The account of the meeting about resuming the feasibility study on the Malibu Creek Ecosystem and Rindge Dam (The Malibu Times, 6.24.04) shows the meeting to be a repeat performance of many meetings over 20 to 30 years. Some participants still toss out incorrect information, i.e.: that the dam was built in 1926 (no, in 1924); that the dam blocks sediment from flowing to the shore at Malibu (no, sediment has freely flowed over the fully silted reservoir since the 1960s); that steelhead reached the upper watershed (no, blocked by waterfalls and an inhospitable habitat) and so on.
The “save the steelhead” mantra is false advertising as to the upper watershed. However, it is vitally important for job security for those trying to keep their jobs in a period of financial hardship for California and the nation. If steelhead and rainbow trout historically inhabited the upper watershed, why were no such fish bones found on a Century Ranch “fish dig?” Why did the Portola expedition (1769-70) first come across trout at Monterey instead of at San Diego or the Malibu Creek watershed? Why did Fish and Game plant hundreds of thousands of steelhead and rainbow trout in the streams of Southern California all the way to San Diego prior to World War II?
No, despite financially trying times for all levels of government, this group continues to merrily spend taxpayers’ money as if it is an endless supply. With such profligate, misguided spending, there is no money left for our woefully under-funded libraries benefiting the human species. But such worthwhile support of our own species is lacking as politicians and legislators at national, state and local levels are trolling for politically correct votes rather than having their eye on the ball for the welfare of the citizens.
Ronald L. Rindge.