The Army Corp of Engineers reviewed all the earthen dams in the country about 10 years ago probably due to new standards of testing and information collected.

We have 104 earthen dams in VA and most of these have been upgraded over the years. In some states, the lakes were drained some years ago and haven't been fixed while some boat owners failed to take their boat out and now there is no way to remove it.

Now it is too late to fix Lake Orville which is the tallest earthen dams in the country at 770 feet above the stream bed of the Feather river and covers 24.2 square miles. They are hosed. Too bad the citizens have to suffer for some dumb politician that failed to take notice.

41

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
You're so full of shit your eyes are brown.

By your logic whenever a state asks for federal funds for any sort of disaster, we ought to decline and blame the lack of money on planning? Gotcha.

Just remember, this part of the state is rather red and while CA is fucked up in Sacramento and other areas, these little cities, towns and communities that will be flooded are the same ones that voted for conservative members of the House to give the Republicans a majority.

The state of California is insolvent. The federal government is insolvent, the only difference being that the feds print the money to pay their own debt. If a state needs money to solve a problem, either the state funds it, or the the state asks the rest of us (via the federal government) to cover the cost. If Jerry Brown needs money, then borrow it. If he needs resources that the feds have, we'll send you a bill.

Is this a disaster, or is this a failure of the state to maintain its infrastructure? If it's a disaster- help. If it's a failure to maintain, then help, but the assistance needs to be setup in a way to recoup the cost. If my neighbor is in trouble I'm going to help him due to no fault of his own- I help him no questions asked. If my neighbor fails to plan- say his back yard is eroding away, and he watched it for 10 years instead of addressing the problem. He spent all his money on other things because the problem wasn't imminent. Now the erosion is threatening his foundation- insurance is canceled due to his own mismanagement. What do you do? If there aren't any consequences for making bad investment decisions, why change?

It's a crappy situation. If you ask me- the right choice is for the taxpayers of California to fund not only the fix, as well as to cover the cost of the evacuation for the individuals involved. California needs to find a way to take care the problems of it's own making. We help while there's a problem, but the state needs to cover the cost.

quote:

Originally posted by mutedblade:

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
You're so full of shit your eyes are brown.

By your logic whenever a state asks for federal funds for any sort of disaster, we ought to decline and blame the lack of money on planning? Gotcha.

Just remember, this part of the state is rather red and while CA is fucked up in Sacramento and other areas, these little cities, towns and communities that will be flooded are the same ones that voted for conservative members of the House to give the Republicans a majority.

I understand what you are saying about these folks being OUR folks. I get it, but there have been numerous posts in this thread that show actions have consequences. The elected officials within the state of California have deemed it more necessary to cover abortions for all, welfare for illegals, and every other humanitarian mission they can find, rather than set some money aside to fix crumbling bridges, roads, and dams (~1400 of them).

By your logic, nobody should have an emergency fund! Think about that for a minute...
Should we all just chip in when your hot water heater takes a shit on you? How about if you lost your job, should we just cover your bills like your mortgage, car payments, cable/internet/cell phone bills? That is what I am getting out of your statement at least.

Emergency funds are for emergencies. Occasional but predictable expenses aren't emergencies. Annual expenses are not emergencies. California knows that there are things that happen with regularity: Earthquakes, floods, landslides/mudslides, wildfires, tsunamis, power outages, and extreme heat. Failing to plan accordingly with their money is a slap in the face for those who do.

You missed my point. This isn't an annual budget issue but instead something not on anyone's radar. This is a above and beyond the norm contingency event.

I don't know how much you've followed the rainfall totals but since October Oroville and the surrounding mountains have received 3 feet of rain and 7" in the past 9 days and 4 more days of rain are coming later this week.

Don't be so harsh. Look a little closer at what they are dealing with before you think this is a busted water heater issue. By your logic the states should never ask for federal assistance for any disaster.

chellim1:

I was looking at your signature line in light of the Calexit thread. If CA did secede, I am reasonably certain they could top the US gov't as the largest criminal enterprise on earth.

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:

You missed my point. This isn't an annual budget issue but instead something not on anyone's radar. This is a above and beyond the norm contingency event.

Wrong.

http://www.mercurynews.com/201...rnings-12-years-ago/

quote:

Three environmental groups — the Friends of the River, the Sierra Club and the South Yuba Citizens League — filed a motion with the federal government on Oct. 17, 2005, as part of Oroville Dam’s relicensing process, urging federal officials to require that the dam’s emergency spillway be armored with concrete, rather than remain as an earthen hillside.

The groups filed the motion with FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. They said that the dam, built and owned by the state of California, and finished in 1968, did not meet modern safety standards because in the event of extreme rain and flooding, fast-rising water would overwhelm the main concrete spillway, then flow down the emergency spillway, and that could cause heavy erosion that would create flooding for communities downstream, but also could cause a failure, known as “loss of crest control.”

FERC rejected the motion, but it turns out the environmental groups were right. The state owns the damn, and the federal regulator shouldn't have let them get away with not making the changes. This is a problem that was seen 10 years ago but the state didn't want to address the problems.

All the more reason for Trump to help, these are good people, who they voted for doesn't matter, they are Americans who are going to potentially lose everything they have ever owned, worked for to keep maybe even for generations.

Seriously, a get even attitude because they live in a state where the major cities control politics?

Show he's the bigger man, playing with peoples lives over politics is not the way to go...

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:
chellim1:

I was looking at your signature line in light of the Calexit thread. If CA did secede, I am reasonably certain they could top the US gov't as the largest criminal enterprise on earth.

LOL. For sure.

What do you think of the State of Jefferson, has the time has come for 51? I guess you should post your reply in the Calexit thread.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
All the more reason for Trump to help, these are good people, who they voted for doesn't matter, they are Americans who are going to potentially lose everything they have ever owned, worked for to keep maybe even for generations.

Seriously, a get even attitude because they live in a state where the major cities control politics?

Show he's the bigger man, playing with peoples lives over politics is not the way to go...

Yea...thats something Zippy would do.

California has the money, but dams are a low priority compared to funding every social cause on earth, and trying very hard to circumvent the 2nd Amendment. My recommendation is to let California pay for their mistakes, otherwise the beaurocrats will never learn.

Friends of the River and others warned them in plenty of time, now they are reaping the rewards of not being responsible.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
California has the money, but dams are a low priority compared to funding every social cause on earth, and trying very hard to circumvent the 2nd Amendment. My recommendation is to let California pay for their mistakes, otherwise the beaurocrats will never learn.

Friends of the River and others warned them in plenty of time, now they are reaping the rewards of not being responsible.

Yes, California has a grotesque history of misappropriating funds. Their priorities are a mess. I would love to force this teachable moment on them, but not at the expense of hurting the good, responsible folks in that area. California politicians need to feel some pain though.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmanic:

Yes, California has a grotesque history of misappropriating funds. Their priorities are a mess. I would love to force this teachable moment on them, but not at the expense of hurting the good, responsible folks in that area. California politicians need to feel some pain though.

Agree- when people are hurting we pick up and help each other. Then we send them the bill for the response- let California figure out how to pay for it. We should help, but we shouldn't cover the cost.

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
You missed my point. This isn't an annual budget issue but instead something not on anyone's radar. This is a above and beyond the norm contingency event.

I don't know how much you've followed the rainfall totals but since October Oroville and the surrounding mountains have received 3 feet of rain and 7" in the past 9 days and 4 more days of rain are coming later this week.

Don't be so harsh. Look a little closer at what they are dealing with before you think this is a busted water heater issue. By your logic the states should never ask for federal assistance for any disaster.

I completely understand the point and I want to point you to a website California Natrual Disasters

Seems to me, that California knows full well what risks they are looking at, and fully ignored spending money where it needed to be spent. I agree that it sucks for those in the areas affected, but what should we do? My analogy about the water heater is absolutely valid and relevant here. It is an entity spending money on shit they don't need to when they could have been putting it aside to work on stuff that actually benefits everyone, not just those that vote in line with the Democrats in Sacramento. I'll bet somewhere money was siphoned away from the dam in Oroville by the big city politicians in favor of some liberal agenda.

Now, I don't think that everyone here on Sigforum is heartless. Once people start losing stuff, I fully expect President Trump to step in and offer federal assistance to help with cleanup. Honestly, it would be a great gesture of goodwill, even if it is lost on the loopy libs.

If you wish to keep going, my email is in my profile. I am sure Para doesn't want to watch us bicker back in forth.

Another thing California needs to think about, if they are actually considering Calexit (and even if they're not)--they are going to need more dams and reservoirs to provide the water needed by the expanding population. Those will need to be built according to the most stringent standards possible.

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
California has the money, but dams are a low priority compared to funding every social cause on earth, and trying very hard to circumvent the 2nd Amendment. My recommendation is to let California pay for their mistakes, otherwise the beaurocrats will never learn.

Friends of the River and others warned them in plenty of time, now they are reaping the rewards of not being responsible.

Sorry to disillusion you, but kalifornistan DOES NOT have the money. IIRC, the state is about ONE TRILLION in debt, and the debt is growing. And I tend to believe that they cannot even pay the interest on their debt.

I should have said California would have the money if they changed their priorities. Cali will never have enough money, no matter how much is thrown at them, unless the government changes their priorities.

In the county I am in, District Attorneys are paid $295k/year. When they retire they receive the same pay for life. This generous pay is typical of county employees in my area. I have no sympathy.

California has all the money it needs

it just spends it badly

if it wanted to, it could zero out 50% of its social welfare crap, all of its illegal alien 'entitlements' and all of its money earmarked for sanctuary city projects

then it would have all the money it needs

what California wants is to have its cake and eat it too

I vote NO

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
California has all the money it needs

it just spends it badly

if it wanted to, it could zero out 50% of its social welfare crap, all of its illegal alien 'entitlements' and all of its money earmarked for sanctuary city projects

then it would have all the money it needs

what California wants is to have its cake and eat it too

I vote NO

...So it is a budgeting issue...

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
California has all the money it needs

it just spends it badly

if it wanted to, it could zero out 50% of its social welfare crap, all of its illegal alien 'entitlements' and all of its money earmarked for sanctuary city projects

then it would have all the money it needs

what California wants is to have its cake and eat it too

I vote NO

...So it is a budgeting issue...

Yes, budgeting and appropriations.

Maybe we are just taking the wrong approach to fix the dam. What if we took the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, the Legislature, everyone at DWR at the level of middle management and above, gave every one of them a shovel, and dropped them in the hole in the concrete spillway. It might not fix the hole in the concrete, but something tells me that the state would be better off...

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:
Maybe we are just taking the wrong approach to fix the dam. What if we took the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, the Legislature, everyone at DWR at the level of middle management and above, gave every one of them a shovel, and dropped them in the hole in the concrete spillway. It might not fix the hole in the concrete, but something tells me that the state would be better off...

I wonder how much sense of responsibility Jerry Brown et al might feel for their contribution to the problem; how much responsibility to solve the problem; how much effort to shift the blame/attention in some other direction.