Social distancing in Venice Beach.
Credit: Kris Dahlin
Supporting Karen Bass
I agree with Rachel Brashier’s advocacy in support of Karen Bass to replace Kamala Harris as one of California’s two senators. Congresswoman Bass is the platonic ideal of participatory democracy, always professional, always polite, always well informed, and always willing to listen to views not in accordance with her own. California couldn’t do better.
Ron Richards
West Los Angeles, CA
‘Jim Jones Trump’
Donald Trump is a loser like David Perdue.
Trump’s voters are rubes and crazy fools.
What are you afraid of, racist Republicans?
Where did those fascist Trump flags go?
Don’t you want to die for Mad King Trump?
Drink the Kool-Aid of Orange Jim Jones!
Start a second civil war and see how it goes?
You already lost! The President-elect is Joe.
And with Kamala as Biden’s Vice President,
And two GOP Georgia Senate seats in play,
By January 20, GOP control is going away!
Moscow Mitch McConnell is going to cry,
While the Trump Crime Family endlessly lies.
Don Jr. is high on cocaine, don’t you know?
Princess Ivanka will get her own TV show.
Trump’s 3rd wife Melania will get a divorce.
So Trump needs more lawyers, of course.
For frivolous lawsuits and paying porn stars.
To buy photos of Eric maskless at a gay bar.
And get ready for Trump Tower in Moscow,
Since the traitor needs a new residence now.
Jake Pickering
Arcata, CA
Re: Onward with Fish and Wildlife’s Ballona Project!
David Kay’s opinion piece on the Ballona Wetlands lacks any evidence-based arguments and instead consists entirely of ad hominem attacks on those who believe that science and law should prevail against the drive to bulldoze Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve. For example, Mr. Kay’s subtitle is, “The plan for Ballona is the only means to accomplish all goals set for Ballona.” Yet, he fails to inform the reader that one of the primary goals of the “project” is flood control. Where do I get such fact? From the Environmental Impact Reports! Not from some whispering conspiracy.
However, there is a conspiracy afoot. CDFW’s attempt to label the project “restoration” is a conspiracy to mislead the public. Restoration means to “return something to a former condition.” Travis Longcore, Ph.D., a true scientist, found that the Ballona Wetlands is historically a freshwater marsh, the mouth of which would only break through on years with heavy rain events. Bulldozing Ballona to create a saltwater marsh is not restoration, but the creation of saltwater marsh habitat that rarely existed at Ballona.
This brings us to the law, which David Kay also neglects to discuss. Flood control is not permitted in wetlands under the California Coastal Act. (Coastal Act section 30233.) Restoration, however, is permitted. CDFW is attempting to push a square peg dredging project through a very narrow definition in the Coastal Act. It simply does not fit. There is no need to bulldoze Ballona to save it.
Todd T. Cardiff, Esq.
Attorney for Grassroots Coalition
San Diego, CA
Respectfully, Mr. Cardiff’s rebuttal to my Opinion piece (Onward with Fish and Wildlife’s Ballona Project, Argonaut, 11/24/20), missed the point. I did not attempt nor intend to argue scientific or legal positions. I simply reasoned that we have a choice for Ballona. Fish and Wildlife proposed the correct choice; the “Supercar” version of Ballona – an ambitious, expensive and long duration project, but one which achieves all of the goals established for the Ecological Reserve after decades of consideration by scientific advisory panels relying upon exhaustive studies. We should not “settle” for a minimal restoration akin to slapping new paint on an old VW Bug, which achieves few of the long-term goals established either specifically for Ballona, or as generally envisioned by the Coastal Act for state tidelands. The latter simply doesn’t deliver the greatness Los Angeles deserves.
With respect to Mr. Cardiff’s specific assertions, the notion that Ballona was historically closed to the tides and was a freshwater environment is simply unsupported by voluminous archaeological, geological, hydrological and historical evidence which need not be discussed here. Irrespective of this evidence, the Fish and Wildlife proposal remains the best choice, for its long-term ecological and societal benefits to Los Angeles and the state.
Mr. Cardiff’s oft-parroted assertion that the Fish and Wildlife plan is really a flood control project disguised as a wetland restoration, is a dog that won’t hunt. As an experienced CEQA attorney himself, Mr. Cardiff knows well the many wetland projects completed in his San Diego region, which, owing to potential impacts to existing flood control infrastructure, necessarily included flood control elements in order to mitigate said impacts. In any case, Mr. Cardiff is entitled to argue the merits of his case in court, after the Ballona EIR is certified. I look forward to that day as an enthusiastic spectator.
David W. Kay, D. Env.
Playa Vista
The prototype for the bulldoze approach to restoration is in Manila Dunes where these crass approaches were tested- yet never inspected and not monitored. The wetlands we intended to enhance, drained when the non-natives were removed. Wildlife disappeared along with stability, wetlands and their functions.
We now have erosion out of control and our centennial for the Migratory Bird Treaty was celebrated by destroying the wetlands that Migratory Birds need to survive.
Please don’t make our mistake, it has set our resilience goals back 60 years.
Monitoring and performance failures should not happen, but the few are no reason to abandon decades of properly monitored success stories. “One bad apple….”, as the saying goes. -DK
Mr. Kay, comparing an old VW bug to the Ballona Wetlands misses the point completely. A VW bug, man made engine that is bound to break at some point and Ballona Wetlands, a breathtaking example of the natural environment that is resilient and with time heals itself (which is why we’ve seen endangered and protected species make their way back to Ballona in the past few years). It may need a little help here and there (a gentle restoration), but bulldozing is destruction no matter how you try to spin it. It is arrogant to believe man can fix nature. Maybe you should sit back and watch how nature restores itself if you give it a little time. Why not try that first, nature may just surprise you!
That’s just your choice, to which you are entitled. -DK
That is only your opinion, to which you are entitled. -DK