CHAPTER 6 

 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS 



Southern California coastal marshes 

 have been so reduced in acreage by 

 disturbance that they are in danger of 

 total elimination. They occur in such 

 prime locations for developments that the 

 threat of total elimination continues. 

 The California Coastal Act of 1976, which 

 followed a 1972 public initiative to 

 preserve the coastline, clearly identifies 

 coastal wetlands as a valuable resource. 

 The act calls for their maintenance and, 

 where feasible, their restoration. 

 However, much of the wetland habitat is in 

 private ownership, and owners are allowed 

 reasonable use of their property. Hence, 

 unless wetlands or easements are purchased 

 for public management, development in and 

 around wetlands will continue. 



6.1 VIEWPOINTS OF MANAGERS 



Agencies and persons entrusted with 

 managing coastal wetlands have a difficult 

 job. They make decisions about future 

 developments, attempt to mitigate the 

 effects of future alterations, protect 

 endangered species populations, and 

 restore disturbed areas to more desirable 

 conditions. The groups involved in these 

 tasks are many. At the federal level, the 

 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. 

 Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. 

 Environmental Protection Agency, and 

 National Marine Fisheries became involved, 

 along with the U.S. Navy, which owns 

 large portions of Mugu Lagoon, Anaheim Bay 

 and Tijuana Estuary. With the proposal to 

 designate Tijuana Estuary as a National 

 Estuarine Sanctuary came the involvement 

 of the Office of Coastal Zone Management 

 as well. At the state level, the Coastal 

 Commission originally had the 

 responsibility of approving or denying 

 alterations of lands within the coastal 

 zone; the California Coastal Conservancy 

 is charged with aiding the implementation 

 of wetland preservation and restoration 



projects; and the Departments of Fish and 

 Game and Parks and Recreation are actively 

 involved in resource management. Finally, 

 local governments are responsible for 

 developing plans and enforcing ordinances 

 which affect coastal wetlands. 

 Ultimately, they will grant permits for 

 alterations within the coastal zone. 



Conflicts among organizations which 

 are concerned with the future of wetlands 

 are bound to develop because their 

 individual goals differ. Public health 

 agencies, required to control disease 

 vectors, develop plans to spray and ditch 

 ponds where mosquitos breed. Cities 

 desiring additional tax bases and 

 increased tourism plan for marinas in 

 place of marshes. Landowners hold out for 

 maximum profits. Even within an agency, 

 conflicts may develop if management for 

 one species impinges on another. 



6.2 DEALING WITH DISTURBANCES 



The comments which follow must be 

 viewed as emerging guidelines rather than 

 dogma, because the data base is 

 incomplete. Overall, I recommend that 

 scientists be consulted before any of 

 these ideas is applied to a specific 

 project. The variety of wetland 

 situations and individual constraints on 

 planning require that each modification be 

 considered separately, keeping in mind its 

 relation to regional goals and concerns. 



Disturbances in southern California 

 wetlands range from large-scale, 

 whole-ecosystem elimination to 

 small-scale, habitat-specific alterations. 

 Urban development, reduced tidal 

 circulation (related to sedimentation and 

 filling), and altered watershed hydrology 

 are examples of the former, major 

 disturbances. Dredging, off-road vehicle 

 use, and mosquito control measures are 

 more site-specific. Unraveling how these 



86 



