by Spreck | Aug 10, 2024 | Uncategorized
We’re excited to be reuniting with Pulitzer Prize winner Tom Philp when he joins us at our Annual Dinner on October 26 in Lafayette.
On April 21, 2001 (John Muir’s birthday), before authoring the editorial series that earned him the Pulitzer, Philp wrote “Bring Back Hetch Hetchy?” for the Sacramento Bee Forum. The Forum article introduced a newly-formed Restore Hetch Hetchy and our campaign for restoration to the larger public, stressing both our technical competence and our passion for and commitment to changing history as embodied within our visionary founder Ron Good.
Ron Good has moved on, but that passion and commitment has only grown within the board, staff and supporters of Restore Hetch Hetchy.
Meet Tom on October 26 in Lafayette.
The prescient Forum article is worth rereading. Yosemite is more crowded than ever. Dams are coming out. Water agencies are reforming. Some industry leaders from 2001 are open-minded about Hetch Hetchy (e.g. Lester Snow and BAWSCA‘s Art Jensen). Still, leadership in San Francisco and/or Washington D.C. is needed.
Philp moved on after winning the Pulitzer, then returned to the Bee in 2023. (Ironically, or perhaps not, Philp worked as an Executive Strategist for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California for 16 years – impressively demonstrating that reliable water and environmental restoration are wholly compatible.)
We expect Tom to stay on message (it’s the politics, not the plumbing!). But he’s been watching statewide water trends and well understands San Francisco’s changing needs. We can expect Philp to provide us with some compelling approaches to slicing the Gordian (political) Knot from his unique perspective.
Please join us at our Annual Dinner featuring Pulitzer Prize Winner Tom Philp on October 25 in Lafayette. See details here.
by Spreck | Jul 28, 2024 | Uncategorized
The newly released “Superintendent’s Compendium” for Yosemite National Park still prohibits boating and fishing at Hetch Hetchy Reservoir. But the reasoning for the prohibition has fundamentally changed. The National Park Service now seems to be conceding that it could allow boating if it were to choose to do so.
(This conclusion is based on Restore Hetch Hetchy’s interpretation of the 2024 Superintendent’s Compendium. It is not based on any direct statement by the National Park Service.)
This concession is progress, but, at the same time, obviously frustrating that these activities are not allowed.
We will persevere as we believe an improved visitor experience is key to getting people excited about Hetch Hetchy and building support for restoration as well as providing visitor benefits in the short term. Boating will not only be recreation for its own sake and sightseeing, but will also provide hikers access to Rancheria Falls, climbers access to Hetch Hetchy Dome and fishermen access to streams that feed Hetch Hetchy. (We do not believe many boaters would then decide they prefer the reservoir to a restored valley.)
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (and occasionally the Nation Park Service) operates a motorized boat on Hetch Hetchy, normally for “official” purposes. Above, Tom Graff, former Regional Director of the Environmental Defense Fund, gets a ride courtesy of the SFPUC.
Compare the operative language in the 2023 and 2024 Compendia with regard to boating (similar language is used to prohibit access below the high water line which effectively prohibits fishing).
- 2023 Yosemite Superintendent’s Compendium: Hetch Hetchy Reservoir is closed to all vessels. Lake Eleanor is closed to all motorized vessels. These restrictions are in direct support of the Raker Act, Water Quality Provisions, and the Filtration Avoidance Regulation, and it is necessary to maintain the high quality of water found in the Hetchy and Lake Eleanor Reservoirs as a clean municipal drinking water source free from microbial pathogens and other contaminants.
- 2024 Yosemite Superintendent’s Compendium: Hetch Hetchy Reservoir is closed to all vessels. Lake Eleanor is closed to all motorized vessels. These restrictions are necessary to maintain the high quality of water found in the Hetch Hetchy and Lake Eleanor Reservoirs in accordance with the NPS Organic Act and to protect water quality of the downstream segments of the Tuolumne Wild and Scenic River in accordance with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
The 2023 Compendium implies that boating and fishing would violate the Raker Act. After Restore Hetch Hetchy and others explained that the language was not only not supported by but in fact directly violated the Raker Act, the National Park Service made a change.
The 2024 Compendium cites the NPS Organic Act and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act as legal authorities to continue these prohibitions. The Organic Act, passed in 1916 partly in response to outcry over the Raker Act, created the National Park Service and provides little in the way of specific language that would allow it to preclude boating at Hetch Hetchy while allowing it at lakes throughout Yosemite. We have asked the NPS for more information about how the prohibition derives from the Organic Act.
Rafting the Wild and Scenic Tuolumne River is a wonderfully wet and wild experience. Photo: Sierra Mac River Trips
The link to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act seems specious at best. The Tuolumne River, upstream and downstream of Hetch Hetchy, is protected by the Act but the reservoir is not. Moreover, below Hetch Hetchy, the Tuolumne River includes two famous whitewater stretches where there is substantial human contact with water – far greater than would occur at Hetch Hetchy Reservoir.
As explained above, we hope soon to get additional clarification on this decision and its rationale from the National Park Service. We will make every effort to ensure park visitors are provide improved access and recreational benefits at Hetch Hetchy.
P.S. Don’t forget our Annual Dinner featuring Pulitzer Prize Winner Tom Philp on October 25 in Lafayette. See details here.
by Spreck | Jul 26, 2024 | Uncategorized
Is the quality of San Francisco’s water as good as some claim?
The simple answer is no. Some people cannot distinguish it from other Bay Area supplies, and many who do prefer those other sources.
Ever since damming Hetch Hetchy Valley in Yosemite National Park, San Francisco leaders have been boasting about the quality of their water supply. Restaurants often tout their “Hetch Hetchy” water, conflating one of many storage reservoirs with the source of the water (the Tuolumne River). Some claim that it is the best around or even the best anywhere, and that the quality is essential for making bagels and brewing beer.
Such hyperbolic adulation seems unwarranted.
Debunking San Francisco’s outlandish claims about water quality is important. When the valley is restored, we don’t think consumers will be able to tell the difference if the bulk of their water is diverted from other locations in the Tuolumne River watershed. Further, we believe the overstated water quality claims are a factor in current prohibitions against boating and fishing in the current reservoir.
In early July, we asked 34 people to take part in a “double-blind” taste test to determine how water provided by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission compares to that provided by the East Bay Municipal Utilities District and the Marin Municipal Water District.
The results were reasonably close, but Marin was the favorite, followed by East Bay MUD with San Francisco receiving the fewest first place votes. See Figure 1.
The taste test was designed by graduate students at Colorado University, who collected survey data in Oakland in June and who will complete a full report that we will then release in the fall. Data for Figure 1 was collected by Restore Hetch Hetchy in July at locations in Marin, Alameda and San Mateo Counties. (A “double-blind” test is one in which neither the subject nor the person administering the experiment knows which sample is which.)
At Restore Hetch Hetchy, we have always been a little skeptical about the quality of San Francisco’s water, so we asked Colorado University for help and also collected some data on our own. The people surveyed were not experts. We wanted to know what regular people think.
How are these water sources different?
Perhaps the most obvious quantitative difference between these supplies is the “hardness” of the water, i.e. the concentration of minerals, principally calcium and magnesium, measured in milligrams per liter.
San Francisco’s water is particularly soft, i.e. it has little mineral content. Some may prefer soft water, while many complain it has little taste. Note that communities which desalinate water typically add small amounts of calcium and magnesium before distributing supplies to customers.
On the other hand, people tend not to like water with a high mineral content – like most water in southern California.
Water supplies provided by East Bay Municipal Utilities District and the Marin Municipal Water District have relatively low mineral content, but higher than San Francisco. See Figure 2 for a comparison of the mineral content of selected urban water supplies in California.
It is also important to point out that most water utilities deliver a blend of supplies. The precise blend a utility delivers at any given time depends on a number of factors, including time of year, drought year vs. normal year, and maintenance schedules.
The samples for the taste test described above were collected from homes in Marin, Alameda and San Mateo (90% SF water) Counties – all with modern piping systems and after running water for five minutes. Below is more information about the sources of the various water supplies in the taste test:
- San Francisco – 85% of San Francisco’s water comes from the Tuolumne River in the Sierra Nevada. Most of this water is delivered (treated with chlorine etc. but unfiltered) directly to customers, but some is stored in Bay Area reservoirs. Water stored in Bay Area reservoirs is both filtered and treated before being delivered. San Francisco has also added small amounts of groundwater to make its supplies stretch further. (In recent years, San Francisco has shut down all imports from the Tuolumne (and Hetch Hetchy) for two months in the winter so it can do critically important maintenance on its Mountain Tunnel. Consumers rarely notice that they are relying entirely on water from local watersheds during these periods and not receiving any “Hetch Hetchy” water.)
- San Francisco’s customers – San Franciscans consume only about 1/3 of total supply provided by its Public Utilities Commission. The other 2/3 of the water is sold to other Bay Area communities, collectively members of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency. Menlo Park and Hillsborough, for example, have no source other than that purchased from San Francisco. Half of the water in Half Moon Bay is purchased from San Francisco; the rest is derived from local runoff. Fremont and other cities served by the Alameda County Water Agency rely on San Francisco for only about 30% of their supply, relying on State Water Project and local resources for the rest.
- East Bay Municipal Utilities District – East Bay cities including Berkley and Oakland rely on water imported from the Mokelumne River in the Sierra Nevada (near the Tuolumne River) for most of their supply. EBMUD also harvests runoff in local watersheds and, during dry years, brings in water from its Freeport project on the Sacramento River.
- The Marin Municipal Water District gets no water from the Sierra, relying on rain to fill its reservoirs within the county, supplies purchased from the Sonoma County Water Agency, as well as local groundwater.
Water quality is a complex issue. Safety is paramount and fortunately something urban consumers in California rarely need to worry about. (It’s a different story in many small towns.)
Taste, on the other hand, is, well, a matter of taste. And many people simply do not prefer San Francisco’s “Hetch Hetchy” water.
P.S. Don’t forget our Annual Dinner featuring Pulitzer Prize Winner Tom Philp on October 25 in Lafayette. See details here.
by Spreck | Jul 20, 2024 | Uncategorized
Due to the reservations system affecting other entrances to Yosemite National Park, as well as extended access hours and increased publicity, Hetch Hetchy was more popular this past spring than ever.
Hetch Hetchy was full on 13 different days this spring, forcing the National Park Service to deny access to motor vehicles until another car left and freed up a parking place.
It’s disappointing whenever visitors are unable to visit their national park – whether it be Hetch Hetchy, other parts of Yosemite or any other parks. We are pleased, however, to see people flock to Hetch Hetchy. As more people visit Hetch Hetchy and learn its story, it will be far easier to build the support necessary to relocate the reservoir and return the valley to its natural splendor and all people.
The parking lots at Hetch Hetchy were filled to capacity on weekends from mid-May to mid-June (days shown in red). Visitors who arrived after 11 AM either had to turn around or wait for someone to leave. Wapama Falls’ peak flows of 800 cubic feet per second occurred during the third week of May, making its bridges treacherous to cross. By the 2025 snowmelt, the Park Service hopes to install a newer bridge at the western end of the falls to improve safety.
The chief draw at Hetch Hetchy is Wapama Falls, which dries up by the end of June in an average water year like 2024. Unlike Yosemite Valley, there are no shady groves and no meandering river to provide sublime solace throughout the summer. Indeed, Hetch Hetchy is downright hot in summer months, especially where the trail below the granite monoliths on the north side of the reservoir catches full sun.
When Wapama is raging, the westernmost bridge, located at the red “B” in the photo, is unsafe to cross.
This photo was taken June 11. Crossing the bridges was exhilarating and wet, but safe. Very nice to cool off as temperatures reached close to 100 degrees.
Until the valley is restored or boating on the cool reservoir is permitted, we will continue to appreciate Hetch Hetchy best during the spring snowmelt or fall when cooler weather and the soft autumn light returns.
If (when?) weekends in the spring continue to see Hetch Hetchy’s limited parking fill to capacity, perhaps we can encourage the Park Service to arrange for a public shuttle system – after all, the Yosemite Area Regional Transit System serves the park’s other four entrances.
by Spreck | Jun 30, 2024 | Uncategorized
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is continuing its history of doing its own thing by declining to cooperate with others even when there is opportunity for mutual benefit.
The SFPUC has opted out the California Department of Water Resources’ Flood-MAR (managed aquifer recharge) Reconnaissance Study of the Tuolumne River watershed. Flood-MAR is a statewide effort to identify the potential benefits of cooperative groundwater recharge. DWR has completed a study of the Merced River watershed and is proceeding to analyze other important Sierra watersheds.
We get it – “DWR’s Flood-MAR Reconnaissance Studies” is a wonky term, but it is critically important effort for all Californians.
We will be asking the SFPUC to consider and, if it continues to decline, we will ask DWR to proceed with comprehensive analysis of the Tuolumne River with publicly available data.
DWR’s graphic illustrating some of the benefits of groundwater recharge.
The Flood-MAR studies are simply studies, and will carry neither mandates nor even recommendations for implementation. Rather, the Flood-MAR studies will provide information to the public, water agencies and decision-makers for consideration. There is no downside to better information.
Cooperative groundwater recharge, in the Tuolumne watershed and elsewhere, has substantial potential to improve water supply reliability for farms, cities and vulnerable communities, to reduce groundwater overdraft and land subsidence, and to provide upstream and downstream environmental benefits. On the Tuolumne, recharging groundwater has the potential to replace the water storage benefits of the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir.
It is essential that all of Flood-MAR Reconnaissance Studies be true watershed studies. We must know what is possible so we can work together to manage our limited water supplies as efficiently and effectively as possible. Allowing major stakeholders to opt out will result in the omission of major benefits and undermine public confidence in the overall process.
Restore Hetch Hetchy will be working with the Department of Water Resources, the SFPUC if it is willing, and others to ensure that the Flood-MAR analysis of the Tuolumne River is as complete as possible.
by Spreck | Jun 28, 2024 | Uncategorized
Keeping Promises Update and Summary
Note: This blog post is a bit thick with detail, chronicling a record of Restore Hetch Hetchy’s written communications with the National Park Service since release of our Keeping Promises report. Peruse at your leisure, but it will take some time to digest the many attachments if you are interested.
When San Francisco pleaded with Congress for unprecedented authorization to dam and flood Hetch Hetchy Valley in Yosemite National Park, it promised and Congress expected that the area would welcome park visitors. Camping, boating and fishing would be available. There was no hint that the entrance to our national park would close daily, or that Hetch Hetchy would be the one area of Yosemite not served by public transportation.
Three years ago, Restore Hetch Hetchy published Keeping Promises: Providing Public Access to Hetch Hetchy Valley, Yosemite National Park, documenting these unmet expectations. Keeping Promises advocates for 5 key elements – camping, trails, boating, elimination of gate closures and public transportation, but other improvements are warranted as well.
As a result of these unkept promises, the Hetch Hetchy area receives barely one percent of Yosemite’s visitors, while a reservation system limits access to the rest of the park during much of the year.
Moreover, park visitors who are discouraged from going to Hetch Hetchy never see its granite monoliths and roaring waterfalls or learn its full story, and are thus less likely to support relocation of the reservoir and restoration of the valley to its natural splendor.
So, since publishing Keeping Promises, Restore Hetch Hetchy has met regularly with the National Park Service at Yosemite to advocate for improved access and additional recreational activities. These meetings have been friendly, cooperative and somewhat productive, but we have realized that more needs to be done to improve the visitor experience – even with the dam and reservoir in place.
Below is a chronological summary of our written correspondence with the National Park Service that has been interspersed with our meetings. We have asked for many improvements – some of which are good public policy and others required by law.
We are waiting for a promised written response to our assertion that certain current policies, including the prohibitions on boating and fishing and the daily gate closures are outside the law, violate the Raker Act and other laws. We are hoping very much that the National Park Service will willingly and enthusiastically make needed changes.
Below is a chronological record of (most of) our written correspondence over the past year.
- Group letter to Superintendent Muldoon re access etc. at Hetch Hetchy updated 2023-5-30 – A letter to the Yosemite Superintendent with names of 800 supporters who signed our petition.
- Restore Hetch Hetchy letter to YNP and SFPUC re 2023 MOA renewal 2023-06-19 – The MOA (Memorandum of Understanding) between San Francisco and the National park Service is renewed every four years, and reflects San Francisco’s obligation to pay for security and watershed protection at Hetch Hetchy. Restore Hetch Hetchy asserts that elements of the document go beyond what the Raker Act allows.
- Petition to Improve Public Access to the Hetch Hetchy Area of Yosemite National Park 2023-09-25 – Last September we filed a petition, in the form of a letter to Superintendent of Yosemite Cicely Muldoon, Director of the National Park Service Chuck Sams, Secretary of Interior Deborah Haaland and Interior Solicitor Robert Anderson. The Petition includes the elements of Keeping Promises as well as others such as handicap access and interpretation.
- Superintendent Muldoon letter to Restore Hetch Hetchy 2023-10-3 – The Superintendent’s response to our May letter.
- Restore Hetch Hetchy letter to NPS re proposed MOA with SFPUC 2024-1-24 – After meeting with the National Park Service in January, our concerns over renewal of its MOA with San Francisco were heightened. We also wrote to the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, and have spoken publicly at Commission hearings on the issues, receiving hostile feedback from both staff and Commission members.
- 2024-02-27 RHH – MOA Response from NPS – The National Park Service replied to our January letter, explaining that it made some changes to the document based on our comments, but that it was proceeding with and expected to sign a new MOA as drafted. Restore Hetch Hetchy maintains that certain elements of the document, including any reference to San Francisco’s filtration exemption, are unwarranted and possibly illegal.
- Restore Hetch Hetchy letter to Yosemite NP re nonmotorized vessels 2024-4-8 – We thought it important to re-emphasize that we believe the prohibition on non-motorized vessels at Hetch Hetchy is illegal.
- Group letter to YNP re fishing at Hetch Hetchy Reservoir 2024-5-4 signed – Fishing groups and others agree that the NPS’ prohibition on access below the high water line, effectively prohibiting fishing, makes no sense and is not supported by law.
- Restore Hetch Hetchy letter to Yosemite NP re interpretation at Hetch Hetchy 2024-5-17 – We explain the many ways that information provided to visitors at Hetch Hetchy is insufficient and/or inaccurate. We assert the NPS has no business distributing San Francisco’s “brochure” – a piece of propaganda that includes unwarranted, misleading and inaccurate statements.
- Restore Hetch Hetchy letter to NPS regarding visitor restrictions at Hetch Hetchy Reservoir 2024-5-20 – While we appreciate working with the NPS, we are impatient with progress to date. This most recent letter makes our view of certain NPS legal obligations abundantly clear, stating in part “There is therefore no legal basis for restricting human-powered boating or fishing at Hetch Hetchy Reservoir based on water quality considerations. Nor do the Raker Act’s water quality restrictions provide authority for the National Park Service to limit access through the Hetch Hetchy entrance to Yosemite National Park.”
We are very much looking forward to the promised written response from the National Park Service, especially to our most recent letter, to continued constructive engagement to improve access at Hetch Hetchy, and to the ultimate restoration of the valley.
