Your article about the Los Angeles River playing an important role in reducing flood risk in the LA region during times of heavy rain was accurate (Yes, the Los Angeles River is dramatically full. But it’s just ‘doing its job’, 6 February). But the decision to line the LA River – and many of its tributary creeks and streams – with concrete to control flood risk was a 20th-century engineered approach to how urban areas should coexist with the whims of nature. In the 21st century, we know there are better ways to address concerns about both water quality and flood risk in ways that promote greater resilience and equity.
Rather than sending billions of gallons of water – an increasingly precious resource in drought-prone southern California – directly out to sea when storms hit, we should lean into nature-based solutions that provide multiple benefits while managing storm-water flows. For example, there may be opportunities to invest in large-scale water-supply capture infrastructure in strategic areas in the Los Angeles River watershed. Such projects could provide the same level of flood protection provided by a concrete-lined river while allowing captured water to recharge our local groundwater basins as nature intended.
We can also add green spaces along the river channel that could serve as flood plains during times of high water while also providing critical urban habitat for wildlife, recreational opportunities for park-poor communities, and critical shade for Angelenos to enjoy in the heat of the summer. Several of these types of projects are already being built. It’s up to our leaders to embrace the vision of working with nature, rather than against it, if we hope to reap all the benefits that the Los Angeles River has to offer.
Bruce Reznik
Executive director, Los Angeles Waterkeeper
