extols atomic power as being a preferable alternative to hydroelectric.
The scenes in this film were at a low water mark that was not seen before, and has not been seen since.
And I still wonder why the vacationing hoards of tourists are valued over daily life provided to the Bay Area by the clean water and power that flows from Hetch Hetchy. Why should the water that sustains SF and the bay area be removed to make way for vacationers and day-trippers? Yosemite is crowded, as confounding as the crowds that clog Disneyland each summer. Is there a reason to bring those same hoards to another nearby natural area? The bay area depends on that clean water and power for life.
San Francisco was lovely before it was built into a city. Should we try to roll back the calendar there too? Take down the buildings? Tear up the roads? Probably not. Then why take away the water and power that make SF possible?
Whose water treatment plans and power generators are waiting in the wings to charge and overcharge the people of the bay area? What we have works.
It's the out-of-towners who are keen to "restore Hetch Hetchy". But - as a naturalist ancd geologist has said - "Hetch Hetchy has already been restored - it was a glacier lake once, and it has been restored as a lake once again."