LETTERS
The Ballona Wetlands needs less opinion and more objective factual analysis Editor: The March 31 letter from David Kay (Jane Velez-Mitchell and the Ballona Wetlands) continues a decades-long pattern of misinformation being justified by a highly emotional “us against them” approach to what should be a fact-based discussion. Dr. Kay has never expressed any interest in an objective analysis of the available facts. He is playing the role of a salesperson whose sole objective is for the public to buy what he is selling. Our organizational approach has been, and continues to be, to help surface all of the relevant facts in the proper context, not only those that we believe support our position that the current restoration plans for Ballona, as designed, would be extremely counterproductive to the long-term health of the wetlands. Dr. Kay suggests that the proposed plan would benefit Belding’s Savannah Sparrow (BSS), even though the environmental impact analysis unequivocally acknowledges the near-term destruction of existing BSS habitat (see page 603 of the EIR) and, more importantly, the loss of virtually all BSS habitat to sea level rise by the turn of the century (see pages 547 and 275 of the EIR). This is a mind-bogglingly counter-intuitive outcome for a “restoration” project that is priced at $182 million. When presented with the maps and data showing this concerning outcome, in an open public forum, Dr. Kay...
Read More