Here are excerpts from several letters from Thursday’s Bee about the dam, levees, and flooding, to give a flavor of the various opinions the public is reflecting in their letter writing.
1) "The March 11 article "Doolittle, Auburn dam win key ally" about Rep. John Doolittle getting support for Auburn dam is quite heartening for those of us who wish to see a multipurpose dam built. The best news was that money may be appropriated for a feasibility study and environmental report. Once these are written and all of the possibilities examined (dry vs. multipurpose) a multipurpose dam will win."
2) "Republicans have controlled everything in Washington for the past five years, but Doolittle couldn't get funding for his dam. Why can he now? This sounds very much like a ploy to get him through this election."
3) "In 1975, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamations started to work on a 700-foot-high concrete arch dam a mile southeast of Auburn, just downstream the confluence of the North and Middle forks of the American River. While work on the foundations of the dam was well underway, a 5.7 magnitude earthquake hit the Oroville area and proved that the numerous faults in the Sierra foothills, Auburn included, should be considered as active. "
4) "Thousands of structures have been built in areas that were underwater during the 1986 floods, yet little work has been done to strengthen the levees that are the only logical defense against future flooding.
"We all know that the Auburn dam site sits over a known seismic fault and that there are no buyers for the water or the hydroelectric power, yet Rep. John Doolittle and his puppets such as Placer County Supervisor Bruce Kranz insist on building it. An Auburn dam would do nothing to stem the flows of the Sacramento or Feather rivers or the South Fork of the American River."
5) "Has it not sunk in yet that earthen levees are water soluble! All the money poured into them for eons does not make them permanent! Adding dirt on top of dirt will not save anything - people, bugs, or crops - from a major flooding as happened in New Orleans. But a big new concrete Auburn dam would, as well as provide a huge water storage area to help prevent power and water shortages!"
6) "Strengthening Sacramento levees doesn't stop the storm water from coming down the Sierra Nevada and the foothills and overwhelming the flood control systems, nor would the Auburn dam.
"Please read the State Floodplain Task Force Report or Federal Sacramento-San Joaquin Study. The state has a compromised flood control system, complicated by upstream development, agricultural levees and volatile weather patterns. We must take the "peak off the storm"; that is, the amount of water that will overwhelm the system must be captured before it gets to the valley. The answer: hundreds, if not thousands, of low-impact, high-value reservoirs and wetlands on public and private land to draw excess flows from significant tributaries, determined by stream gauge measurements, throughout the watershed."
7) "The federal budget of 2006 is a classic case of missed opportunities.
"We need to ask a few simple questions of our representatives: Did you vote to give earmarks to Alaska to the tune of over $1 billion ($985 per capita). Why did California's earmarks amount to only $6.62 per capita? Of the funds received by California, why were $2.3 million wasted on landscaping the Ronald Reagan Freeway?
"Why are we currently funding a $1 million feasibility study for Auburn dam (our bridge to no where) when lives are at stake? We need to set priorities. Our California delegation is dysfunctional."
