There is another Grand Valley in Yosemite, Hetch Hetchy Valley, but in 1913 it was decided to damn the valley to hold more water in the Sierras.

No matter what your politics are, standing in the Yosemite Valley will make you feel a connection to our environment. It can put you in a state of awe and you will leave a place like that with a new appreciation for what nature has to offer.

Most of Yosemite’s visitors will leave with the perception that there is no other place in the word that compares, but that isn’t completely true. There is one other place, a place that is commonly forgotten about by the general public, a place that exists within the northwest corner of Yosemite National Park and may be just as spectacular of a wonder as Yosemite Valley is, but only receives a tiny fraction of the visitors. This valley is called the Hetch Hetchy Valley.

Downstream from the source of the Toulumne River, the Hetch Hetchy Valley is a glacial valley formed as recently as 10,000 years ago. More recently the Valley has been flooded by the O’Shaughnessy Dam, which currently provides San Francisco with a little less than 25% of its water. The politics surrounding the construction of the dam are interesting, as it created quite a controversy that still exists today.

While the park and its protected boundary was first established in 1890, San Francisco mayor James Phelan proposed damming the valley that same year. Over the following fifteen years he applied two more times and was denied on both occasions, but in 1906 the San Francisco earthquake and subsequent fire ravaged the city, giving the argument to dam Hetch Hetchy much more political support, as access to more water would have proven to be indisputably useful during the fire. Thus, in 1908 the Interior Department approved the city’s application to dam the valley. Although temporarily suspended, the inevitable construction was solidified with the passing of the Raker Bill of 1913, which gave the city of San Francisco final approval to dam the Hetch Hetchy Valley. It is also important to note that The Raker Bill coincided with Woodrow Wilson’s appointment of a new Secretary of the Interior, Franklin Lane. It would thus appear that the damming of Hetch Hetchy can be attributed to the shift in Washington politics, combined with the changed public opinion that the earthquake and fire of 1906 caused.

Within this time frame there was a great amount of dispute on whether this decision was the right one. The main opponent of the dam was undeniably John Muir, who famously stated, “As well dam for water tanks the people’s cathedrals and churches, for no holier temple has ever been consecrated by the heart of man!” Moreover, there was a great amount of criticism from environmentalists nation wide.

Currently, there is still a large effort by the Sierra Club, a non-profit group called Restore Hetch Hetchy, and many outspoken environmentalists to restore the valley to its original state. Their basic argument is that the water is no longer, and in some circumstances never was, essential for the Bay Area. In addition, they argue that there are other water and power resources outside the boundaries of the park that can be utilized, the crowds of Yosemite Valley would be greatly reduced with the additional attraction of Hetch Hetchy, and that once the dam is removed, restoration of the valley floor would cost very little as there is not a large build-up of silt on the valley floor. Although they argue for the dam’s removal, there is acknowledgment by the supporters of this restoration that this will take a great amount of time and resources to accomplish. A right move in that direction would to be conduct a complete and comprehensive study on what it would take to deconstruct the dam. This study would build, and or fill in the gaps of previous studies conducted and hopefully build a more accepted public discourse concerning the restoration.

Although supporters of keeping the dam are much less outspoken, the process to revitalize the valley has continuously been stifled by the realities of our political situation in California. Seen through the lens of the pragmatist, an effort so great is just not worth it. Yes, the restoration would ease the overcrowding in other parts of Yosemite, yes it would be a great salute to the late John Muir, who fought tooth and nail to save this valley at the end of his life, yes, there are other options for water and power resources. But, at what cost? In a time in which California is completely out of money, is it smart to prioritize this over our public health, our education, our deficit issues and reoccurring drought? Most notably, Senator Diane Feinstein has opposed this idea and released a statement in 2005:

“I strongly believe that tearing down a dam that provides more than 2.5 million Californians with high quality drinking water is a terrible mistake.

The fact of the matter is that California needs every drop of high quality water that it can get.  I have been working for more than a decade to increase California’s water supply through a state-federal partnership known as CALFED. CALFED calls for the development of between 1.2 and 1.5 million acre-feet of additional water storage a year. Eliminating the 360,000 acre-feet of high quality water that Hetch Hetchy provides would run counter to the goals of CALFED. We should be looking for ways to increase our water supply, not ways to diminish it.

Additionally, this would be a hugely expensive endeavor. Some say that draining the reservoir would cost somewhere between $500 million and $1.6 billion. The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, however, believes the cost to be several times greater, because the estimates don’t include many of the major costs associated with replacing the infrastructure supporting Hetch Hetchy. At a minimum, any plan to restore Hetch Hetchy would require:

  • New interties;
  • New pump facilities;
  • New conveyance facilities;
  • Increased local storage;
  • New treatment facilities;
  • Purchase of water in critically dry years;
  • Replacement of lost power from the Hetch Hetchy Project;
  • Compensation to Modesto and Turlock Irrigation Districts for storage in the Don Pedro Reservoir; and
  • Operation, maintenance and powering of all these new facilities.

Hetch Hetchy also provides 400 megawatts of power to our State. The California Energy Commission estimates that California needs an additional 3000 megawatts of power by 2008 in order to avoid a return to energy emergencies and blackouts. In a time when energy is in short supply, it would be foolhardy to take this reliable supply of power offline.

Much of the water and power infrastructure of the State, including Modesto and the Central Valley, has developed with the contributions of Hetch Hetchy in mind. Twenty percent of Modesto Irrigation District’s electric power is provided by the Hetch Hetchy system, most of it at cost. The Hetch Hetchy system also provides an important flood control function for the City of Modesto, which experienced heavy flooding in January 1997. And the City of San Francisco paid one half of the cost of the New Don Pedro Project, based on its ability to divert water further up the Tuolumne.

There is no question that Hetch Hetchy Valley is a remarkable environmental treasure. But the decision to put up the O’Shaughnessy Dam was made over 80 years ago. To tear it down now simply does not make sense.

The bottom line is that Hetch Hetchy is a critical source of water and power for the State of California. Draining the reservoir would be far too expensive and leave the State vulnerable to both drought and blackout. The O’Shaughnessy Dam should not be torn down.”

Although Feinstein’s pragmatic views are hard to argue against, they wield such resonance only toward ears that believe the inevitable is to use more and to conserve less.

The dichotomy between these two schools of thought have never been more apparent as we face a mutitude of environmental and economic problems. Can we stay true to the idealistic and altruistic ideas of John Muir and conserve and use less to greater benefit the world to come, or, will we buckle in the face of economic peril and cast aside those noble ideals for more pragmatic solutions to our everyday problems?

It is my understanding that many people have not heard of Hetch Hetchy, let alone seen it. And the question concerning it’s future cannot be answered if there is no public conversation concerning it. I feel that if this issue were to truly garner national attention as it did a century ago, we could find an answer to the question: Get rid of the dam, or let it be damned?

 

Images from Wiki

info from…
feinstein.senate.gov
stanford.edu
assumption.edu
hetchhetchy.org
Wiki
sfmuseum.org
sierraclub.org – Timeline
sierraclub.org – Editorials

hcn.org

Sign up for news and our top posts


17 Comments

  1. Adam says:

    Nice post Nick, its good to see some more thoughtful posts on this site. Not that I don’t appreciate all the other craziness, cause I do!

    Reply
  2. Kyle says:

    Honestly if they tear down the dam the whole valley is going to be just dirt. No plants survive living under the water for 80 years…. It would take decades for it to be “restored to its original state”

    Reply
  3. Nice writeup and research on unique piece of natural park history.

    Reply
  4. Kevin says:

    Agriculture is the major user (read: waster) of freshwater in California, not urban. As important as it is, and always will be, for us as urban consumers of water to conserve, the real problem surrounding California’s freshwater won’t be resolved until the major Ag players step up their conservation game.

    Reply
  5. Thanks for the well written article. I appreciate how you’ve balanced both sides in the debate over Hetch Hetchy. Last year I had a great camping trip in the area and was stunned by it’s beauty. I wish I could have seen before they flooded the valley.

    Reply
  6. Ken says:

    Wow!! What timing. What a great article. I was just in this Valley this morning at 8:00. Truly spectacular. During the 1.5 hour round trip to Wapama Falls, we ran into 3 people. The parking lot had 3 cars at 10:00….a far cry from Yosemite Valley the day before. Go see this place. The walk across the dam is amazing, looking down at what the Valley must have been on one side and the reservoir on the other. Allowing access to the river below the dam would be great. Although not as dramatic, it’s certainly breathtaking …then we would have the best of both worlds.

    Reply
  7. This is a fascinating writeup Nik! Killer!!!

    Reply
  8. John Muir says:

    “These temple destroyers, devotees of ravaging commercialism, seem to have a perfect contempt for Nature, and, instead of lifting their eyes to the mountains, lift them to dams and town skyscrapers.

    Dam Hetch-Hetchy! As well dam for water-tanks the people’s cathedrals and churches, for no holier temple has ever been consecrated by the heart of man.”

    Reply
  9. geriatric Skier Gurl says:

    “There are other water and power resources OUTSIDE the boundaries of the park that can be utilized….”

    Oh, like the proposal to raise Shasta Dam (Folsom dam is already getting a raise and a spillway makeover, other dams are proposed in the north part of the state) so the Bay Delta Conservation Plan’s twin giant pipelines can divert a third of the Sacramento River before it reaches the existing estuary, and send it somewhere else. The resulting wreck of the sweetwater in the Delta (where San Francisco gets some water, where Los Angeles gets a lot of water, and where farms grow fresh food that you eat, besides being salmon habitat) being replaced with encroaching brine from the bay and ocean will then be “fixed” by a 3 decades long crazy “restoration” project of making a new artificial Delta up by Elk Grove. This has aggravated the existing Delta inhabitants and a few people upstream who aren’t completely oblivious on water issues as they realize drought + water stealing by SoCal water districts = Big Problemo up here for local watersheds point of origin water rights.

    DiFi, on the other hand, I think, wants to have Yosemite expanded by having some of her friends sell the government some adjacent land. There are also a bunch of retired San Franciscans (“Mariposans for Environmental…. Something or Other” which are rather notorious right now for being in the forefront of the effort to get rid of existing swimming pools, ice skating, bicycle rental, and horseback riding in Yosemite with their lawsuit.

    In other words, San Franciscans are just FULL of ideas of what everybody else should do to appease their desire to make a killing in real estate AND visit Yosemite once a year and not see anybody else. And have water. Sort of like what Colorado folks plans to see happen at Squaw….

    Reply
  10. white people says:

    You’re welcome.

    Reply
  11. the critic says:

    and these new ads… could significantly reduce traffic, and they do reduce the user experience

    Reply
  12. Anonymous says:

    seems like feinstein just cares about water because she made a big push for this CALFED thing and has to front like it was a great idea…typical politician pumping their own ideas over any other piece of logic

    Reply
  13. mdskier says:

    Moot point now.
    The entire south shore of Hetch Hetchy Reservoir has burnt to a crisp in the
    still raging Rim Fire. Rim Fire is now the 4th largest fire in CA history and still
    expanding at 230,000 acres.

    Reply
  14. muir says:

    bomb hills

    Reply
  15. Robert Hanna says:

    Thanks for this article. We’re going to make this happen!

    Reply

Leave a Comment