L E T T E R S of the project disputed this fact. David Kay, however, suggested that habitat loss for an endangered species is acceptable as long as it occurs outside of the nesting season. This is an absurd contention that defies the most basic understanding of habitat. While temporary habitat disturbance can be mitigated by limiting such disturbance to non-nesting periods, permanent habitat loss is just that - permanent. The article also cites a table of habitat acreages indicating that the proposed project would result in a net gain of 69.6 acres of habitat for the sparrow, assuming such habitat is adopted. However, this table is taken out of context because it applies only to the habitat types that are projected to exist sometime prior to 2030, before the impacts of sea level rise begin to convert viable sparrow habitats to other types of habitats. Comparing the map on page 2-147 of the draft EIR, which is not linked to any specific year, to the map on page 2-148, which shows habitat projections for the year 2030, shows this
PAGE 4 THE ARGONAUT MARCH 10, 2022
trend, which worsens substantially over time. Readers of the article are likely to get the impression that proponents of the project are refuting concerns about the loss of this endangered species habitat in a meaningful way, when in fact they are simply employing an accounting trick to distract from those very legitimate concerns. Implementing the project as currently designed would unquestionably lead to a net habitat loss for this endangered bird that the Fish and Game Code requires to be protected. That would be an unacceptable outcome for a $182 million project designed to protect biodiversity. It is also worth noting that the picture by Jonathan Coffin on a cover page, which so artfully supports the article’s title of “Ecological Gem,” appears to be from the same area that is slated to be covered under a new flood control levee. Readers ought to be aware of that connection between the cover photo and the project that is the subject of the article.
PHOTO CREDIT: KRIS DAHLIN
Letter re: Ecological Gem Editor: Our organization was pleased to see an article on the Ballona Wetlands (Ecological Gem, January 27) that recognizes this natural resource to be the “ecological gem” that it is, and which included beautiful photos from Jonathan Coffin. We also appreciate that the author made an effort to provide a range of viewpoints regarding how the wetlands should be managed moving forward. No article on this important and complex topic could ever cover every aspect of why so many organizations are concerned about the proposed plans for this natural space moving forward. However, merely positioning different assertions side by side likely left readers confused on several important points raised in the article. For instance, the article rightly notes that existing habitat for the endangered Belding’s Savannah Sparrow will be permanently impacted by both construction and sea level rise. None of the individuals who spoke in support
The Feb. 22 wind storm on Venice Beach. Again, we appreciate that the Argonaut provided coverage of this important ecosystem and we hope that the Argonaut will commit to a follow-up article in the near future that continues to explore these important issues. Walter Lamb Ballona Wetlands Land Trust
We Want to Hear from You! Being in print is a lot more meaningful than grouching on Facebook. Send compliments, complaints and insights about local issues to kkirk@timespublications.com
