Natural Perspectives -- Vic Leipzig and Lou Murray

There was a commentary column in this paper last week with which we

strongly disagreed. It was by our boss, City Editor Danette Goulet. She

claimed that the Bolsa Chica restoration plan stinks.

Members of this community have fought for wetlands restoration for

more than two decades. We have battled wealthy developers who wanted to

convert the wetlands to a marina and build homes there. We have battled

misinformed members of the public who wanted a restoration plan that

spelled death for the wetlands. The last thing we thought we’d have to do

is fight our own editor.

In most businesses, disagreeing with the boss is not encouraged. But

in the newspaper business, hard-hitting controversy is the breath of

life. Besides, newspaper editors are among the strongest defenders of the

American tradition of freedom of speech. But when an editor writes a

column, it confuses the public. People might believe that it is the same

as an editorial reflecting the official opinion of the newspaper. We

assume that the Independent hasn’t shifted its decades-long support

position for the restoration of the Bolsa Chica wetlands.

To put it gently, Goulet is misinformed. She seems to think that the

view at Bolsa Chica will be destroyed by the restoration project. She

probably thinks that surfing will be ruined at the site. However, as a

surfer herself, she ought to understand that the quality of surfing is

expected to improve as a result of the inlet. That’s exactly what

happened when the Talbert Channel was created to benefit Talbert Marsh.

These restoration projects produce small inlets, on the same size scale

as the originals, and they form small offshore sand bars that improve

surf breaks.

Goulet thinks that what she sees when she looks at a modern beach is a

work of nature. In fact, the natural condition of our beaches was

enormously different from what we have today. The native sand dune

habitat that covered the back beach is essentially gone and the beach

sand is a sterile desert because of humans. There are now only small

remnant patches of the sand verbena and beach primrose that once must

have been an awesome sight along our coastline.

The beauty that Goulet can see from the mesa is man-made beauty, far

from the “treasure of nature” that she describes. We no longer have a

natural beach at Bolsa Chica, one that is teeming with shellfish, covered

with dune plants, and host to breeding birds such as snowy plovers and

least terns. In place of a natural sand dune is the man-made

infrastructure of a modern beach: driveways, parking lots, changing

rooms, bathrooms, and 60-foot high light standards, with a four-lane

highway separating the beach from the wetlands. We don’t consider this

totally beautiful. Even the expanse of glistening white dry sand that

makes up most of the visible surface of the beach is not natural. It was

originally vegetated sand dune. Its current status of ecological

sterility is due to decades of nightly grooming by gasoline-powered heavy

equipment. If you want to see a beautiful beach, go to Central California

and see one still in its native state.

Goulet may believe that the view of the beautiful ocean, with its

offshore oil wells, will be affected. It won’t. None of the inlet

structure will extend out to sea. Again, Talbert Channel serves as the

model for Bolsa Chica.

Goulet said that there were thousands of miles of wetlands along the

coast of California. Well, not quite. This is more misinformation. But

wetlands have been massively destroyed, as she acknowledges, with only a

fraction remaining. According to the California State Lands Commission,

California has lost 4.6 million acres of historic wetlands, a loss of

91%. In Southern California, 75% of historic wetlands are now gone and

the remaining 25% have been degraded to some extent. That’s a tremendous

loss of wetland habitat.

In contrast to the loss of coastal wetlands, there has actually been a

gain in beaches. The silting in of the old inlet, caused by installation

of the tide gates by the members of the gun-club a hundred years ago,

created more beach than was there before. In the process, it destroyed

the ebb and flow of tidal water-the lifeblood of the wetlands.

No, the real treasures of nature in this area are within Bolsa Chica

Ecological Reserve. And, yes, they are scarcer than the treasures of the

beach.

But being misinformed is easily passed over. What is harder for us to

understand is Goulet’s willingness to just give up the good fight. She

wrote that perhaps the Bolsa Chica “is an area destroyed by man and

that’s it.” Dead wrong. Bolsa Chica has tremendous restoration potential.

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service believes that overall habitat value at

Bolsa Chica can be improved by a factor of four, and for many species, by

factors vastly greater than that.

Restoration will improve the scenic beauty of the Bolsa Chica by

removing oil wells and replacing dried up cells with productive wetland

habitat. Environmental professionals have worked conscientiously and

diligently to create a plan that will benefit fisheries and other

wildlife, while causing the least impact to beach goers. After nearly

three decades, we’re almost there. This is no time to throw a monkey

wrench into the works.

* VIC LEIPZIG PhD and LOU MURRAY PhD are Huntington Beach residents

and environmentalists. They can be reached at o7 vicleipzig@aol.comf7 .