No-win situation on river

Re: your July 8 article, "County liable for damage from projects":

The article says: "The county could end up paying millions of dollars to residents after a judge ruled Monday that four projects built by the county diverted high water flows from the Ventura River that slammed onto the bottom of the Monte Vista bluff, causing erosion and damaging houses. ... The lawsuit, triggered after a January 2005 storm, was filed by 28 plaintiffs who reside in 13 houses on the bluff in Oak View."

The Matilija Dam Ecosystem Restoration Project studies identified this reach of the river as a problem area — see Hydrology, Hydraulics, and Sediment Studies for the Meiners Oaks and Live Oak Levees, Draft Report (July 2007). The Matilija Dam project will widen the Santa Ana Road bridge and rebuild the levee, also damaged in 2005 storms.

The report's flood maps clearly show constriction in the river's floodplain formed by the Live Oak Levee and the "pinch point" at the Santa Ana bridge. The lawsuit alleges these four projects combined caused erosion of the toe of the bluff across from the levee.

From 1974 to 2000, the county constructed the Santa Ana Boulevard bridge, the riprap/levee that protected Live Oaks Acres, a riverside dike and the 2000 Live Oak Creek diversion project. In 2005, Watershed Protection District constructed rock "vanes" to deflect flows away from the bluff. Surely, more engineering is in the future.

This case clearly shows the "no-win" situation when trying to control a river within its floodplain. The resulting cascade of public works projects is an ever-increasing taxpayer burden. Costs escalate further as government agencies squabble over degraded water quality and loss of habitat as dictated by Endangered Species and Clean Water laws.

To see the flood maps, visit: http://venturaecosystem.blogspot.com/2008/07/county-found-liable-for-flood-damage.html.

— Paul Jenkin, Ventura

(The writer is the Ventura Campaign coordinator of the Surfrider Foundation. — Editor)

North Pole not the threat

Re: Bill Vaughan's July 10 letter, "Fooled by environmentalists":

I can't believe The Star would waste valuable resources by publishing letters by people as uninformed as Vaughn.

The North Pole is surrounded by the Arctic Ocean. Since the ice is already floating in water, it wouldn't raise sea levels if it melted. The ice caps we need to worry about are the ones on landmasses such as Antarctica and Greenland. In fact, sea levels would rise more than 250 feet if they melted. That's enough to cover the vast majority of Florida and Louisiana.

They're both red states (until Nov. 4, at least), so conservatives should be just as concerned as liberals when it comes to global warming. Vaughan won't be getting his beachfront property any time soon, but if he leaves his house to his descendants, it may become completely worthless if the beach happens to move even farther inland.

— Ken MacLeod, Simi Valley