Â
By Michael Falcone
Daily Bruin Senior Staff
A study spearheaded by UCLA researchers may give surfers in
Malibu more to worry about than catching the next wave.
Those waves, along with urbanization, constant construction and
the physical geography of the Malibu watershed all contribute to an
increasingly contaminated coastal zone.
UCLA professors Richard Ambrose and Antony Orme led a team of
researchers from UCLA and the University of Arizona in a two-year
study that was released in May.
The report, commissioned by the California Coastal Conservancy,
focused on the causes of environmental problems and human health
risks in the Lower Malibu Creek and Malibu Lagoon areas.
Ambrose said at first researchers were looking for evidence of
human pathogenic viruses, but did not find them.
What they found instead were traces of two types of parasites
““ giardia and cryptosporidum ““ both of which can cause
adverse reactions in humans, including stomach cramps, vomiting and
diarrhea.
Marti Witter, a biologist for the city of Malibu, said the
problem partly stems from the physical processes which take place
in the Malibu Lagoon.
The lagoon is the main drainage point for the Malibu Creek which
carries urban runoff from areas upstream as well as treated water
from the Tapia Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Ocean waves create a sand barrier in the lagoon, trapping water
inside. This natural process becomes problematic during the summer
when low rainfall prevents the flow of runoff from the lagoon into
the ocean.
“Under normal circumstances the lagoon would stay closed
all summer long, and none of the polluted water gets out into the
surf zone,” Witter said.
But when water remains stagnant for extended periods of time,
the lagoon becomes a breeding ground for the kinds of dangerous
parasites the research team identified.
Besides the trapped water in the lagoon, Ambrose said a
geographic division between two watersheds in Malibu also means
those who live in the upper watershed don’t realize that the
contaminants they dump trickle into the lower watershed, more than
15 miles away.
“Most of the people living in the upper watershed probably
don’t realize that it’s connected to the Malibu lagoon
and the ocean because they live miles away,” Ambrose
said.
Urban development near Highway 101, leakage from faulty septic
systems, and domestic pollution contribute to contaminated water
which enters Malibu Creek and its tributaries and makes its way
into the ocean.
Property owners, environmental groups, surfers, and the city of
Malibu, among others, all have a stake in whichever policy
solutions are eventually adopted.
Ambrose said it is because many groups are interested in the
future of the Malibu watershed that the study was commissioned in
the first place.
“If it were easy for them to agree on what should be done
we wouldn’t have done the study,” Ambrose said.
Mark Abramson, Stream Team manager of the Santa Monica-based
non-profit environmental group Heal the Bay, criticized one company
currently interested in developing an area of Malibu.
“There’s a huge, horrible project sponsored by
Washington Mutual Bank to build 350,00 homes, two golf courses and
a hotel at the very top of the Malibu creek watershed,”
Abramson said.
“It jeopardizes much more than the plants and animals that
live there; it’s just a stupid place to build,” he
added.
But development has been on-going in the wealthy Malibu area
since the turn of the century and more people often means more
pollution and contamination.
“All those houses and commercial Malibu colonies turn out
to be a major factor in pollution on Malibu Surfrider Beach,”
Abramson said.
The beach, which Abramson said is used by more than 1.5 million
people every year, received an “F” grade from Heal the
Bay’s Beach Report Card.
Abramson said parties involved would reach an agreement about
how to control the creek and coastal contamination problem in
Malibu based on findings in the UCLA study.
He said the study does not spell out exactly what should be
done, but instead provides “assessments of the pros and cons
of the different alternatives.”
“We can’t really tell them what to do because
it’s a difficult problem and there’s no one scientific
solution that’s going to solve the whole thing,”
Ambrose said.