Registered or Premium Member? LOG IN | Not a Premium Member? TRY PREMIUM FREE NOW
|
SANDBAGGED
After years of unspectacular closeouts, Pratte's Reef is removed from El Segundo
By:
Evan Fontaine
Photos: All photos: Jeremiah Klein/Surfline
|
October 11, 2008
|
|
A 24-year, $850,000 artificial surfing reef experiment came to an uneventful close Thursday, October 9th, in El Segundo, California.
There was no fanfare, not even a curious passerby. From the looks of it, no one in El Segundo really cared. And why should they? For eight plus years, Pratte's Reef was as useless as useless gets. So, how did something that on the surface sounded so promising, go so wrong?
|
|
Previous
|
The artificial surfing reef at Dockweiler was mitigation, moreover compensation, after a surf spot that broke off the finger jetty at Grand Avenue was compromised by the construction of Chevron's 900-foot groin. Built in 1984 because the beach in front of its El Segundo refinery had eroded threatening its pipeline to offshore oil tankers, a condition of the permit issued by the Coastal Commission and pushed through by Tom Pratte, a founding member of the Surfrider Foundation, stipulated that Chevron monitor the surf and should the groin adversely affect the surrounding surf spots then Chevron would be required to mitigate for that lost resource. Six years later, in 1990, the Coastal Commission affirmed that the surf north of the groin at the refinery had been adversely affected, and mitigation needed to be determined. After eight years running the gamut of possible options, from shower installation to better parking, the Coastal Commission, Chevron and Surfrider Foundation settled on an artificial surfing reef with Chevron slated to pony up $300,000. It took two years after that, until 2000, to secure the money, do the permitting, figure out who was going to build the thing and, finally, put it in the water. Then in 2001 the California Coastal Conservancy donated another 250 thousand dollars, which Surfrider used to increase the footprint, or size, of the reef. The Coastal Commission gave Surfrider a 10-year permit, a window in which they either had to make it work in or take it out. The results from the beginning were nightmarish. Consider the amount of sand building up on the north side of the groin and that it literally buried a previously dependable surf spot at the Grand Avenue groin. Couple that with the fact that, post-Chevron groin, the beach on the north side is very straight and very steep producing little more than closeouts. When those are the pre-existing conditions and "mitigation" is an undersized, under-funded artificial surfing reef, Pratte's never really had a chance. Consequently, it never produced a consistently surfable wave. Excluding Pratte's, there are five artificial reefs currently up and operating or under construction, and there are plans for another, Oil Piers, in Ventura, California. Pratte's, however, was the first to be removed in a privately financed three-week operation that will bring ashore the 200 sandbags, at 14,000 pounds each, deconstructing the u-shaped reef. "We exist to protect the ocean and the coast and the beaches, so if we put a bunch of plastic bags out in the ocean and they didn't work, we feel pretty obligated to pull them out."
--Surfrider's Chad Nelson
Chad continued: "Knowing what we know now, we probably should have said $300,000 is not enough. Pratte's reef is about one seventh the size of the reef the Amalgamates Solutions and Research Limited (ASR) guys put in at Mount Maunganui. Narrowneck, it's not even one tenth. I think Narrowneck might be 20 to 30 times larger. There's a reef proposed for Ventura that's a similar design, Oil Piers, that's also seven times larger. At the time, there was sort of a belief that, well, if we lost a surf spot we should get one back. And there wasn't any other solution that seemed fair." Still, the other artificial reefs have failed to provide consistent surf and opinions of the quality of waves each produces vary greatly. Some of the criticisms of Pratte's reef is that it might have faired better with a different primary purpose, such as a beach nourishment or erosion prevention project. Nelsen is quick to cite that beach nourishment projects on the East Coast of the United States are $100 million per mile and that if the artificial reef isn't going to make a wave, there are any number of more cost effective ways to build structures in the ocean that will prevent erosion. "The technology has definitely improved, the science has improved, and those ASR guys are leading that, my personal opinion is that they're still struggling to create a great wave," Nelsen said. "Obviously, they can be better designed and built than Pratte's was, but that's only a piece of it," Nelsen said. "I think there was a lot of, what I think is naïve optimism about the ability to build surf spots. We didn't succeed. The ASR guys, who obviously have probably spent tons more time and energy than anyone else, are still struggling to build successful surf spots. I think in the last 10 or 15 years we've been thinking about this issue, we're realizing maybe trying to enhance surf spots is not a good idea maybe the better idea is to try to protect the ones we have and focus there. I don't think we should ever trade a surf spot for the promise of building something else. "There's so many things that could have been done differently, I guess," Nelsen said. "We could have told Chevron that $300,000 doesn't buy a surf spot. We could have tried to use that money for something different, but how do you use that money when it's the guys that live at this spot who lost their surf spot? If it was your spot and they said, 'Hey, we'll use that money to do activism in Hawaii.' You'd be like, 'No I want you to fix my spot. You screwed up my spot.' So we were challenged with coming up with something here that would actually make a difference for the surfers who lost their surf spot. "People ask us all the time, 'Why aren't you guys putting in surf reefs or trying to quadruple the size of this one?' We tell them we're not in the business of building surf spots. We're in the business of protecting surf spots. We'd rather protect the ones we have than try to mitigate afterwards. The more I learn in my career in environmental work the more I realize that mitigation is a false promise. There is very little mitigation out there that ever is successful. So far we haven't seen an artificial surf spot that comes anywhere near the good surf spots we have." Since the construction of Pratte's Reef, Surfrider's Board of Directors updated its policy regarding artificial reefs. It's a position that Nelsen says, has evolved. Nelsen won't go so far as to suggest that an infant Surfrider should have tried to stop oil giant Chevron from building the groin altogether, saying rather candidly that some things are inevitable. But when pressed about other measures that should have been taken to ensure a higher success rate, Nelsen, who wrote his Master's Thesis at Duke University on the history of the Pratte's project, pointed to when the research for the reef was done. "One of the things that should have been done is that there should have been more monitoring of the sand bars and the beach conditions before the reef was put it," Nelsen said. "That would have told us that the reef was too small before we even put it in." Nelsen and Surfrider concede this has been a learning experience. "We learned a lot about what it takes to build an artificial surf reef, we were happy about the fact that this project got the Coastal Commission to recognize surfing as a sport that's worth protecting, and now we're learning a ton about how hard it is, and expensive, to take these things out once their lifespan's over," Nelsen said. To those who were hoping Pratte's Reef would bring a reeling A-frame to El Segundo, its legacy may be nothing more than a glorified conversation piece. But Tom Pratte, who first persuaded the Coastal Commission to consider surfing as a resource in coastal management decisions when they added the mitigation condition to the permit for the Chevron groin, gave the Surfrider Foundation evidence that the chief governmental agency responsible for coastal management in the state acknowledged that they mattered in the decision making process. "You can thank Tom Pratte and that decision for saving or thinking about surf spots up and down the state anytime some project's proposed," Nelsen said. "Now, of course they listen to surfers, ala Trestles. But in 1983, that was a big deal. We went from Killer Dana getting killed to Trestles on the other end, and this was one of those key moments in between." And though Pratte's Reef had many shortcomings, namely the dangerous precedent set by mitigation, it may stand the test of time as the landmark case in Surfrider's infancy that ultimately helped surfers save Trestles. (Click here for a 2000 story on the state of artificial reefs and click here for a 2005 story on the 4th international Surfing Reef Symposium.) MORE SURF NEWS SURFLINE HOME PAGE |
|
Comments: (59) Add Your Comment
JohnnyAM 10/18/2008 03:44 PM
Great, an engineered MISTAKE. Now they don't have to Mitigate again, its a failure. No, it's not hard to build a man made shelf/reef successfully, not hard at all. Andrew, Randy, close, very close.
Mt reefer 10/15/2008 03:07 PM
Since the work done in early June the Mount Reef has had great waves . Check out youtube search Mt Reef for some waves from 5th September
shayan hassani 10/14/2008 11:45 PM * PREMIUM MEMBER - Real Name
if the cheveron corperation placed a pipe with fast moving fresh water much like the pipe they now have futher out to sea it would create the sand bars need for good surf. much like a river mouth. many cities have to
Sebastian 10/14/2008 12:43 PM
Wow, a lot of armchair quarterbacks Engineers out there. At least a project like this was thought of approved and constructed. It is also important to note that when failure was realized they were responsible enough to remove it. my sympathy goes out to all the surfers who are standing around the beach waiting for someone else to come up with unique ideas and find ways to give you guys what you want, waves. Your opinions here are greatly appreciated.
prattes is a joke 10/14/2008 08:17 AM
for the most part prattes was a joke from the beginning. you want a reef why dont you put a bunch of rocks or smashed up cars out there to make an artificial reef and dont make it 20 feet deep, not everyone rides a longboard!! when it was big enough to break there was waves breaking out further than prattes, check out some AU artificial reefs and youll get a clue, you should of had a bbq for all of us over here in the so. bay and we would of been much happier. keep on wasting money, what a joke.
Andrew 10/13/2008 06:50 PM
From the Surfrider site: "The reef sits in about 15 feet of water. At a "zero tide" the reef is approximately 8 feet deep." Who signed off on that genius idea?? on a zero tide its 8 FEET DEEP?! Morons... honestly. Should have been nearly dry on a negative tide to be legit. Its all the permits and whatnot im sure but they should never have wasted all that cash knowing this.
evan 10/13/2008 04:36 PM
sounds like surfrider should hire a new team of engineers, not a bunch of pencil pushers that don't know the first thing about surfing slabs.
Ryan Vick 10/13/2008 04:10 PM
"it never produced a consistently surfable wave."
of course!
"so if we put a bunch of plastic bags out in the ocean and they didn't work, we feel pretty obligated to pull them out."
Surfrider, you are idiots. Just leave it there! Not hurting anything. Maybe can build upon it later... Otherwise, as it was, I saw it break on a few large swells. Was tempted to surf it once. That wave had potential. Now it's gone completely. THAT is a waste (of effort/money/etc).
Randy Wright 10/13/2008 03:19 PM * PREMIUM MEMBER - Real Name
I luv man-made waves!
As a long time Los Angeles area surfer, I have spent many years riding our man-made waves. Spots like the Venice Breakwater, Venice Jetty(rip),Venice Pier, Toes(rip),Gilis,Dockweiler,Grand Jetty(rip),Oil Piers(rip),Hammerland Jetty,etc are ALL MAN-MADE WAVES!
Don't forget the storm drain sandbars too.
I've noticed some spots that didn't break 30 years ago that now do, and others are only memories...
I think that Pratte's reef was simply too far away from the shore...
Eric Hooper 10/13/2008 02:53 PM * PREMIUM MEMBER - Real Name
WOW! How does Surfrider a help on a large scale? I feel I'm just wasting my money every year by donating to them. I know they do create ocean awareness as well organize beach clean-ups; but beyond that, do they do any good. I was completely embarrassed when I saw "Surfrider" talking about the whole lowers thing on T.V., guy sounded like such a retard and made it look like surfers are bunch of uneducated idiots. This confirms it, I'm done w/ the Surfrider foundation. $850,000 down the drain.
mister ed 10/13/2008 02:05 PM
who cares this is LA we are talking about, dirty stinky, loud, rude, LA. You people dont deserve to use the ocean.
NO MO Hammerland 10/13/2008 01:17 PM
Wow - no wonder were in this mess...can some one go by and wake up Ron Peterson- Premium Member ... I'm no brain surgeon but even I could tell that Prime Demo was being sarcastic. No one is debating that big corporations have rolled all over us. The problem is that even with organization , we still don't have a chance. can't wait to see YOU handle the current financial crisis- Thanks buddy for everything YOUR doing to clean up was street . Good Job - Atta Boy
wayne 10/13/2008 11:39 AM
Surfrider,what a joke! When I proposed a storm water filter that drops into a storm drain to capture oil and hydrocarbons they would not step up yet they build a reef that is non-surfable!
Jet 10/13/2008 11:35 AM
Notice to all you geniuses... we still need someone to figure out HOW to build a real surfing wave. How many of you oceanographers/engineers etc. need a masters/Phd. thesis... this is it. There is pleanty of room for inovation here. ASR has been working to this end for years and still hasn't got it all figured out. Surf Science is a burgeoning field with room for everyone with a unique idea.
surfrider skeptic 10/13/2008 10:10 AM
View All Comments (59 comments)
surfrider foundation is a FOR profit organization, if you think they spent all that money on some plastic bags full of sand then I have an igloo in Maui I'd like you to see...
Add Your Comment:
ABOUT SURFLINE'S COMMENTS: Surfline comments are intended to foster and continue a community discussion and/or debate on the topic brought up by the feature above. We encourage you to comment and express your opinion. Before commenting, you should know that Surfline Comments are moderated, which means that comments containing personal attacks, excessive profanity, or off-topic remarks may not be posted. Also, 'EDITOR'S PICKS' are comments that we feel capture points-of-view from all sides of the issue at hand, not necessarily the comments Surfline most agrees with. Thanks. --the editors
|