Two North Shore road stream crossings, including one in West Newbury, have been selected by the state Department of Fish and Game’s Division of Ecological Restoration for future ecological restoration studies.
The culvert replacement sites – one on River Road in West Newbury and the other on Concord Street in Gloucester – were selected due to their vulnerability to coastal erosion, flooding and future sea-level rise, agency said.
Although the culverts are crossing freshwater streams, the division says they are expected to become tidal as sea levels rise, a transition presenting significant challenges for road infrastructure, DER officials said.
The Division of Ecological Restoration announced it is funding and managing future studies at the sites to help the communities, nearby landowners and partners overcome technical challenges and plan for ecological restoration and climate adaptation.
“Ecological restoration provides innumerable benefits,” Fish and Game Commissioner Tom O’Shea said in a prepared statement. “Projects like this will improve public safety, build resilience to sea-level rise, coastal erosion, and mitigate flooding, and restore water quality and wildlife habitat.
“By supporting municipalities and partners, we can scale our efforts to steward a biodiverse and climate ready future.”
“DER looks forward to helping these two communities evaluate and plan for sea-level rise while building resilient, fish-friendly road stream crossings,” Division of Ecological Restoration Director Beth Lambert said in a prepared statement. “Culvert upgrades and other nature-based solutions can be technically challenging and costly for our municipalities to pursue alone. State-municipal partnerships like this are key to successful implementation of ecological restoration and climate adaptation projects.”
In West Newbury, the River Road culvert is on an unnamed stream of the Merrimack River. The crossing faces challenges due to flooding and erosion, and has the potential to be heavily influenced by increased storms and sea level rise.
Conducting models of the way water moves at the culvert site and investigating potential ecological improvements through restoration would enable a systematic approach to improving infrastructure and natural resource resiliency, the state said.
In Gloucester, the Concord Street culvert is along a tributary of Walker Creek.
The DER indicated the culvert is affected by coastal storms and is at an increased risk for erosion and flooding. The replacement of the culvert with a structure of resilient design would address flood water retention and bank stabilization and sedimentation; improve fish passage and wildlife habitat; and increase climate resilience by preparing for sea level rise, storm surge, and coastal marsh mitigation.
A 2019 technical report called “Great Marsh Barrier Mitigation: A comprehensive program to mitigate aquatic barriers in the Great Marsh Area of Critical Environmental Concern region” by the Ipswich River Watershed Association looked at the single culvert on Concord Street, among many other “priority barriers” in the region.
“The site has been identified as a site that has experienced flooding and ranked as having poor aquatic organism passage in the (North Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity Collaboration) Tidal Crossing Assessment,” the report said. It singled out the culvert as having “no passage due to rock piles/undersized structures.”
If the coast of California is a state asset worth trillions of dollars — and it is — why is the state agency that has successfully protected that asset for 50 years under assault? The answer — “unnecessary permitting delays” — is unfounded. Yet California’s exceptional history of coastal protection is in greater jeopardy today in the halls of our state Capitol than it has been for generations.
Like water flowing downhill, California’s incomparable coast has always been a magnet for development. In 1972, with this in mind, the voters of California overwhelmingly approved Proposition 20, a ballot initiative that set in motion the 1976 California Coastal Act. Unlike South Florida, the Jersey Shore or other coastal regions devoured by privatization, the California coast was by law given special protection: The coastal zone would be developed not as an enclave for the wealthy but for everyone’s use, with provisions for protecting its natural resources and its breathtaking beauty.
The California Coastal Commission was created to enforce the act with a specific charge to balance the needs of the ecosystem with the need for public access and economic development, including affordable housing. It works like this: Local jurisdictions come up with coastal plans that the commission must approve. Once a plan is in place, development permits are handled by the city, town or county, although those decisions can be appealed to and by the commission.
Over the years, the Coastal Commission has successfully defended public access to the beach in Malibu, Half Moon Bay, Carlsbad and other towns. It has helped preserve state parks, open space along the coast and the beach itself — denying permits for oil drilling, more than one luxury resort, an LNG port (in Oxnard) and a toll road (at San Onofre Beach). In 2019, it fined a developer nearly $15.6 million for replacing, without a permit, two low-cost hotels along Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica with a boutique hotel.
Predictably, this process has often been in the bull’s-eye of Coastal Act critics, and while the rationale may vary with the moment, their goal remains the same: To weaken oversight by the commission and return land-use control entirely to local governments.
Today, low affordable housing supply along the coast is the basis for attack. In legislation introduced in January, with a purpose of “resolving unnecessary permitting delays in the disproportionately low-housing Coastal Zone,” state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) has proposed an unprecedented carve out of 23.5% of the coastal zone in San Francisco. Specifically, Senate Bill 951 would delete from commission oversight residential areas on the city’s western edge, as well as a piece of Golden Gate Park. As the first significant coastal zone reduction in more than 40 years, this attack on the commission could set a dangerous precedent that would invite similar carve outs from San Diego to Santa Monica to Crescent City.
Last month, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors voted overwhelmingly to oppose SB 951, and, one day later, the Coastal Commission, by unanimous vote, did the same.
The existential threat that this legislation poses to the Coastal Act and the entire California coast is undeniable. Among numerous commission responsibilities affected, SB 951 ignores the agency’s essential role in planning for sea-level rise adaptation along San Francisco’s increasingly vulnerable coast. And it seems no mere coincidence that the excluded area includes land proposed for a controversial 50-story condominium and commercial project in the flats of the Outer Sunset neighborhood north of the San Francisco Zoo.
The claim that the Coastal Commission is responsible for housing inequity in the coastal zone, though long on rhetoric, is belied by the historical record. Indeed, when the Coastal Act became law in 1976, it required that “housing for persons of low and moderate income shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided.” The commission actively complied, approving or protecting from demolition more than 7,100 affordable units between 1977 and 1981 and collecting an estimated $2 million in “in lieu” fees to support affordable housing.
But in 1981, the state Legislature amended the Coastal Act to remove the commission’s affordable housing authority. Contrary to the claim of “unnecessary permitting delays” on which SB 951 is based — only two coastal development permits in San Francisco have been appealed to the commission in 38 years — it is this amendment, and the fact that developers prefer to build high-end projects, that has produced today’s affordable housing deficit in the coastal zone. As then-Coastal Commission Chair Leonard Grote warned in 1981, “The passage of this bill would make sure that the ability to live near the coast is reserved for the wealthy.” And so it has.
If increasing the supply of affordable housing near California’s coast is actually the goal of SB 951, then restoring, not reducing, the commission’s authority is needed. It was a mistake in 1981 to remove the commission’s power to require that projects it approved included affordable housing, and it’s a mistake in 2024 to expect that diminishing the coastal zone will right that wrong.
The California Coastal Commission has an extraordinary record of success in protecting California’s most valuable environmental and economic resource, and its regulatory role is as essential today as it has ever been. SB 951 would weaken, not promote, equal access to that resource, and it threatens to erode, perhaps irrevocably, the most successful coastal management program in the country.
Joel Reynolds is western director and senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council in Santa Monica. Tom Soto is a former alternate member of the California Coastal Commission and a Natural Resources Defense Council board member.
A necropsy was performed on a dead fin whale Feb. 13 after it was found stranded at the Sunset Beach State Recreation Site in Oregon.
Tiffany Boothe
Seaside Aquarium
When an endangered 46-foot fin whale washed ashore on an Oregon coastline, it left many wondering how the animal ended up dead.
Now, experts have more answers around the “magnificent” creature’s death: It “likely died from an underlying illness of some kind,” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration spokesperson Michael Milstein said in an email to McClatchy News on Feb. 14.
The whale was spotted entangled Monday, Feb. 12, at the Sunset Beach State Recreation Site, McClatchy News reported. Shortly after, a team from NOAA conducted a necropsy to determine its cause of death.
Tiffany Boothe Seaside Aquarium
The whale was emaciated, wrapped in fishing rope and had fresh rake marks from orcas, Milstein said. A rake mark is caused when a killer whale uses its teeth to scratch another whale, according to the Center for Whale Research.
The whale also had other scrape marks on its body, and it was found entangled in rope.
However, Milstein said the injuries from the entanglement didn’t appear to be fatal and neither did the rake marks.
Because there were “no other obvious causes of death,” Milstein said the team concluded the whale died from an underlying illness.
Tiffany Boothe Seaside Aquarium
Collected tissue from the whale will be tested to determine what the underlying disease may be. It could take a few weeks for those results to come back, Milstein said.
The public should remain 100 yards away from the whale and any stranded animals, the Seaside Aquarium advises. Entangling gear also shouldn’t be removed from a stranded animal because it can interfere with an investigation.
The Sunset Beach State Recreation Site is about 90 miles northwest of Portland.
What to know about fin whales
Fin whales are the second-largest whale species in the world, following blue whales, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
They can grow up to 85 feet in length and weigh between 40 and 80 tons, according to the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation.
They were listed as protected animals under the Endangered Species Act in 1970 after their population dwindled significantly due to being hunted by commercial whalers, the federal agency said.
Helena Wegner is a McClatchy National Real-Time Reporter covering the state of Washington and the western region. She’s a journalism graduate from Arizona State University’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. She’s based in Phoenix.
Chilling rain, swirling gray clouds and blustery winds rolled into Southern California on Sunday as the strongest winter storm of the season geared up to deliver near-record rainfall and life-threatening flash flooding in the region through Tuesday.
The slow-moving atmospheric river was gathering strength Sunday afternoon, spurring the declaration of a state of emergency from Gov. Gavin Newsom in eight Southern California counties, including Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura. The National Weather Service in Oxnard warned that “all systems are go for one of the most dramatic weather days in recent memory.”
“Storms can change quickly, but let me be clear: This storm is a serious weather event,” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said during a news conference. “This has the potential to be a historic storm — severe winds, thunderstorms, and even brief tornadoes.”
Palm trees in Santa Barbara bend in the wind on Sunday as hurricane-force gusts battered the seas off California.
(Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Indeed, forecasters said the brunt of the storm appears focused on the Los Angeles area, where the system could park itself for an extended time over the next few days. The storm could drop up to 8 inches of rainfall on the coast and valleys, and up to 14 inches in the foothills and mountains. Snowfall totals of 2 to 5 feet are likely at elevations above 7,000 feet.
“Los Angeles County now seems to be the area of most concern, where the heaviest rain will last the longest,” said Ryan Kittell, a meteorologist with the NWS in Oxnard. The agency has issued dozens of flood watches and storm advisories across the region and the state, including urgent flash flood warnings in parts of Los Angeles, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties.
“If anyone has an opportunity to work remotely on Monday, that’s definitely the day to do it,” he said.
At the Ventura Harbor just north of L.A. County, as the storm moved into the region, rain was beating down on shops and restaurants that ordinarily draw tourists. It had been hours without a customer at Harbor Market and Liquor, and at a nearby hair salon, stylist Danielle White was weighing whether she should hit the road, worried that flooding could strand her there.
“We’re clearly not going to get any inquiries,” she said, gazing out at the rainfall.
Here’s the latest rain timing/intensity graphic, indicating some minor changes. – Rain totals have been increased: – 4-8″ for coasts/valleys and 8-14″ foothills/mountains – Lower totals for San Luis Obispo County – FLOOD WATCH still in effect for all areas #CAwxpic.twitter.com/YR4WwgWGsA
The storm is expected to “bring a multitude of dangerous weather conditions to the area,” forecasters said.
Evacuation warnings and notices were issued in portions of Ventura, Santa Barbara, Monterey and Los Angeles counties — including parts of Topanga near the Owen and Agua fire burn scars; the Juniper Hills and Valyermo areas near the Bobcat fire burn scar; the Lake Hughes and King Canyon area near the Lake fire burn scar; and the La Tuna Canyon area of Sun Valley near the Land fire burn scar.
Burn scars are subject to an increased risk of flooding and debris flows, and officials urged Angelenos to heed all evacuation orders.
“Make your personal safety your top priority,” said Los Angeles Fire Department Chief Kristin Crowley. “Follow all evacuation orders, avoid travel … If you do have to travel, please, please, slow down and avoid any flooded areas.”
Swift-water rescue teams, urban search-and-rescue teams and other personnel were standing by in preparation for the storm, Crowley said.
Newsom also mobilized a record 8,500 emergency response personnel across the state to assist communities in the path of the storm, his office said.
In addition to a high risk of flash flooding and excessive rainfall, the storm also has the potential to deliver damaging winds. That includes gusts of up to 70 mph in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties through 6 p.m. Sunday, with isolated gusts of up to 90 mph possible in mountain areas.
Ventura and Los Angeles counties could see wind gusts of up to 50 mph between 1 p.m. and 1 a.m., with isolated gusts of up to 70 mph in mountains and hills. The Ventura River is expected to swell and reach its flood stage around 11 p.m. Sunday night.
Inside Ventura’s Pierpont Tacos on Seaward Avenue, Joseph Kenton and Anna Tyler were taking a break from delivering firewood from Ojai on Sunday morning.
“People were freezing in this weather,” said Kenton, who had been out driving for hours making deliveries, between bites of his tacos. “They want wood to stay warm. Anna got up at 5 o’ clock and started splitting wood.”
As the rain started to fall, “it was real dangerous,” he said. “We had to go real slow.”
On Sunday evening, celebrities also began arriving for the 2024 Grammy Awards at Crypto.com Arena in downtown L.A. as the storm began to churn. Several stars were spotted scrambling from their cars to the red carpet with umbrellas.
Waves crash over a breakwater in Alameda, Calif., with the San Francisco skyline in the background on Sunday.
(Noah Berger / Associated Press)
The storm barreled through Northern and Central California before making its way south.
In Northern California, monster winds and downpours began to inundate the region late Saturday, with the worst of the weather kicking into high gear early Sunday. Thousands were without power by late morning, with officials scrambling to respond to downed trees and power lines across the Bay Area and Central Coast, as well as growing concerns about increased flooding.
Delays and cancellations at San Francisco International Airport led the nation Sunday morning, with almost a third of incoming and outgoing flights delayed as of noon Sunday, according to flight tracking website FlightAware.
Bob Rotiski, spokesperson for the airport, said the airport reduced its capacity for flights because of the weather, expecting continued delays through 1 a.m. Monday. He said the average flight was delayed more than 4 hours as of noon Sunday, with the possibility for that to increase.
In Sonoma County, a tree early Sunday fell onto a home; in Palo Alto, a massive tree blocked the eastbound lanes of the Oregon Expressway. Downed power lines closed a stretch of State Road 1 in San Mateo County, and in San Francisco, fallen lines forced traffic detours.
Some of the highest winds early Sunday were recorded in the Big Sur area — up to 88 and 85 mph, said Sarah McCorkle, a National Weather Service meteorologist in the Bay Area. But gusts had also reached as high as 60 mph in the East Bay and were expected to remain a major threat throughout the day, with a high wind warning in effect for much of the state through late Sunday or Monday.
In San Jose, city officials declared a state of emergency ahead of expected flooding along the Guadalupe River, fueled by heavy rains in the Santa Cruz Mountains, where 6 inches of rain is expected through Monday. Officials there ordered the evacuation of people living along the river’s banks, offering free rides and shelter. The river is forecast to peak over 11 feet — almost 2 feet over its flood stage.
Fallen trees and power lines block a road in Pebble Beach, Calif., on Sunday.
(Ryan Sun / Associated Press)
The Carmel River at Robles Del Rio in Monterey County was also expected to flood, reaching almost a foot over its 8.5-foot flood stage by Sunday night, according to the California Nevada River Forecast Center.
McCorkle said the massive winter storm uniquely strengthened directly off the Northern California coast, where a low pressure system dropped down from the Pacific Northwest to merge with a moisture-heavy system moving in from the eastern Pacific.
“That helped intensify the storm from the eastern Pacific,” she said. That rapid intensification Saturday could mean the storm underwent a bombogenesis, often referred to as a bomb cyclone, but McCorkle said that will require post-analysis to confirm.
“Once it strengthened, [the low pressure system] helped draw in the moisture from the subtropics,” McCorkle said, forming a type of atmospheric river that has become known as a “Pineapple Express.” Those two dynamics — the intensified low pressure system and heavy moisture — have helped drive the dangerously high winds and severe rainfall moving across the state, she said.
Although the Bay Area and Central Coast have experienced some significant impacts, “it will be a different story when the storm moves into Southern California,” said Daniel Swain, a climate scientist with UCLA.
“This will have a broader contiguous band of heavy rainfall developing from about Santa Barbara County eastward, and it’s going to be very slow moving,” Swain said during a briefing Sunday.
A man swims chest-deep through flood waters with his cellphone near cars that are submerged in the 2300 block of West Willow Street in Long Beach on Thursday after rain flooded several areas of the city.
(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)
Areas south and east of Los Angeles also will not be spared. Conditions in Orange County, the western Inland Empire and the San Bernardino Mountains were expected to deteriorate Sunday into Monday as the storm moves toward San Diego and the Mexican border, according to the National Weather Service in San Diego.
“Precipitation intensity will only increase across these areas on Monday, and life-threatening flash flooding will be possible. By Monday night into Tuesday, the axis of the moisture plume begins to shift farther south and east, reaching Riverside and San Diego Counties,” the agency said.
Rainfall rates in the southernmost part of the state will be modest — up to 0.30 inch per hour — but the relentless nature of the rain will still lead to impressive totals through Tuesday, the agency said.
That includes up to 7 inches in the Santa Ana Mountains; 5 inches in Orange County; 4 inches in the Riverside County Mountains; 2 inches in the Apple and Lucerne valleys; 1.5 inches in the Coachella Valley and 0.75 inch in the San Diego County deserts. The San Bernardino County mountains could see up to 11 inches on south-facing slopes.
Regional public utilities, including California Edison and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, were preparing to respond to service outages and downed power lines. More than 380,000 people were without power statewide by Sunday afternoon.
“We are taking this storm system very seriously to ensure we are accurately prepared,” Edison spokesman Jeff Monford said. “Our meteorologists discuss the current conditions and the forecast with the teams handling operations and grid management so we can place crews in the most affected areas. We do this to get crews in location before roads may be closed due to flooding or ice.”
The LADWP “will monitor the storm system closely and respond accordingly, with the ability to schedule crews to be available around the clock,” the utility said in a statement. It has also beefed up staffing at call centers to respond to potential increases in calls from customers without power.
“During the storm, winds could blow down large objects such as trees, or cause branches and palm fronds to strike power lines, which could cause power outages,” LADWP said. “This is especially true when soil becomes oversaturated by the rain, causing it to loosen and uproot trees.”
In addition to downed trees, flooding and water intrusion into underground electrical systems may also cause power outages. Repairs may be slower if the affected equipment is underground and crews need to go from vault to vault to identify the source of the damage before repairs can take place.
The utilities urged people to be careful around downed power lines, which can electrify puddles, wet grass and surrounding areas.
“Always assume a downed wire is energized,” Edison said. “Stay away and call 911 immediately.”
As steady rain fell on Sunday, George Camarena, a lifeguard and longshoreman in Ventura, brought his Nintendo down to play video games with friends inside Pierpont Tacos. Earlier in the day, he had gone out to keep an eye on the beach.
“You never want to see someone down in the water” in this weather, he said. A faraway seal had made him look twice, but he was relieved to see no one in the water, just a few neighbors walking their dogs on the beach.
When a rogue wave hit the same area back in December, he had seen people standing on top of their trucks to avoid the water; elderly people with scraped faces; women who wanted to leave but whose keys had been swept away from them, he said.
“Today I’m just keeping my eye out,” he said.
Times audience engagement editor Nicholas Ducassi contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Hayley Smith, Grace Toohey, Emily Alpert Reyes, Roger Vincent
A U.S. Navy helicopter crashed into San Diego Bay off the coast of Coronado on Thursday evening, according to federal officials.
The MH-60R Sea Hawk helicopter from Helicopter Maritime Strike squadron entered the water while conducting training around 6:40 p.m., said Navy Cmdr. Beth Teach.
A safety boat was on location and, with assistance from Federal Fire Department San Diego, all six crew members were pulled from the water and taken to shore. The crew members survived and were undergoing medical evaluation, Teach said.
The helicopter had been stationed at Naval Air Station North Island, Teach said.
Another helicopter from the U.S. Coast Guard was sent out to help at the scene, Coast Guard Petty Officer Adam Stanton said.
Some of the heaviest surf in years pounded the Southern California coast on Saturday, while high tides triggered warnings of flooding and closures of beaches and piers.
Waves as high as 20 feet were forecast in Ventura and Los Angeles, while larger swells were rolling in along the Central Coast and in Northern California. Officials warned that the powerful waves and strong currents could sweep people onto rocks and jetties and into the ocean.
“It is generating extremely dangerous conditions at beaches,” said Rose Schoenfeld, meteorologist with the National Weather Service in Oxnard.
“This is the highest surf we’ve had in the last year,” Schoenfeld said. “It’s definitely more like once every few years.”
The huge swells rolled in while rain swept across Southern California on Saturday.
An initial round of strong waves pummeled the Ventura coast on Thursday, sending onlookers scrambling as the waves swept past seaside barriers and barreled down city streets. At least eight people were injured and several businesses were damaged as the waves broke windows and flooded buildings.
Saturday brought a second peak of hazardous waves. Residents with homes along Pacific Coast Highway in part of Ventura County were under an evacuation warning “due to high surf impacting structures in the area,” the Ventura County Fire Department said in a post on social media.
The surging water flooded some parking lots in the area. And piers were closed in places from Ventura to Manhattan Beach.
As powerful waves pummeled the shore, officials closed the Venice Pier on Saturday. Crowds gathered along the sand berm, watching the biggest sets scrape the bottom of the pier. Huge walls of waves broke across the beach as storm clouds gave way to sunny skies.
“Definitely some of the biggest in years,” Venice surfer Tim Sullivan said of the heavy swell.
The pier is a popular surf spot, but no one dared to venture out — except an L.A. County lifeguard. The lifeguard maneuvered a jet ski across the whitewater and rode some of the larger waves, apparently practicing his rescue skills.
Officials also warned people to be wary of “sneaker waves,” much like the one that caught Ventura beachgoers by surprise this week. The powerful waves are created by larger-than-average swells that can suddenly surge much farther inland than expected, breaking over rocks and lifting logs or driftwood onto the beach with deadly force.
The swells were generated by a low-pressure system to the north, west of Oregon, a few days ago. And the big surf combined with elevated high tides, which have been gradually decreasing after peaking Dec. 26, Schoenfeld said.
“It’s that combination of the really high surf with the fact that our tides are elevated in the lunar cycle right now,” Schoenfeld said. “We’ve gotten reports of pretty significant coastal flooding all up and down the coast.”
Warnings for heavy surf and coastal flooding were in effect throughout Southern California and the Central Coast. Forecasters said the highest surf and surges would hit west- and northwest-facing beaches, such as Hermosa Beach and the Palos Verdes Peninsula.
Near San Francisco, the waves grew to massive over the past few days. The National Weather Service said breaking waves were forecast to reach as high as 33 feet along some Bay Area beaches on Saturday.
In Half Moon Bay, at the renowned surf break known as Mavericks, spectators gathered along the bluffs to watch surfers ride the giant waves. Nearby, at the Old Princeton Landing restaurant and bar, employee Jon Dorn said surfers were continuing to paddle into waves on Saturday, though “it’s a little smaller than Thursday.”
Meanwhile, Saturday’s storm brought up to three-fourths inches of rain to Los Angeles and Ventura counties, while nearly 2 inches fell in Santa Barbara County, according to the weather service. Patchy showers were fading, while forecasters said mainly light rain is expected Sunday night into Monday.
In addition to the heavy surf, the rain also brought other potential hazards at beaches. L.A. County’s Department of Public Health advised people to avoid contact with water through Tuesday because flowing storm drains and creeks can lead to higher levels of bacteria and chemicals.
Times reporters Karen Garcia, Christian Martinez, Ashley Ahn and Nathan Solis contributed to this report.
Central Coast environmentalists are celebrating ExxonMobil’s recent decision to scrap plans to replace miles of pipeline through Santa Barbara County, key to revitalizing a local network of petroleum energy production shuttered since the catastrophic 2015 Refugio oil spill.
But at the same time, the oil giant has raised fresh concerns, saying it is instead exploring the possibility of repairing existing, damaged pipeline.
The years-long effort by oil companies to replace two major segments of pipeline could have allowed the company to restart offshore oil platforms along Santa Barbara County’s coast and an onshore processing plant. These possibilities have been long reviled by local environmental groups and some residents, especially after the catastrophic 2015 spill, which continues to loom large in the region.
“This [pipeline] replacement has been hanging over the community’s head for five years now,” said Jonathan Ullman, director of the Sierra Club’s Santa Barbara-Ventura chapter. “I was very happy to hear this news; it felt like their withdrawal signified that the writing was on the wall that they could not continue.”
Ullman said the construction project — had it been approved — had major implications for the environment, wildlife and public health, with heightened risks of oil spills and increased fossil fuel emissions.
The 2015 spill, caused by “extensive” corrosion on a section of pipeline, hemorrhaged more than 140,000 gallons of crude oil along the Gaviota Coast, much of which ended up in the ocean and along the region’s prized coastline, closing Refugio and El Capitan state beaches for weeks and affecting countless seabirds and marine life. Oil heavily coated a stretch of Santa Barbara County’s coast, with small tar balls reaching as far south as Redondo Beach in Los Angeles County.
Officials for Pacific Pipeline Co., a subsidiary of Texas-based ExxonMobil, wrote to Santa Barbara County leaders that it had found “the potential environmental impacts associated with the major construction of a second pipeline unnecessary and avoidable,” according to an Oct. 24 letter, withdrawing its proposal from the county’s permitting process.
The letter, however, also opened the door for another complicated fight in Santa Barbara County, with Exxon officials announcing that the oil giant would change its focus from building replacement pipeline to trying to restore old, damaged pipeline.
“Recent inspections and analysis affirms … the existing pipeline can be responsibly restarted,” the letter said. It also mentioned that during the replacement pipeline’s environmental review, “staff from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicated that restart of the existing pipeline is likely the Least Environmentally Damaging Practical Alternative under the Federal Clean Water Act.”
Exxon officials did not release additional information about those reviews but clarified that any “formal decision on the [Least Environmentally Damaging Practical Alternative] cannot be made until the entire environmental review and permitting process is completed.”
Exxon officials did not respond to questions from The Times requesting further details about such an undertaking, including any analysis of environmental impacts.
“Pacific Pipeline Company and ExxonMobil have assets that we intend to leverage to deliver reliable energy to Californians and others,” Exxon spokesperson Julie King said in a statement.
Kelsey Gerckens Buttitta, a spokesperson for Santa Barbara County, said Exxon and its subsidiaries do not have any current applications under review regarding the pipeline, noting that another recent proposal to upgrade multiple valves along the line was not approved this summer. However, any plans to restart the lines would fall under the jurisdiction of the California State Fire Marshal, she said, making it clear that county officials would still be paying attention.
“The County does have concerns with the integrity of restarting the existing pipeline but we are confident in the California State Fire Marshall’s ability to ensure that these concerns are addressed through their review authority,” Buttitta said in a statement.
Environmental groups also shared overwhelming concerns about Exxon’s portrayal of restoring the existing pipeline, which was found to be heavily corroded in 2015.
“At this stage of the climate crisis, building new oil infrastructure is reckless, to say the least,” said Maggie Hall, deputy chief counsel at the Environmental Defense Center, a nonprofit law firm that advocates for environmental protection in Santa Barbara, Ventura and San Luis Obispo counties.
“However, restarting a corroded and compromised pipeline that already caused one massive oil spill is even worse,” she said in a statement. “There is no way for the pipeline owners to credibly claim it will be safe. If this pipeline is allowed to restart, it’s not a question of if, but when, it will be responsible for another catastrophe.”
Ullman said he is hopeful that Exxon continuing to show interest in further construction in Santa Barbara County is simply a ploy by the company to keep investors interested, because he doesn’t believe such a plan could be successful.
“That pipeline cannot be repaired,” Ullman said. “It must be abandoned for the safety of the people who travel on the Gaviota Coast, but also for the massive amount of wildlife and sea life that’s there now.”
The ruptured pipeline that created the 2015 spill was built in 1987 and extended about 11 miles along the Gaviota Coast. It is part of a larger oil transport network that expands into Kern County, which Exxon had hoped to rebuild almost entirely, for a total of more than 120 miles through Santa Barbara County.
With the replacement project now halted, Ullman hopes to see the existing lines — still not in operation — removed.
“We’re still dealing with the consequences and the threats,” Ullman said. “The Gaviota Coast is really a special place … and worth protecting.”
