Dr. Kasho's wildlife documentation is stunning. He and his wife, another UCLA researcher, are the ones who managed to snap photos of the illusive, but beautiful Long-tailed Weasel at Malibu Lagoon. Thanks for posting this and for showing that not all scientists are in favor of bulldozing this beautiful, functioning ecological wonder that is Malibu Lagoon.

Bob, it was made dysfunctional by the stupid '83 operation but is now healing by mother nature. keep the green-washing and bulldozers the hell out of Malibu. Looks like you're the one getting paid here.

Mr. Kasho was actually referring to Phase 1, the parking lot construction, that contributed to the loss of Wood Ducks, Oyster Catchers, Snow Geese and other birds that have yet to return to Malibu Lagoon. Imagine the loss of life when the entire marsh land is destroyed by bulldozers.

Does anyone ever listen to nature anymore? Engineers see only a battle against nature. Geologist read natures forms and processes and try to work with her. All coastal engineering is bound to fail. Ask any geologist. Stop this nonsense of lagoon engineering!

As a coastal geologist and oceanographer (US Geological Survey 1980s, Oceanography Researcher at URI GSO - My specialty is coastal process and extreme events), as well as science educator (Ph.D. in Science/Technology Education), I know that engineering the shoreline is almost always a bad idea - especially when based on half-baked ideas for modifications that uninformed land developers and speculators think looks pretty). The coastal zone is by form and process one of, perhaps the, most dynamic place on the planet, where land, sea and air meet. Coastal processes can indeed be predicted. These dynamics at play are known. It is a certainty that any engineered coast will eventually (at at some cost to structures built) revert to a naturally responding form. Our manipulation efforts are more often than not doomed to failure. If you need an expert to argue for protecting the natural system, talk to a geologist, not an engineer or profiteering "land developer". The history of the US Army Corps of Engineers is fraught with failed attempts to "control nature". The argument is a no brainer!
Scott M. Graves Ph.D.

You hit the nail on the head Scott, the non-profits behind the dredging and re-engineering of Malibu Lagoon and Ballona are corrupt fronts for large engineering corporations such as AECOM, MWH, RMC, PSOMAS and CH2M Hill. These multinational giants are on the board of Heal The Bay, Baykeeper and the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission. Our environment is being attacked by the very organizations that are supposed to protect it.

Athena. Sadly, that is a tactic that works in fooling the public. "Power" subverts the dialog and gets the public to think they are working to protect, when they really are protecting their interests - witness how many times politicians adopt the very language and terms that others might se against them, in a preemptive strike, e.g. "the Wise Use Movement", etc. What is needed is a call to action, to expose their agenda and reclaim the effort and the language of sustainability.

I agree, we did have (close to) a natural system back in the day. Nature needs no "fixing" by the hand of man. Man has always acted out of ignorance. Like neanderthals with nukes. We often think we should move mountains, just be cause we can. Much of my commentary assumes a "natural state" as the initial condition - as in pre engineered. I grew up just inland in the Canyon - home right beneath the Serra Retreat, but also spent time living in the colony. I remember well the dynamics of the lagoon in those days. Since then I have studies many lagoon and beach systems, with particular interest in their changes over decades, centuries and millennia. I believe that our attempts to fill lagoon margins is just as misplaced a strategy. What we need is to "BACK OFF" all coastal dynamic systems and allow them to function as the natural bufferes they are - from storm, flood actions. We need to think like the old sea captains. They never build homes on beaches; instead, they built on the highlands overlooking. So, old Malibu colony, by this same thinking, is a much misplaced community... no wonder the costs incurred in trying to protect those waterfront properties.

Scott Graves you are very adept at writing the bare bones truth on this situation,thank you so very much.
Maybe every toilet in the nation should have a tv monitor showing in real time where your next flush will go and how it is affecting the given watershed. I think we also have a very social issue here as well. We are the ONLY animals who have major problems with their waste stream!

That would be very instructive.... There is no "other place" to which our refuse goes... in the end it winds up affecting the very systems, cycles and ecology we all depend upon. Thanks Bill! - ps. I remember you from my youth! Hope ou are well?!

I see you have addressed others but not my question: Why did you not address all the leftover compacted landfill placed in the lagoon when PCH was built?

A grading plan is now posted to this site to show the extent of the destruction -- virtually all of the western marsh, including many acres of native habitat and vegetation will be destroyed. These plants actually filter pollutants from the watershed, so why would they be removed? FOLLOW THE MONEY.

there is no compacted landfill where the current wetland area is behind the Colony and to dig a giant lake back there as a holding tank for sewage water is a criminal act of eco-terrorism. It is criminal negligence to plan on lagoon alteration before dealing with Tapia, Pepperdine, and shopping centers pollution upstream.

You obviously like to use the word "destroy" frivilously, so naturally we expect all the other fear-mongoring words too.

Yeah, you say “FOLLOW THE MONEY.” Exactly Marcia and I have asked repeatedly, how do you make your money from this project? And are not the Colony residents your main backers who helped start your opposition campaign? Aren't they the one's who are funding you because they don't want the paths cutting through the wildlife habitat removed?

And how much have you made so far to keep up this fight for the developers now and those few colony residents?

Hear from a CURRENT surf instructor and surfer ~ someone who's been surfing at Surfrider Beach for the past 10 years. Ian Bryant. Thanks to Mr. Malibu for sharing this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdC-V-Pn1KQ&feature=related

Mr. Purvey's false claims about Marcia and others must stop.

The Colony residents who wanted to protect property rights, including access gates to the beach, filed a separate lawsuit, and they settled with the State Dept. of Parks.

One of the terms of this settlement, as I understand it, is there is no big concrete wall along the Colony path in the project now. Ask the officials at the Dept. of Parks if this is not true, Mr. Purvey. There was a notice I saw last spring when the project was changed by the Coastal commission because of this agreement. The Colony people who sued are not allowed to support the environmental groups as a result.

Mr. Purvey is flat wrong on this, and I know that Marcia's husband works long hours at his job so that she can do this work. We in Malibu who love the lagoon, the birds and the animals appreciate her tireless dedication. I've known her since she lived in Malibu, and there is no one who works harder to protect wetlands.

The project manager, who I see is close with Mr. Purvey, made up this lie about her support, as if her opinion can be bought. Anyone who knows Marcia knows this is not true.

Why doesn't Marcia speak for herself? Let her refute that she never got a dime for her opposition campaign.

Do you think letting the pollution in the lagoon go unchecked for another year is acceptable? Do you know what answer I'd get if a gathered 100 surfers and asked them that same question?

I already know about the wall and we saved around $200,000.

There is a photo posted on this site showing healthy, swimming Striped Mullet. These fish would not have been living in the Lagoon on July 23, with a closed to the sea condition if there was not sufficient oxygen. The false claim about insufficient oxygen is similar to the claim that this project must go forward to clean up the lagoon pollution. The evidence in the record states the project will NOT clean up the pollution. How can it? Pollution will continue to come from upstream, and the native plants that soak up the pollution are going to be ripped out by the bulldozers. This is not restoration.

An official in charge of the lagoon demolition project stated that NO WATER CLEAN-UP will be happening as part of this effort. She stated this at the Governing Board meeting of the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission on Thursday morning, according to reports from members of the public who attended. She said that cleaning up human fecal bacteria is not the reason for the project. Mark Gold has said repeatedly that the TMDLs - which relate to cleaning the water - is the reason. And Surfrider claims that is their rationale. The project proponents don't even seem to agree on the reason for the project.

Marcia Hanscom is the leader of the opposition campaign, is a paid operative working to manipulate information with half -truths. A clear example is the small grading plan she is referring to here in this article with her comment - can you read it? Does she really want you to read it? Go to the article "The Lagoon Project Is NOT Related To The Surf" here on Malibu Patch and you'll see a PDF image of the final grading plan and you'll be able to zoom in on it to read all the details.

I was at the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission meeting yesterday where I spoke about the recent USGS findings. Suzanne Goode was there, she was the only person to address my public comment. She clearly stated that "the focus of this project is to change the artificial topography, fecal indicator has nothing to do with it".

Not too long ago, in the Surfside news, Mark Gold had this to say: "The ecology of the lagoon is severely impaired and the end result is that the state water board, the EPA, regional water board, they've all made it clear that this lagoon is so polluted that it needs to be cleaned up," Mark Gold, the president of Heal the Bay, which worked with state parks to develop the restoration project.

Before that, Suzanne told a group of us at the Malibu Watershed Council Meeting that the Jack-knife clam is suffering.

Which reason is it and why do the justifications for bulldozing seem to flip-flop?

N

Mark Gold had this to say: "The ecology of the lagoon is severely impaired"... yet Mark Gold has done NOTHING about Tapia, Pepperdine, and shopping centers dumping into Malibu Creek. His failure to address these grievous crimes constitutes negligence. If those contributors to pollution are not in Gold's "territory" then it is his responsibility to report the crimes to those funding Heal the Bay. But to suggest bulldozing the wetlands as a solution to the upstream polluters makes him a complete imbecile and he ought to be fired immediately.

I wrote down what Suzanne said word for word. Yes, please consult with her so we can clear this up.

Heal The Bay, sponsored by the following corporations: CH2MHill, MWH GLOBAL, PSOMAS, RMC, AECOM, EDISON, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY, BROWN & CALDWELL, CAROLLO, HDR ENGINEERING, GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS....the list goes on and on.

Hey all..... what is it that you/we all really want in the long run? Say 20-50 yrs from now, what will be the legacy of all this activism? I propose that all in this "fight" actually do wish to see a healthy functioning ecosystem - lagoon and beach, creek that is fun to play and fish and swim in (like back in the 60's when I lived on its banks), and a real world-class surf spot with dynamic sandbar system that supports a diversity of breaks with the historic major peaks stabilized. So.... how about everyone airing concerns, admitting bias and "agenda", but then moving beyond to ensure hat whatever "we want out of this" the greater beneficiary is actually the ecosystem.

I know for my part, as a once resident of Cross Creek and the beaches, having spent all my youth in the creek, fishing (steelhead caught back then), swimming (actually drank the creek water and never got sick), rafted down the creek to the lagoon, surfed the breaks, chased grunion at midnight on the beach, etc. I knew all the area well, and the residents back then - Lyon, Kaufman, Nathanson, Marin, Hagman, Hormel, Horner, Hopkins, and on and on. Those were days indeed, and I never thought such a community would fragment over an issue we all care so much about - preserving our wonderland.

So, now what. I ask all to put all concerns up. Some (I would hope all) really want a long term solution that would give us a vibrant healthy creek-lagoon-beach system. We might have to give up some of the land we took (in our ignorance). The UCLA proposed reclamation of large pieces of claimed and filled/graded lands were once, and should be again a part of what nature made to suit the dynamics of the historic ecosystem. More than ever, with all the upstream changes in land use - the coastal wetland system needs its body back.... But we can do this while serving our wants for a recreation area, especially a world class surf spot.

I have been listening to many voices: Andy's love of the surf (mine too), the others deep concern for the existing wildlife (me too again), etc. We may all need to take a step back and consider that to help the ecosystem's long term future, we may have to put up with a system in transition, including diminished surf potential at first point (until a study can substantiate a solution for permanent dynamic connection of sediment outflow - certainly the current far east outlet is not what was happening in the past and it threatens the Adamson house as well as starves the major point break). The existing wildlife, may be displaced by a radical drain and dredge, but it will return, or could be nurtured throughout the process if a less radical approach was taken ...

Less dramatic dozing and a longer term, more hands on dig and planting process - how about a service learning approach, recruit residents and schools or other workers to do more manual labor manipulation - or let the reclamation take place over years instead of a one shot deal. The UCLA study eventually calls for a huge area of reclaimed wetland. I'm all for that. Malibu residents could take the high ground and really honor nature. Give up some precious land and feel good about it. Still..... the major issue is the vast numbers of people impacting the watershed, the treatment plants and Pepperdine effluent. The long term wetland reclamation should and needs to take into account all concerns - water quality and recreation and ecosystem services and health. It can be done! All need to cool jets. Everyone's heart is in the right place... a best-of plan needs to be laid, starting with the UCLA study and including water quality surf... and upstream legal action and limiting of watershed residents' "rights to pollute".

Nature as best and perfect (sort of) architect, did initiate a dynamic lagoon and fronting beach/berm. It has always shifted, as the course of the main stream channel meanders. Most of us have little "deep time" awareness, so we are shocked at flooding, etc. the healthy ecosystem actually "needs" the entire width of its historical wetland, meandering channels and all. We can manipulate, wisely, but at a cost. Eventually we would need to mimic nature and force distribution of water and sediment to help maintain a viable wetland and fronting beach and sandbars. We just need to better understand how nature works, and her timescales. If we manipulate, we should not be surprized at natural responses.

Thank you Scott, for being a diplomatic voice who obviously cares about our lagoon. Part of my frustration is that this is a brackish lagoon and proponents want to change it into more of a tidal/salt water lagoon. Am I correct in my interpretation all? That being said, the many animals who do currently thrive here would not be able to do so once the conditions were changed. I was on the first bridge this morning and saw not one, but two Virginia Rails. So many birds and fish rely on this fresh water, I am not sure I believe in a hard core dozing operation. I think if we address the sources of pollution coming into the lagoon then the long term goal would be achieved. The lagoon will heal itself and beyond that, the ocean would benefit as well. I am a firm believer in the Precautionary Principle, first do no harm.

I got this paragraph from www.sehn.org:

Unfortunately, precautionary action has been the exception rather than the rule in U.S. environmental policy. Instead, even laws with precautionary intent and substance have been undermined, overridden, and poorly enforced.
Q. Why have these laws failed to protect people and the environment?
A. Many regulations are aimed at cleaning up pollution and controlling the amount of it released into the environment rather than preventing the use and production of toxic substances.
But the greatest weakness in most conservation and toxics policies is that they are based on the expectation that science can and must provide definitive proof of harm before protective action is taken. This assumption creates a loophole in regulations, giving the benefit of the doubt to products, technologies, and development projects, even those that are likely to have harmful side effects.
Q. How does the precautionary principle change all that without bringing the economy to a halt?
A. Preventive policies encourage the exploration of better, safer, and often ultimately cheaper alternatives--and the development of cleaner products and technologies.

The lagoon project is like the realization that a broken arm was allowed to heal out of alignment . This happened to my sons friend who later had to have his arm reset properly and allowed to heal in a way that he would not be handicapped for life . The Lagoon would be handicapped for life without re-configuring it .

The real ... and most appropriate (as far as ecology goes) surgical procedure would be a fix that removes the golf course and turns most of the floodplain back to the wild. Good luck.... though I feel right in stating that obvious solution, I aslo recognize that we (humanity) are a party of "nature", in fact we are that specific component of nature that thinks, plans, and sometimes feels regret. We are nature's conscience. We ought to plan, even rethink plans that serve the greater good. 
"A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, the stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”  A. Leopold

Probably the most visible example of unintended consequences, is what happens every time humans try to change the natural ecology of a place.
Margaret J. Wheatley

I'm so glad you brought up the golf course, Scott. We filed a coastal enforcement action (no permit for the golf course) over that land and objected when the California Coastal Commission was ready to give him a retroactive permit for the 20+ year violation, making a mockery of the coastal development permit process.

Fortunately, Mr. Perenchio came to his senses, and he agreed to "give something up" - for the floodplain - and idea you suggested in an earlier comment, Scott. We are grateful to Mr. Perenchio and his wife, as they also agreed to stop using the poisons on the golf course that many think were likely ending up in the adjacent lagoon and the surf zone.

Heal the Bay did not think many of those poisons were so bad; we had to prove each one of these poisons to them -- as they advised the Perenchio legal team, since John Perenchio served on the Heal the Bay board of directors. I was rather surprised Mark Gold and Shelley Luce were willing to allow some pretty bad chemicals to continue. Mr. Perenchio's lawyers were great to deal with as we came to a solution.

Below are a series of articles people can read for a refresher course in what happened.

http://articles.latimes.com/2003/jul/10/local/me-perenchio10
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/oct/15/local/me-perenchio15
http://articles.latimes.com/2004/jun/11/local/me-perenchio11

The jack knife clam will benefit from having some oxygen in the mud so it can survive. It is an inhabitant of intertidal wetlands and estuaries and does not need an entirely saline environment. The bullrushes, or tule reeds, will be replaced. The existing ones may be able to be salvaged and replanted upon completion of the earthwork.

What number of parts per million of salinity does the Jack Knife Clam need, Suzanne, from your understanding?

My understanding is that this species is not natural to the sort of wetland that Malibu Lagoon is. The only time the Jack Knife Clam has been documented there was during a time when State Parks and the County were opening the berm with bulldozers and keeping the lagoon more saline than is natural.

And as you know, this was before the Tidewater Goby was successfully reintroduced to Malibu Lagoon and other agencies ordered the bulldozing to be ceased; present conditions, with far less salinity, have helped the Goby.

Can you name other coastal wetlands where Jack Knife Clams and the endangered Tidewater Goby thrive in the very same salinity environment?

I don't think anyone quite gets it. While not as much water as in the past,hundreds of thousands of gallons per day of treated waste water introduced and shoved down the throat of Malibu Canyon watershed by meddling humans is what you ALL are
calling "natural"? I
By this meddling that is including all of us! Fundamentally we do not know what to do with our own crap! So we use enormous amounts of increasingly expensive resources (fresh water,chemicals and electricity) and shove the result somewhere else at undo cost!
Then we introduce animals mother nature has withdrawn for reasons we cannot know, then we continue to call this phenomenon natural- please. I still have not seen a steelhead swim there since I was a kid that would have meant the creek was open to the ocean

What some of us have been saying all along, focus on the sources of pollution. I think everyone should be required to have a compost toilet but I don't see that happening. Here we are now. Rather than altering nature once again, to possibly accommodate further development, we should shift our focus on long term sustainable goals that would eliminate altogether the dumping of millions of gallons of treated water into our ocean.

Having surfed at dawn this morning , air temperatures barely in the 40's and water temps close to 54 degrees it was rather biting cold. However the near 75 degree water seeping through the berm was quite gross, smelled even worse. With out substantial rains this time of year the lagoon should nary be but a trickle. Just an observation. Oh, by the way observed a herd of birdwatchers walk the beach up to the lagoon trying not to disturb the bird life but trampling the native vegetation the state is trying to restore,hmmm, what we cannot understand we destroy.