Dam on the upper San Jaoquin | High Sierra Topix  

Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Grab your bear can or camp chair, kick your feet up and chew the fat about anything Sierra Nevada related that doesn't quite fit in any of the other forums. Within reason, (and the HST rules and guidelines) this is also an anything goes forum. Tell stories, discuss wilderness issues, music, or whatever else the High Sierra stirs up in your mind.
User avatar

Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby Gooflinger » Sun Oct 19, 2014 6:20 pm

Hi Everyone,
Just got my new issue of Ca. Game and Fish and on page 14 under More Reservoirs Proposed they are talking about Bills proposed in Congress would allow a new Dam on the Upper San Jaoquin River and damming another valley north of Sacramento. Just thought I would throw it out there,just concerned!

Gooflinger



User avatar
Gooflinger
Topix Novice
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 11:12 am
Location: Gardnerville, NV.
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby freestone » Sun Oct 19, 2014 7:57 pm

Pay close attention to California Prop 1. The outcome of the election could jumpstart long stalled damn building projects on rivers such as the San Joaquin.
User avatar
freestone
Topix Expert
 
Posts: 571
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 9:42 pm
Location: Santa Barbara
Experience: Level 1 Hiker

User avatar

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby dave54 » Sun Oct 19, 2014 8:29 pm

freestone wrote:Pay close attention to California Prop 1. The outcome of the election could jumpstart long stalled damn building projects on rivers such as the San Joaquin.


...and run up the state's credit cards by $14 billion.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
Log off and get outdoors!
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
User avatar
dave54
Founding Member
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:24 pm
Location: where the Sierras, Cascades, and Great Basin meet.
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby robow8 » Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:05 pm

dave54 wrote:
freestone wrote:Pay close attention to California Prop 1. The outcome of the election could jumpstart long stalled damn building projects on rivers such as the San Joaquin.


...and run up the state's credit cards by $14 billion.


And line the pockets of Moonbeam's buddies.
User avatar
robow8
Topix Regular
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:17 pm
Experience: N/A

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby Cross Country » Tue Oct 21, 2014 10:04 am

I wonder how many people in HST write about economics and have a university degree in economics.
I also wonder how many believe they are experts on economics with no economics education whatsoever.
Cross Country
Topix Fanatic
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 11:16 am
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby SSSdave » Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:29 pm

Those agri-corps that use politics and media manipulation that have made the rest of we Californians pay for their cheap water for decades and now are at it again.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california ... tml#page=1
User avatar
SSSdave
Topix Fanatic
 
Posts: 1965
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:18 pm
Location: Silicon Valley
Experience: N/A

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby Cross Country » Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:05 am

That is an accurate economics statement Dave
Cross Country
Topix Fanatic
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 11:16 am
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby rlown » Wed Oct 22, 2014 12:23 pm

sorry to disagree on some level. We really need all the dams we can get in this state, and the CDB/eviros will fight that all the way. Redirect all High speed rail to water. Much more important. Now go flush your toilet, pour a tall glass of water (8 a day) and imagine a day when you cannot.
User avatar
rlown
Topix Junkie
 
Posts: 5352
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:00 pm
Location: Petaluma and Wilton, CA
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby Cross Country » Wed Oct 22, 2014 12:34 pm

Actually I agree with your comments too Russ.
Cross Country
Topix Fanatic
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 11:16 am
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby ERIC » Tue Oct 28, 2014 1:14 pm

"Upper" SJR is likely referring to Temperance Flat which is essentially an expansion of Millerton Lake. http://www.reedleyexponent.com/articles ... 109340.txt

The "storage" funding isn't explicitly handcuffed to reservoir construction as it was in earlier drafts. While some reports suggest this money will be used for dam construction, that is by no means certain. The money could instead be used for groundwater banking, etc.
New members, please consider giving us an intro!
Follow us on Twitter @HighSierraTopix. Use hashtags #SIERRAPHILE #GotSierra? #GotMountains?
Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HighSierraTopix
User avatar
ERIC
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
 
Posts: 2910
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:13 am
Location: between the 916 and 661
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby rlown » Tue Oct 28, 2014 1:45 pm

Eric,

What are your thoughts on groundwater banking w/o monitoring/metering Agriculture pumping? Seems we have that with above ground water feeds today. Not so much with the farmers freely pumping groundwater.
User avatar
rlown
Topix Junkie
 
Posts: 5352
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:00 pm
Location: Petaluma and Wilton, CA
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: Dam on the upper San Jaoquin

Postby limpingcrab » Tue Oct 28, 2014 2:42 pm

40 bazzillion dams on the forks of the SJR already, what's a few more? That place is jacked. (unless you're upstream of Mammoth Pools, then it's great!)

Helped with some of the research for salmon restoration on the lower SJR, not exactly promising future down there either...
User avatar
limpingcrab
Topix Regular
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 8:38 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

Next

Return to The Campfire



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests