CA Delta boating advisory

[Carl L]

Also consider the continued building along the San Andreas fault. Sure, it's prime real estate now, but becomes worthless if it ends up rubble at the bottom of some crevice or part of the ocean. As long as people and developers ignore the scientists, you'll continue to have these types of disasters. I'm not a doomsayer, but there's a point where common sense must come into play.

I gotta jump in here.  The San Andreas is a big and active rascal, no doubt about it, it is what geologists call a first order feature of the Earth -- a piece of the mid-oceanic rift system.  However, there are lots of faults along the Pacific Coast, all the way over to the Rocky Mountains    The San Andreas is a strike slip fault -- all its motion is horizontal becasue all the stresses on it are horizontal, the west side is on its way to Alaska.  Nothing is going to fall in the ocean -- at least in the short term of hundreds of years -- bar obviously hazardous coastal cliffs and slide bodies.

There is no 'safe' place.  The whole of California is shot thru with faults.  The big ones include the San Andreas, the Hayward, the San Jacinto, the Garlock, the Sierra Front, the Inglewood-Newport, the Northridge, the San Gabriel Front, the Loma Prieta,  the Landers, etc.,  etc..  Presence on the fault zone has its hazards in an earthquake but largely because of really crappy foundation soil.  San Francisco is not on the San Andreas -- it is 5-10 north of it.  The reason the 1906 event was so destructive was that much of the 1906 city was built on sandy fill and was constructed of unreinforced masonry and wood frame not bolted to foundation.  Oh yes, and there was a fire that attempted to be controlled by dynamite.  Loma Prieta was 50-60 miles south, and it wrecked the Marina District -- which was built on fill from the wreckage of '06.

Shoot, we even have volconoes.  Shasta, Lassen, which blew its top in 1917 iirc, and the Long Valley Caldera monster at Mammoth Lakes are the big, active ones.

Do you want to live in a area with two season Mediterranian climate?  Do you like moutains running down to the sea.  Do you like to drive down a 3500 foot elevation valley and stare at mountains rearing up to 14,500 feet a few miles away?
Orange groves framed by snowcapped pearks?  Do you like to ski in mountains in the morning and surf in an ocean in the afternoon.  Well then welcome to California, but realize that there is a price.  With a bit of common sense and wise construction, the price can be within reason.
 

 

[BernieD]

Today's Arizona Republic had a news article that the Risk & Insurance Magazine ranked Phoenix as the 2nd safest city in the country for business; based on models for hurricane, earthquake, winter storms, terrorism, etc. The top ranked? SACRAMENTO

 

[Tom]

Well said Carl. Interestingly, one of our neighbors asked me last weekend if it was worth getting earthquake insurance  ???

Loma Prieta was 50-60 miles south, and it wrecked the Marina District -- which was built on fill from the wreckage of '06.

The impact on San Francisco during Loma Prieta was compounded by the wave being amplified as is propagated up the peninsula. So, this land fill was at the end of a long arm that was being whipped back and forth. Kinda like waving a long flexible stick with some jello sitting on the end.

I recall folks from work who were travelling on the east coast when LP hit. All they saw were the newsclips on CNN that  focused on San Francisco. They lived down in the Santa Clara valley, part way between the epicenter and SFO and, due to phones being out, could only imagine what it was like in the valley. They assumed that, since SFO was so badly hit, the valley, being much closer to the epicenter, must have been a total disaster. It wasn't, because it wasn't whipped around at the end of the peninsula nor was it built on land fill.

Before we moved to Livermore, I checked the U.S. Geological maps from the office in Redwood City. Livermore was rated as having the lowest potential impact from Bay Area earthquakes. I'm assuming someone checked those maps before they built Lawrence Livermore Lab and again before they spent an additional $2B for their latest toy a few years ago.

 

[Bob Buchanan]

Today's Arizona Republic had a news article that the Risk & Insurance Magazine ranked Phoenix as the 2nd safest city in the country for business; based on models for hurricane, earthquake, winter storms, terrorism, etc. The top ranked? SACRAMENTO

Hi Bernie:

Interesting example of how "not" to depend upon statistical models.  R&I gets their data from AIR, a data modeling company. Winter storm data has only recently been added their models. The model takes historic data on the impact of wind on roofs, snow on roofs, and such. Obviously, the model did not contain data on "potential" damage from floods caused by levee breaks caused by dams overflowing.

As stated earlier in this thread -- Sacramento IS No. 1 now in potential flood damage in the US. And again, that's a fact.

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/projects/flooding/story/13790554p-14632249c.html

Has anyone here ever visited Sutter's Fort in Sacramento? Notice how far away from the Sacramento and American rivers it is located. 

 

[caltex]

Interesting article, thanks Bob.

 

[Tom]

Reading that article, I shake my head at the DWR folks on TV the last few days patting themselves on the back for having done a good job. Maybe they don't read the Bee?

But, Arnold has now seen it for himself during his walkaround and has declared that we must fix the levees.

 

[Tom]

Has anyone here ever visited Sutter's Fort in Sacramento? Notice how far away from the Sacramento and American rivers it is located.

Bob, I haven't been to Sutter's Fort since the early 80's and only had an approximate recollection of its location. So I looked at it on a map and I'm still trying to figure out your point. Was the fort at one time adjacent to one or both rivers?

BTW that was a sobering article.

 

[Bob Buchanan]

Bob, I haven't been to Sutter's Fort since the early 80's and only had an approximate recollection of its location. So I looked at it on a map and I'm still trying to figure out your point. Was the fort at one time adjacent to one or both rivers?

BTW that was a sobering article.

According to some articles I have read, and from what I was told years ago when visiting the fort, Sutter wanted to be far enough inland from the Sacramento to avoid the flooding. He was closer to the American, but was not as concerned.

As you probably know, his Son then began building what is now Sacramento right on the river (now Old Sacto). It was a good move at the time because it happened just before the gold rush (1848??). Of couse, the city was wiped out over and over by floods such as in 1862 (I think). He had the ability to dock shipping from the Bay, and became a focal point for the gold miners. So as with NO, all the good stuff to build a city. Never mind that you have to look "up" to see the river.

Glad you found that an interesting article.

 

[Tom]

Thanks for that explanation Bob. I was looking at it (proximity of the fort) the wrong way around.

Never mind that you have to look "up" to see the river.

We'd boated in the Delta for a number of years before I drove the levees with a friend who was born in Holland (land of the dikes). His first comment was "the water is higher than the land". Up until that point, we'd owned small boats that didn't provide a view over the levees, so we didn't realize we were boating in high places.

 

[Tom]

The DBW this morning lifted the ban on recreational boating in the CA Delta. Click here for details.