News

THE BIRD CAGE

Jennifer StockdaleWed. June 25
 

The once-rare brown pelican may stand in the way of any plan to remove the Long Beach breakwater


PHOTO by JENNY STOCKDALE

Last week, after 12 years of talk and a year of delays, city officials voted to study reconfiguring—maybe even partially removing—the Long Beach Breakwater. And they set an aggressive deadline: The city hired Moffatt & Nichol, and gave the local engineering company just 12 months to complete the study that could bring waves and clean water back to the shoreline that made Long Beach famous.

Although there is a long list of obstacles to that goal—Congressman Dana Rohrabacher’s refusal to even ask the feds to help fund the effort, offshore oil drilling, onshore homes at stake, the Port of Long Beach and a project cost that could run as high as $400 million, among others—the most daunting roadblock could be a fish-eating bird with a sack on its face.

Pelecanus occidentalis californicus—the California Brown Pelican to those of us who mastered neither science nor Latin—is a bird federal and state officials consider endangered. Thousands of the pelicans roost on the 57-year-old breakwater. Led by Leonard Arkinstall, executive director of the Los Cerritos Wetlands Stewards Inc., a few naturalists and I counted nearly 2,000 pelicans during a trip to the breakwater last month.

On what Arkinstall called “a perfect day for bird counting,” we boarded Eva 4, and headed for the breakwater at low tide. The boat hesitated a bit, at first. “Sometimes this thing gets stuck in neutral,” he said with a shrug. “I’ve got to sweet talk it.” After a few tender words, Eva 4 cut across the Cerritos Bahia Marina, past the Alamitos Bay Jetty and out into the brackish water. Veering west toward the Port of Long Beach, we could see the bird clusters dotting the rocks of the Long Beach Breakwater.

On that 13,350-foot stretch of inhospitable rock we found real life. There, just a mile and a half off the coast, in the wake of stadium-sized tankers painted in mist, a kamikaze California Brown Pelican dropped 60 feet from the sky, crashed through the ocean’s surface and vanished. He came up with a mouth pouch of anchovies three times the size of his stomach and flew to the dung-bleached boulders of the Long Beach Breakwater, into the ranks of almost 2,000 others.

“I think I got 80 Brown Pelicans, two cormorants and one oystercatcher in that batch,” said a breathless Eric Zahn, director of research and education for Arkinstall’s conservation group.

Clutching his clipboard, Zahn filled me in on the conduct of the pelicans—how they roost, rest, digest and fraternize with their fellows on the predator-free wall. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) says a habitat like that is essential to the bird’s survival. But agency officials don’t think that poses an insuperable obstacle to reconfiguration of the breakwater. For one thing, they say, the bird already has unconditionally protected habitat elsewhere on the coast. For another, the Long Beach breakwater isn’t an ideal habitat: It’s near airports, close to the port and the constant flow of oil tankers, closer still to oil drilling, and contaminated by effluent streaming from the mouth of the LA River. When the USFWS issues its atlas of pelican roost sites in 2009, it’s unlikely our Long Beach Breakwater will be in it.

Peering over the brim of his binoculars, steering Eva 4 with his free hand, Arkinstall shouted, “Look at them all! You wouldn’t think they’re endangered!”

And maybe they’re not really endangered.

The California Brown Pelican is a subspecies of the Brown Pelican, nearly every one of which was wiped out in the 1960s when the pesticide DDT entered their food chain, thinning the shells of their eggs; the eggs shattered when a parent sat to incubate. The chemical was in wide use around the world between 1940 and 1970. In just one case, the Montrose Chemical Plant of Torrance discharged hundreds of tons of DDT into Los Angeles County Sewers and dumped DDT-laced waste near Santa Catalina Island.

By 1970, the USFWS declared the bird endangered under the Endangered Species Conservation Act (now the Endangered Species Act). By then, the estimated population in Southern California had declined from its pre-1950s level of 5,000 to just several hundred breeding pairs in 1969. The brand-new federal Environmental Protection Agency banned the use of DDT in 1972, and apparently stopped the freefall of the Brown Pelican.

The California chapter of the National Audubon Society says there are now an estimated 620,000 Brown Pelicans in the world—142,400 of which are the subspecies of California Brown Pelican living along the Pacific Coast. In three recent USFWS reports, including a five-year review, the federal government recommends removing the Brown Pelican, including the California subspecies, from the endangered list because of improved numbers.

Such facts aren’t enough at the state level. The California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) receives no funding for de-listing, so, when the non-profit Endangered Species Recovery Council petitioned the DFG to recognize the Brown Pelican’s recovery, the agency asked the group to pay for research to make its case. The group resisted.

“You can go anywhere along the coast of California and these things are as common as dirt,” Bill Everett, a founding member of the council, told the San Diego Union-Tribune in February. “Anybody who thinks about it at all has got to be going, ‘Come on! These are endangered?’”

Back at the west end of the breakwater, looking out through Queen’s Way Gate, Zahn—a Long Beach native and surfer himself—sighed.

“There has to be a way to have both,” he said. “I’d love to be able to surf Long Beach, but I’d like to know these guys are taken care of, too. Compromises will have to be made by stakeholders on all sides of this issue, but without a comprehensive study it is all just one big guessing game.”

Now, that study is on its way. Whether it will run into what looks like an unmovable state agency is to be determined.

Tags: , , ,

RELATED

Viewing 15 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Great story Jennifer, I had no idea but it does make sense. I wonder what other life thrives underwater because of the breakwater's presence. Thanks for a great story.
    • ^
    • v
    You should read the story about the breakwater on lbpost and lbreport. There is some hope. Even Gary DeLong and some Peninsula residents are open to a new approach (reduce 1800 ft to sea level) that may be cheaper and quicker than a full blown reconfiguration.
    • ^
    • v
    Thanks folks. I did read those two stories about Bud Johnson's report (which I've read in its entirety and whom I've actually interviewed a few months ago). What a great guy!
    His study is really interesting and his personal observations and recommendations are sound and intelligent. The only catch is, his study doesn't follow US Army Corps of Engineers' standards or methodology--things required to move the project forward. He's right when he says that more studies will always be required, even though they may not be necessary, but that's the downside to federal operations.
    I'm sure Johnson's study will be used by Moffatt & Nichol in the coming months for its great information, but since the breakwater is federally owned and maintained, there is no short cut that can be taken by the city to circumvent the USACE's bureaucracy--which includes more studies, going through the process of receiving federal funding and approval for the recon, feasibility and pre-construction phases of its operations.
    I really wish that political will existed, enough to drive Bud's initiatives into action, but I've never seen that kind of action taken until there's been a major disaster. For example, hurricane Katrina finally provoked the Corps to fix Louisianan levees. A few earthquakes and a major bridge collapse instigated better building codes, etc...
    And, just for the record, the term "reconfiguration" refers to every kind of modification to that hard structure--be it a full leveling of the breakwater, an 1800-ft section removal just below sea level like Johnson's proposing, or anything in between. Moffatt & Nichol will likely look all combination of alternatives for the breakwater and test them with the mathematical model simulator they are famous for.

    Both of those stories are great though, because they're getting the message out that this recon study will not result in absolute ignorant doom for the coast and coastal properties. And, they have people--who've been against the project from the beginning-- talking about it. The more smart discussion and communication lines open, the better. Great job guys!
    • ^
    • v
    Jenny, the way it's been explained to me (which may or may not be completely accurate, I'm no expert) is that the study (Bud's) could be taken to the Army Corps to ask about feasibility. If they agree that it's possible and at least worth looking into, pressure can be put on Congressman Rohrabacher to back the study, though he has purposefully stayed out of discussions like this in the past. At that point, the City Council would have to decide whether or not to proceed with the project or keep on with the Colorado Lagoon project (a city can only have one federal legislative project at a time), and if it's a high enough priority, they can vote to send the idea to Congress and it will be brought to the Army Corps. That'sa lotta hoops! But it is something... Somebody correct my process if it's wrong, por favor.
    • ^
    • v
    Wow, I'll look into it Ryan, thanks. I'm no expert either...
    • ^
    • v
    I like the Bud Report as well, though I hope people realize that it's probably a minimum of what could and should be done. I imagine the final recommendation will be a compromise between leaving the breakwater as it is, and tearing it down completely.

    Does anyone know if a pollution lawsuit brought by, say, the Natural Resources Defense Council would help or hurt the (very) slow progression of this movement?
    • ^
    • v
    If those birds were the only thing standing in the way of sinking that breakwater, I'd personally snipe each and every one of 'em...
    • ^
    • v
    Stupid me, when I read the title of the article I thought it was referring somehow to the press-telegram!
    • ^
    • v
    Without even reading the report of the good Dr. Johnson(he has two PHD's )there
    is no question it is a sound and solid report.There are few in this City-if any-that know more about matters Marine than but.

    Equally solid however would be the opposition for any major reconfiguration by the members of the House and Senate-most of who are painfully aware of the
    power of an unchecked rivers or seas.

    One has to but pick up the paper and the see the type of damage that would
    be visited upon a,not so small portion of our tax base.There is ample opportunity
    to surf at Seal,Huntington,Newport Beaches.Look at the Press Telegram's pictures last week of the storm surf damage and flooding of pre breakwater days.

    Will those that want to risk the tax base put up a bond to cover any damage?
    Would not that be fair?
    • ^
    • v
    oopps-forgot to spell check-the last word in first paragraph.Sorry Bud!!!
    • ^
    • v
    Laurence, Bud's report (and most residents) are more concerned with creating ocean flow and circulation - of which there is currently none - to reduce pollution in our waters and on our beaches. Bud's report would do that and is not at all about creating waves. I think that at this point, everyone has pretty much adhered to the idea that we won't be seeing any waves for a long time.
    • ^
    • v
    Hello Mr. Goodhue! Anything else you want the other 498,000 residents of Long Beach to sacrifice for the coupla-thousand people who live on the Alamitos Peninsula? Giving up clean water and sea life--you know, that stuff the Good Lord gave all of us--seems like such a small price for us to pay for their "tax base."
    • ^
    • v
    So 835 in favor of waves and a more natural ocean environment would "personally snipe" the pelicans on the breakwater? Which village lent us this idiot, or is (s)he our own?
    • ^
    • v
    As a long time surfer (before moving to surfless LBch), history shows if it's the right thing to do in LBch, it WILL NOT get done. This city has the most amazing track record of making text book cases of how to screw up what could LA's county's crown ocean front jewel. I won’t even attempt to start the list of idiotic catastrophic errors.
    • ^
    • v
    Breakwater Down = $$$$$ for City and increase in value of Homes when beach is a desired beach.

    $$$$$$
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus
 

© 2007-2008 Seven Days Publishing LLC.