“Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact.
Everything we we see is a perspective, not the truth.”
― Marcus Aurelius, Meditations
In his book, Listening With the Third Ear, Theodor Reik, the Austrian psychoanalyst (1888 - 1969) highlighted the importance of listening carefully to people’s words to reveal what has not been said outright. The Free Dictionary calls the process using “intuition, sensitivity, and awareness” to pick up “subliminal clues” to understand what is really being said. It reminds me of a keen ranger who can discern evidence of a backpacker’s neglect in cleaning up after himself in the wilderness and leaving traces of his or her stay.
Listening carefully and discerning traces of what is hidden becomes vitally important today as more and more people position themselves on platforms to say whatever they wish without regard to honesty or authenticity. I too am one of those that can “say” whatever I wish, but in doing so, I hope my “third ear” guides me honestly and genuinely without pretense to provide a more accurate “perspective” on “reality.”
I wish to apply that “listening” to my viewing of the May 4, 2023 Centennial Celebration of the completion of the O’Shaughnessy Dam. Located in Yosemite National Park (YNP) and built by the city of San Francisco in 1923, O’Shaughnessy Dam retains the title of being the most controversial dam constructed in the United States. Despite two Secretaries of the Interior denying permits to San Francisco in the early 20th century, a third approved of the plans which swayed Congress to pass the Raker Act, the bill that allowed construction of the dam. President Woodrow Wilson signed the bill in 1913.
The reservoir that resulted submerged the picturesque Hetch Hetchy Valley under 300 feet of pure, clean Tuolumne River snowmelt from the Sierras. John Muir, an adamant opponent of the dam, called the Hetch Hetchy Valley “one of Nature's rarest and most precious mountain temples.” The Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, as it is known, stretches for eight miles and includes portions of the Grand Canyon of the Tuolumne, so called for its magnificently deep granite gorge.
The gathering at the dam on May 4 included a representative from California Senator Feinstein’s Office, the Mayor of San Francisco, and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission’s (SFPUC) General Manager and its President, among others.
What follows are a few quotes from the gathering that leave traces of what is not said.
1. “We have an exceptional partnership with this Park and the National Park Service (NPS). It’s a partnership with a focus of protecting natural resources.”—Dennis Herrera, General Manager, SFPUC.
Of course, it is in the best interest of the SFPUC to have an “exceptional relationship” with the NPS. O’Shaughnessy Dam and the watershed where the water originates all lie within the Park’s boundaries. I find it strange, however, that no NPS representative spoke at the ceremony nor did any appear to be in attendance. The unstated reality indicates that the SFPUC knows that when it comes to its relationship with the NPS, it is in the driver’s seat. Long-standing protestations by prominent NPS representatives of the past, including the first Director of the Park Service, Stephen Mather, have failed in getting the city of San Francisco to abide by all of the provisions of the Raker Act, or to acknowledge the nature of the offense the dam has brought against all Americans.
Influential Washington DC power brokers, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (36 years in the House of Representatives) and Senator Dianne Weinstein (31 years in the Senate), who are both long-time San Francisco residents, have made it clear that any attempts to alter San Francisco’s source of pure, clean water (i.e., to restore Hetch Hetchy), will be denied. A KQED website quotes the LA Times as saying Senator Feinstein, the former mayor of San Francisco, once called the Hetch Hetchy reservoir the city’s “birthright” and any idea to add campgrounds or to restore the Valley to its original state would be “dumb, dumb, dumb.”
“Listening” carefully with a “third ear” indicates that, politically speaking, the NPS stands subservient to San Francisco, despite the city’s effusive claim of having an “extraordinary relationship.” History shows that the NPS has never been in a celebratory mood over the damming of Hetch Hetchy Valley.
2. "SFPUC . . . has been working closely with the National Park over the years by Investing more than 8 million dollars a year in Yosemite National Park focusing on projects, such projects as road maintenance to educational activities to fire protection and many more.” -- Newsha Ajami, President, SFPUC
My reading of the 2020 Memorandum of Understanding between the SFPUC and the NPS indicates more than a trace of euphemistic wording in Ms. Ajami’s summary of the agreement. Her narrative conceals the agreement’s real purpose, which is “to preserve the [San Francisco’s] watersheds within YNP as high-quality drinking water sources and to maintain the filtration avoidance status of the Hetch Hetchy Supply.” (Page 2-- Emphasis added) The agreement between the SFPUC and the NPS is designed to protect San Francisco from exceeding water contamination levels that would require it to filter the Tuolumne River water, requiring a significant capital investment that would far exceed the annual $8 million it “invests” in YNP.
For example, portions of that $8 million are being used to refurbish the Tuolumne Meadows Campground and its water and sewer system. The area also includes buildings that house the Tuolumne Grill and Store, the Reservation Office, and the Mountaineering School, all of which lie near the Tuolumne River.
At first glance, this might appear to be a beneficent contribution to the Park and its visitors. Given Senator Feinstein’s sentiments about campgrounds noted above, however, the primary purpose of the refurbishment is self-serving. It will minimize the chance of a raw sewage spill that could contaminate the source of San Francisco’s unfiltered drinking water.
As for the NPS, one could consider the $8 million as “hush money” from the SFPUC. This keeps NPS employees from outwardly speaking against the devastating consequences the dam has wrought on Yosemite’s tribal and public lands. Most individuals who work for the NPS do so to genuinely support its mission to “preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations.“ (Emphasis added) For example, according to the National Park Traveler, three former Yosemite National Park Superintendents, only free to speak after retiring, contributed an op-ed piece that railed against the dam as “the greatest blemish in all our national parks.” There is no telling how many current NPS employees feel the same.
My “third ear” hears the SFPUC say that people contaminate watersheds, and the $8 million seeks not only to protect San Francesco’s “birthright” of the Tuolumne’s sweet and refreshing waters against the contamination people bring, but to also keep NPS personnel from speaking out about San Francisco's self-proclaimed ownership of those waters.
3. "This was an example of government doing something right, the state local and federal government doing something to protect the environment and but also provide a consistent water and power source.” – London Breed, San Francisco Mayor
I’m listening hard here. My “third ear” hears a trace of re-writing history. Before the formation of the NPS in 1916, three of the Department of the Interior Secretaries, Ethan A. Hitchcock, Richard A. Ballinger, and Walter Fisher, so-called government “bureaucrats,” opposed San Francisco water rights to the Hetch Hetchy watershed. Was that an example of “government” doing something wrong? As boasted in the SFPUC ceremony by the speakers, Mr. O’Shaughnessy, the civil engineer who designed the dam, and his employees possessed great “innovation,” “vision,” and engineering “marvels.” With such assets, could not he and his team have used any one of the other possible sites to build a dam that would suitably allow the 'City by the Bay' to prosper and grow? Any arguments to the contrary suggest that those “visionaries’” abilities were far more limited than extolled.
John Muir, who opposed the dam vehemently and who was not known to be a prevaricator, would be a far better historian than Ms. Breed since he himself fought the battle to prevent Hetch Hetchy from being dammed. He stated that the selection of the Hetch Hetchy site occurred “because of the comparative cheapness of the dam and of the territory which it is sought to divert from. . .” In other words, Mr. O’Shaughnessy and the then Mayor, James Rolph, of San Francisco pursued Hetch Hetchy as the most convenient and easiest route. The site focused on the narrow gorge where the Tuolumne River leaves Hetch Hetchy Valley and promotes a gravity-fed flow to San Francisco. That, however, does not make it “right.”
Additionally, there is a reason the NPS came into being. Restore Hetch Hetchy, an organization seeking to rid the Valley of the reservoir, states that, in contrast to the words of San Francisco’s current Mayor, the government was wrong and “[John] Muir was right.” Restore Hetch Hetchy explains why the NPS came into being: “Only three years later [after passage of the Raker Act], public outrage over the seizure of Hetch Hetchy Valley caused Congress to pass the National Park Service Act. This act ensured that our parks would be preserved and managed for the enjoyment of all Americans.”
My “third ear” hears what the ancient philosopher, Marcus Aurelias stated when he observed that “everything is an opinion, not a fact.” Mayor Breed’s need to highlight “government doing something right” implies that doing something wrong is the norm for big government. My own experience as a thirty-year government employee revealed that political expediency often propels government. The example of Woodrow Wilson's appointment of Franklin K. Lane as the Secretary of the Inferior after he became president in March 1913 speaks volumes. Mr. Lane was the City Attorney of San Francisco when the appointment was made. Nine months later, the Raker Act passed through Congress.
FoundSF, a website devoted to San Francisco history, confirms the political machinations that propelled the passage of the Raker Act: “The time was propitious. Woodrow Wilson had named, as his secretary of the interior, Franklin Lane, a California Democrat, long time [SF Public Engineer] Phelan associate, and supporter of the reservoir . . . San Francisco turned out a full force of lobbyists . . . who made one or more journeys to Washington.” John Muir wrote of those lobbyists, “Few of their statements are even partly true, and all are misleading.”
Rarely can political expediency be characterized as “right.” I will admit, however, that is merely my perspective.
The ceremony to celebrate the centennial of O’Shaughnessy Dam left traces of many unspoken words, like a backpacker leaving behind evidence of his/her stay in the wilderness. I listened carefully with my “third ear” to reveal them as honestly as I can, and to “clean” things up as best as I could. I hope the next group of San Francisco officials that come to celebrate the dam and to say what they wish, whenever that might be, leave no traces of their unspoken words, but are honest and genuine. In Part 2 of this topic, I will do my best to "clean up" the unspoken words about access to Hetch Hetchy.
~ ~ ~
* The thoughts in this essay are in no way meant to demean the work done every day by the employees of the SFPUC and San Francisco's Water Power and Sewer divisions. Likely, they too have their own opinions about the Hetch Hetchy reservoir.
Comments