I am also in an area (close to where the break occurred) where the river is part
of my landscape but by nomeans would I want to take the chance of another
life being lost. I am confident that the city is doing its partto prevent
that from happening even though sacrifices would need to be made. Suing for $25
million will do nothingbut hurt the entire community. People are just sue
crazy. I hope the courts decides in the cities favor. $25 million really?
It has become abundantly clear to me that citizens of Cache Valley will lose to
corporate and bureaucratic interests in all such issues. The closing of the
canyon's canal and the covering of the Island's are just two parts of
the we-know-better-than-you approach Cache County has taken toward its citizens.
It's sad, really.
Trusting a city to do things right, is rather risky.
Joy of Logan:You seem to forget most often the legal system is the
only way for citizens to extract accountability from government/corporate
officials. Furthermore these same officials were responsible for safe operation
of this canal system. Additionally I recall reading whereby the
Logan City police chief arrogantly declared the site where folks died due to the
onrush of mud and water through their house was not a crime scene. The rapid
issuance of this statement raised concerns of a successful attempt to reduce
corporate responsibility for the tragedy. Go ahead and continue
your confidence in city officials in safeguarding your property and family
members. Hopefully you won't have to utilize the legal system to extract
accountability when your trust is violated.
We want our pretty stream, but please make sure we can sue the irrigation board
if someone gets hurt by it. Yea, the people who oversee the canals
professionally probably do know more about it than the common citizen. If you
want the canal making a pretty stream on you property, you should have signed an
agreement accepting full liability in case someone gets injured.
The decision to have a covered canal vs an open air canal is a political
decision, not a legal one. If residents feel this way, they should have been
involved in the decision making process all along. This really isn't an
issue for a court to decide.
This isn't just a local houseing problem. Outlying communities rely on
those canals. The canals need to be maintained.
While living in Logan, I often wondered how many children would need to fall
into the open canals and drown before there would be no more dangerous, open
canals. As a former resident of Logan, I think it was an excellent
decision to have the canals covered and think the canals in the Salt Lake Valley
should also be covered.
@dan76Explain how it was remotely a crime scene. What
"crime" was committed?
The canals are manmade and not natural waterways like the Logan River, so Dr.
Gobel's comment is akin to comaring apples to oranges. As long as the city
provides appropriate landscaping to the covered and open areas, I don't see
a problem. I do think that if these citizens lived down the hillside below the
canal rather than beside it or above it, they may have a different view of what
is being done.
As long as you want it restored to it's previous state, why not go all the
way and put it like it was before someone dug canals all over. Times change and
some folks just don't want that to happen.
The choice to close off a canal that was man-made seems to be excellent - in
this case. After a huge break like the one that happened earlier, the integrity
of that bank will NEVER be as strong. It's similar to the idea of
earthquakes - once there's a break, there's going to be another. Is it really that important to them to have money and a stream then to
save many lives in the coming years? How many people have drowned in that canal
in addition to the three that died from the break? Is your landscape really more
important than a life? If so, then tell the City YOU will take on the liability
involved. Furthermore, piping water instead of having an open-faced
stream SAVES water. Your argument that other communities rely on this water
really back-fires. Due to water rights, they will still be getting as much water
as they currently have the right to. The amount of water that will be saved due
to no more evaporation will be incredible.
With the rise of the Internet and the onslaught of instant news, we are daily
confronted with hurried and slipshod writing. Missing facts, poor punctuation,
and imprecise language have become commonplace. How refreshing to come upon this
well-crafted little jewel of journalism. My compliments to Mr. Anderson.
To "GQ Monkee" this isn't an issue of corporations vs. the people.
This is a land rights isue. The owners of the canal want to do one thing with
their land, and the neighbors don't like like it.Imagine you
wanted to paint your house green and your neighbors sued you to keep it the
original color because they liked the original color. What would you do? Who
I have many fond memories of floating the Logan Canal in an inner tube.
Salt Lake City is opening and exposing City Creek after many years of it being
underground, Logan is burying theirs...ho hum. Visual Water is
always better than hidden water. Elect new officials. That'll get their
attention.Provo buried the open canal on 5th West that all the
little kids and families loved to play in. Sad loss for the kids. Very sad how
a few elected officials destroy so much of the freedom and enjoyment of so many.
Government, a necessary evil in so many ways.
@CWEB"Visual Water is always better than hidden water. Elect new
officials. That'll get their attention." I'm going to
completely ignore the first sentence, and not go into a rant about water quality
because I believe you meant aesthetically. However, I cannot ignore the
following two sentences. Do you truly believe this project is occurring because
of elected officials? While elected officials generally have a say in if a
project goes through or not, it was most likely not their idea to implement the
project in the first place. However, as an elected official, I am assuming (and
hoping) that safety of a community is a huge priority. In this case, there is no
restoring the structural integrity of the river bank. Unless the piping happens
another breach in the canal will occur and how many lives will it take this
time? I personally don't want to wait and find out.
When a city or county is sued it's not the elected officials that pays out
of pocket it's you the taxpayer that pays. Are you happy with that?
When putting eye candy above life is a price we all pay.It's
not that I put so much trust in my elected officials but I have the confidence
to believe studies have been done about the dangers of another break in the
system in the future. When it comes to waterthere will always be the
wearing away of soil and break down of old pipes. Unless the engineers are on
their toes with Cache Valley waterways we are destined for another incident.
I'd rather be safe than sorry.
I used to live along that canal in Logan. Yes, it's picturesque, but I
feared every day that my toddler, or older kids, would slip my view for just one
minute and meet a tragic end.We need to stop being selfish about
what individuals want, and grow up to do what's best for the community at
large. A family died because of the canal. Really, that's not enough?
This is the canal that flooded my great grandparents' basement home when my
grandmother and her twin brother and the rest of the family lived after they
came to America from Norway. Six-year-olds (approximately) Grandma, Bertine
Berg, and Great Uncle, Cornelius Berg, were home alone playing checkers on the
bed to keep dry. The basement home was flooded with water with the spring thaw.
Someone came to visit and the mischievous youngsters said, "Come on
in." Of course, entering the dark basement from the bright sunlight, the
visitor was unaware of the lake he was walking into until he stepped down the
stairs and got soaking wet. The same duo had stolen soda crackers on the ship
on which they immigrated, but got caught when the button on Cornelius'
knickers snapped and all the crackers fell on the deck.
This is a case of the fence 'round the top of the cliff or an ambulance
down in the valley. Elected officials notwithstanding have no say, the water
owners have the say, and they are the responsible party in case of injury or
accept the liability. Economically, it is in their interest to prevent
accidents and property damage---I guess they should erect the fence and let the
elected officials pay for the ambulance.