Breeding Ground Called Protected

The news article by Times reporter Michele Norris reporting on the California Coastal Commission’s rejection of the local coastal plan covering the property at the west end of the airport runways and owned by the Los Angeles International Airport was grossly misleading. She alleges that this plan would destroy the breeding ground of an endangered butterfly and a host of other unidentified species.

This article did not make it clear that the breeding ground of the El Segundo Blue endangered butterfly would be totally protected by the plan recommended by the City Council of Los Angeles (the local coastal plan adopted by the City Council and recommended by the city Planning Commission and the Airport Commission in order to determine precisely what should be be protected). The city retained consultants who are considered the most knowledgeable on butterflies in the Western United States, and they concurred that the area allotted by the city for the protection of the butterfly and conservation of the dunes are the only areas in the dunes where the few remaining butterflies live. The city, through the Department of Airports, has committed itself to provide the funds to maintain and protect those 80 acres. A park and buffer zone are illustrated in the city’s plan as a buffer between the golf course and butterfly preserve. The California Department of Fish and Game and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Services, both of whom are consultants to the state Coastal Commission and staff, have signed a written agreement with the city that they concur and support the city’s plan of protection.

The Coastal Commission staff analyst only studied this subject for a brief period, and most of the opposition came from people who have never studied or seen the site and are not knowledgeable about the fact that the golf course is proposed where formerly 800 houses were removed for noise purposes.

The city has scheduled discussions with the Coastal Commission senior staff to see if the city can answer some of the questions that arose from the state coastal commissioners, but the article in the Times was very misleading as to the facts.

CALVIN S. HAMILTON

Director of Planning

City of Los Angeles