I read the Shelley Luce letter and have several comments.
First Paragraph: “Re-contour the tidal channels of the lagoon and replace invasive, exotic plant species with native species … “ There is no need to re-contour the lagoon, and the non-native plants are along paths and easy to access. It is interesting how conveniently the way they plan to remove the acres of native plants is left out-bulldozing!
Second Paragraph: “Many local residents, environmental groups, wetlands experts and agencies who participated in scientific studies … over the last decade ,..” Last time I heard about plans moving forward was about six years ago. Then the planning went under cover. There were two hours of testimony before the Coastal Commission, but I noted that although scientific experts who were against the plan were able to talk, there was no rebuttal to lots of inaccurate information. Furthermore, at the Heal the Bay meeting, these scientific experts were not allowed to talk.
Third Paragraph: “Scientists show how impaired the lagoon is … plants and animals much worse off here … better water circulation will help …” The lagoon is not impaired but enriched. And the endangered tidewater goby needs still water for breeding, not more circulation.
Fourth Paragraph: “This restoration fits in …fits perfectly … highest priority short-term goal for region …” Fits in where, why, what? Bla bla bla is what it sounds like to me. Just a way to make people think that this is such a good idea.
Fifth Paragraph: “… impressive … and the science behind it.” There wasn’t enough input from other scientists and the scientific experts who spoke against the plan were ignored. This is not allowed under the law.
Sixth Paragraph: “… proud of the transparent … inclusive public process … for listening to the public who conceived the plan and technical experts …” This sounds vague and political. Who is the inclusive public and what public who conceived the plan? Certainly not the many environmentalists that questioned the plan.
Seventh Paragraph: “… how gorgeous and inviting the lagoon will be when the restoration is done …” Is the goal to make the lagoon gorgeous and inviting for humans? What about the plants and animals? Isn’t that really what it’s supposed to be about? The lagoon is for wildlife and it is inviting and beautiful now! And the process? Transparent as lagoon mud; good for gobies, not for democracy. I urge everyone to really investigate this project and check out savemalibulagoon.com and the video Save Malibu Lagoon on Youtube.com
Alessandra DeClario