🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4ps96g$rmj@cobweb.aracnet.com> jedwards@aracnet.com (Jeff in Portland, Oregon, USA) writes:

   What BAD will really due is allow developers to build in
   areas which are now in very flood prone areas.

What it will really do is reduce the probably of flooding from around
1/100 - 1/200, to around 1/500.  Of course, the optimistic 1/200 with
a Folsom re-op and levee work assumes that no levee ever fails.

There are several hundred thousand people living _now_ in the flood
plain, rightly or wrongly.  To throw their future away because some
developer might benefit is callous.

   The issue of building the BAD should not be confused with the issue
   of removing all California dams.

Of course not.  I brought that up because some seem to think that
California was kind of natural paradise Before Dams, and that the only
things dams ever did was to line the pockets of greedy developers.

   Your opinion of
   "environs" (in black helicopters?) doesn't matter.

My personal opinion doesn't matter, but the religious nature of
environmental causes matters very much to those about to be sacrified
in favor of Nature.  
-- 
"Nada burra la chamaca." A.G.
Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer or news host.
rfinch@toe.cs.berkeley.edu