Dam! You guys are going to make my head "burst" by all this talk of "breaching" protocol. Exaggeration IS a hallmark of Vanagon List postings, especially on Fridays.

It would be good to "decommission" one's self from the path this thread before someone's feelings get skipped across a pond by a "squadron of Lancasters". Figuratively speaking. Or writing for you "literalists". (I hope that has nothing to do with litter.);-)

BenT

sent from my electronic leash

On Nov 4, 2011, at 12:45 PM, Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@COX.NET> wrote:

> Alistair, the word "burst" in your post would imply to most (or at least to literalists like myself) that the dam somehow accidentally failed, not that it was decommissioned and removed.  mcneely
> 
> ---- Alistair Bell <albell@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> gee Dave, where I be without you :)
>> 
>> thanks for clearing that up, I thought that a squadron of Lancasters had come in to do the job.
>> 
>> alistair
>> 
>> 
>> On 2011-11-04, at 10:57 AM, Dave Mcneely wrote:
>> 
>>> The report does not say "burst."  It speaks of "breaching."  In other places in the report, it mentions the dam being "removed."  I believe this is a purposeful removal of an obsolete dam.  The rafter who was interviewed had been hired (by whom not stated) to assess silt in the river in relation to the breaching.
>>> 
>>> mcneely
>>> 
>>> ---- Alistair Bell <albell@SHAW.CA> wrote:
>>>> on the Columbia river  system
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LxMHmw3Z-U&feature=player_embedded
>>>> 
>>>> Seattle TImes article
>>>> 
>>>> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016678515_apwadamremoval1stldwritethru.html
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> alistair
>>> 
>>> --
>>> David McNeely
>> 
> 
> --
> David McNeely