Connect with us

California

History's Lesson for Saving California's Beaches

Published

on

History's Lesson for Saving California's Beaches


July has been defined by heat waves across America. Nowhere was the heat more intense than in Southern California, where Palm Springs set an all-time record high of 124°. Days of blistering temperatures are both unpleasant and potentially dangerous, even for healthy adults. That reality sends people scurrying for any relief they can find, and in California, for many, that includes heading for the coast, where temperatures are less stifling.

This has been the pattern for more than a century. In the 1910s, when temperatures soared, Los Angeles families would camp out at the beach to sleep “on the cool damp sand.” More than a century later, in 2020, when the first COVID-19 lockdown led to beach closures in the midst of a heat wave, journalist George Skelton vigorously protested in the pages of the Los Angeles Times, arguing that going to the beach was a Californian’s “birthright,” a “trade-off for all the quakes, wildfires, mudslides and smog.”

Yet there is no guarantee that Californians — particularly in the hottest parts of the state — will have a beach to go to in another 100 years. Climate change threatens to erode California’s beaches. In 2017, a group of engineers and marine scientists who modeled shoreline response to climate change estimated that sea level rise could cause the complete erosion of  “31% to 67% of Southern California beaches.”

The irony of this story is that most of California’s beaches are artificial — man-made — and many were much narrower in their original, natural state. The history of their construction suggests that the only solution to the erosion today is to stop working against nature and start working with it.

Advertisement

In an 1872 memorandum to the U.S. Senate, a member of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey wrote that, when he had visited the bay from Santa Monica to Point Dume, “the high bluffs and cliffs came so sharply to the shore, and the arroyos there so deep that no road was practicable above high water.” In fact, according to A. G. Johnson, beach design engineer for the City of Los Angeles in the 1930s, the bay beaches, “in their natural state, before changes occurred due to activities of man,” had a uniform width of about 75 to 100 feet — a far cry from today’s 500-foot beaches.

A combination of engineering innovation, neglect, lack of scientific understanding of coastal ecology, and, most crucially, chance, spurred the dramatic transformation. In the 1930s, Southern California coastal elites all dreamed of attracting the world’s rich and famous by opening a yacht harbor. Santa Barbara, Santa Monica, and Redondo Beach all made the same mistake: they built a breakwater — essentially an offshore seawall built parallel to the coast — to create calm waters, which would be more hospitable for yachts. The problem was that the wall interrupted the sediment currents in that area. While sand quickly accumulated on the beach north of the breakwater, down south, the beach was starved of sand. Within a few years, all three towns had lost a beach. 

The loss reflected how beaches continuously shifted in shape and form — usually growing narrow in the winter and larger in the summer. But construction that disrupted that cycle led to erosion.

Read More: Threatened by Sea Level Rise, This New Jersey Town is Taking Matters Into Its Own Hands

As the beaches shrunk, engineers developed plans to counter the erosion they had created by pumping in sand from nearby dunes. In Los Angeles, the Hyperion dune field provided much needed material. In 1936, Works Progress Administration employees successfully deposited sand from Hyperion on some of Venice’s badly eroded beaches. The operation worked so well that, by the early 1940s, Johnson proposed excavating more sand to enlarge the beach from 75 to 275 feet and use the newly created space to build a coastal highway connecting Santa Monica to Venice. 

Advertisement

This plan, however, was judged too risky and abandoned. The yacht harbor fiascos were still too fresh in people’s minds for them to blindly put their trust in engineers. Nowhere had a road of that magnitude been built successfully on artificial strands. In addition, many coastal residents balked at the idea of a highway marring their view of the ocean. 

But Southern California’s beaches continued to grow more popular as the region’s population exploded after World War II. That meant severe crowding, and engineers continued to insist that they could solve this problem by making the beaches bigger. They received support from local businessmen and officials who campaigned for beach development and preservation.

The result was colossal beach replenishment operations throughout the 1950s and 1960s, using sand both from the Hyperion Dunes and the ocean floor. In 1948, for instance, the City of Los Angeles spread 14 million cubic yards of sand over six miles of beachfront between Santa Monica and El Segundo. Then, between 1960 and 1963, 10.1 million cubic yards of sand that was dredged up to allow the construction of the gigantic Marina Del Rey harbor was distributed on Dockweiler Beach. Yet, major construction on the coastline became less frequent thereafter, and other sources of sediment had to be found (the dunes had been completely excavated by then). In 1969-1970, a stretch of the Redondo Beach coastline was widened with 1.1 million cubic yards of sand dredged from an offshore source. 

In total, between 1945 and the late 1960s, nearly 30 million cubic yards of sand were deposited on the beaches of Santa Monica Bay. And studies in the 1960s showed that, while similar efforts failed elsewhere in the U.S. due to extreme weather and erosion, they worked in Southern California thanks to an array of unique factors. Among them: remarkable stability in terms of weather and temperature patterns, and being spared from sea-level rises experienced on other coastlines due to cold surface waters.

Read More: Rising Seas Are Going to Create a Huge Property Tax Headache for Coastal Communities

Advertisement

While this seemed like a success story — the ultimate in human manipulation of nature — things are now changing rapidly for several reasons. First, the climate cycle that left the waters cold and spared the beaches from sea-level rises has now ended. Additionally, the vast majority of the sand on Southern California beaches came from riverine sediments deposited on the coast during periods of heavy flooding. Yet, as flood-control efforts — including water-supply dams and channelized rivers — took place to protect people and buildings from flooding, they cut off the beaches from their main sediment supply. Environmental regulations also limited the coastal construction that, until the 1970s, had allowed for the dredging of sediments from the seafloor which could be added to the beaches.

The result of these changes has been severe erosion. Municipalities have responded by “armoring” the beaches — building seawalls, jetties, and groins to protect them. This provides some relief in the short term but risks exacerbating beach erosion in the long run or simply displacing it to another part of the coastline. As demonstrated by the breakwater fiascoes of the 1930s, building seawalls always disrupts coastal ecologies.

How can Southern Californians protect their beaches with many earlier options for replenishing or adding sand exhausted? The answer is to learn from the lesson of a century of history: working against nature does more harm to the beaches than good over time. That means ending armoring the beaches and instead implementing a plan for selective managed retreat. That would allow them to wax and wane seasonally, as they used to do before coastal engineering became ubiquitous. Once we stop interfering with hard structures, the natural flow of sediments can return. This, in combination with ongoing pilot projects involving, for instance, growing native plants that trap the sand and allow for dunes to form, will give beaches a fighting chance against sea-level rise. 

Safeguarding California’s beaches will also, however, require grappling with the cause of climate change fueling sea rises, especially our dependence on fossil fuels. No beach protection plan will prove successful in the long term without addressing this problem. These are no small tasks, but continuing business as usual will only deliver a future with narrower beaches, if not a beachless future altogether. In Los Angeles, history tells us that we have built those beautiful, vast beaches. But we are now slowly, but surely, destroying them.

Elsa Devienne is assistant professor in history at Northumbria University (UK) and the author of Sand Rush: The Revival of the Beach in Twentieth-Century Los Angeles (2024).

Advertisement

Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

California

Jackie and Shadow fled during Big Bear fireworks but returned to nest and eaglets the next day

Published

on

Jackie and Shadow fled during Big Bear fireworks but returned to nest and eaglets the next day


Fireworks can frighten animals and send them scattering, but Jackie and Shadow’s eaglets apparently are made of sterner stuff.

Chicks Luna and Sandy were seen safe and sound Sunday morning around 6 a.m. on the popular livestream nest cam aimed at their Big Bear pine tree, snacking on fish in the family aerie.

Mom and Dad did fly off when the nearby Fourth of July holiday show promoted by tourism organization Visit Big Bear began on Saturday night, Big Bear Valley media and website manager Jennifer Voisard told the Orange County Register on Sunday morning.

But both bald eagles flew back to their nest Sunday morning to care for their eaglets, who had remained around the nest during the show.

Advertisement

The fireworks show has faced controversy regarding the famous avians, spawning a Change.org petition to move the festivities farther away or switch to an environmentally friendlier drone show.

More than 45,000 people signed the petition. But the show went on for the sake of the local economy.

There was particular anxiety this year among environmental advocates as the eaglets were on the cusp of flying as the event was planned. The pair took their first flights just days beforehand. They had been spotted in nearby trees but didn’t immediately return to the nest.

The nonprofit that operates the webcam, Friends of Big Bear Valley, wrote a letter to officials warning that, “whether they are still in the nest or newly fledged, they will depend on Jackie and Shadow to care for them.”

“If, as in the past, Jackie and Shadow were to flee the habitat area for a few days, this could put the eaglets in danger at this important time of their lives.”

Advertisement

To the relief of their fans, the parents did return.

The fireworks event is an important economic driver in a year when Big Bear saw less snow than usual during its peak winter months, the travel organization said.

“The fireworks show is a long-standing community tradition and an important economic driver for Big Bear’s local businesses, workers, restaurants, lodging properties, recreation providers, and families. That context is especially important this year after another low-to-no snow winter, which directly impacted many of our neighbors, employees, and small businesses,” Visit Big Bear said in a statement.

It said the show happens about two miles away from Jackie and Shadow’s nest and lasted only about 30 minutes.

The eagles — and occasionally their chicks — could be seen on Friends of Big Bear Valley’s livestream heading into Sunday evening.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

California

A Dividend Portfolio That Out-Earns the Average California Family

Published

on

A Dividend Portfolio That Out-Earns the Average California Family


© PeopleImages / Shutterstock.com

California’s median household income landed at $100,600 in 2024, according to Census data compiled by the St. Louis Fed. That is the number a portfolio has to replace to hand a Golden State family the same paycheck without anyone clocking in. The wrinkle: California’s 2024 regional price parity was 110.7, meaning prices were about 10.7% above the national average. Replacing that income with dividends carries a built-in purchasing-power headwind.

The core equation: income target divided by yield equals the capital required before taxes. What changes across yield tiers is the risk, growth trajectory, tax treatment, and whether the check keeps up with California living costs over the next decade.

The Sleep-At-Night Tier: 3.5% to 4%

At a 3.5% blended yield, replacing $100,600 requires roughly $2,874,000 in invested capital. This is the dividend growth lane. PepsiCo (NASDAQ:PEP | PEP Price Prediction) yields about 4% and just raised its payout for the 54th consecutive year, with a $1.48 quarterly dividend up from $1.4225. Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) yields a leaner 2% but just delivered its 64th consecutive annual raise to $1.34 quarterly.

Advertisement

The tradeoff is capital-heavy but growth-rich. PepsiCo’s annual dividend climbed from $4.02 in 2020 to $5.62 in 2025, roughly a 40% raise in five years. That is how this tier beats the California cost-of-living treadmill.

The Middle Path: 5% to 6.5%

At a 5% blend, the required capital drops to roughly $2,012,000. Push to 6.5% and the number falls to about $1,548,000. This tier is where net-lease REITs, gaming REITs, and pipeline partnerships live.

Realty Income (NYSE:O) yields about 5%, pays monthly, and just declared its 114th consecutive quarterly increase at an annualized $3.246 per share. Portfolio occupancy sits at 99%. VICI Properties (NYSE:VICI) yields almost 7% off a $1.783 payout backed by triple-net leases on Caesars Palace and MGM properties with 100% occupancy. Enterprise Products Partners (NYSE:EPD) yields near 6% on a $2.20 annualized distribution, though its K-1 tax form adds filing complexity in a high-tax state.

The tradeoff: growth slows. VICI’s quarterly dividend rose from $0.4325 to $0.45 over the past year, a mid-single-digit bump. Realty Income’s payout grew about 3% to 3.7% per its 2026 AFFO guide. That still edges past inflation, barely.

The High-Yield Tier: 8% and Above

At 8.3%, the required capital collapses to roughly $1,212,000. Main Street Capital (NYSE:MAIN) is the archetype. Its regular monthly payout of $0.26 annualizes to $3.12, and four $0.30 supplementals per year add another $1.20, for a total of roughly $4.32 per share. Against a $52 stock price, that is a total yield near 8.3%.

Advertisement

The catch: BDC supplementals are tied to net investment income and portfolio performance, not contractual. Non-accruals sat at about 1% of the portfolio at fair value at quarter-end, which is healthy, but the extras can shrink in a credit downturn. The 10-year Treasury yields about 4.5% for comparison, so an 8% equity yield is nearly double the risk-free rate for a reason.

Why the Cheapest Portfolio Is Often the Worst Deal

A 3.5% yield growing 8% per year doubles the income stream in nine years. A flat 8% yield stays exactly where it started. Nine years from now, that $100,600 California household budget needs to be closer to $130,000 just to hold ground against typical inflation. The high-yield portfolio funds today’s paycheck. The growth portfolio funds today’s paycheck and next decade’s.

California’s top marginal state rate reaches 13.3%, and MLP K-1s, REIT ordinary-income distributions, and BDC dividends are almost all taxed as ordinary income. Qualified dividends from PepsiCo or Johnson & Johnson get preferential federal treatment. That gap matters in Sacramento’s tax bracket.

Before Chasing Yield, Run These Three Numbers

  • Calculate spending, not salary. California households often need to replace only 70% to 80% of their working income once payroll taxes, retirement contributions, commuting costs, and other job-related expenses disappear. Replacing $75,000 of actual spending requires far less capital than replacing a $100,600 paycheck.
  • Compare total return, not just today’s yield. Run a simple ten-year spreadsheet comparing a 3.5% dividend-growth portfolio with an 8% high-yield portfolio, assuming dividends are reinvested. The higher-yield option often wins early, but the growth portfolio frequently catches and passes it over time.
  • Model after-tax income. California’s 9.3% and 13.3% state tax brackets can change the ranking. Qualified dividends, REIT distributions, BDC dividends, and MLP distributions all receive different tax treatment, so the portfolio with the highest stated yield may not produce the most spendable income.

Replacing California’s median household income with dividends is possible, but the cheapest portfolio is not always the one that leaves you in the strongest position ten or twenty years from now. The right choice depends on whether your priority is maximizing today’s income, protecting tomorrow’s purchasing power, or striking a balance between the two. For most investors, the real goal is not simply matching a paycheck. It is creating one that never requires punching a clock again.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

Mother, daughter found ‘alive and well’ after going missing on Southern California hiking trail

Published

on

Mother, daughter found ‘alive and well’ after going missing on Southern California hiking trail


A mother and daughter who went missing after going for a hike on a difficult trail in San Bernardino County’s San Gorgonio Wilderness have been found “alive and well,” the sheriff’s department announced Friday.

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department told KTLA they were uninjured and “walked out on their own.”

Krystal Meyers, 41, and her daughter Alexis Meyers Martinez, 21, were hiking on the Vivian Creek Trail Thursday but didn’t return, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department.

Krystal Meyers (L) and Alexis Meyers Martinez went missing in the San Gorgonio Wilderness on July 3, 2026. (San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department)

They were last known to be at the 10,300-foot elevation mark above the High Creek switchbacks at 11 a.m., according to the San Gorgonio Search and Rescue team.

Advertisement

The Vivian Creek Trail is widely considered one of the more strenuous and hazardous routes in the San Gorgonio Wilderness.

The U.S. Forest Service says it’s the shortest and steepest route to the summit of Mount San Gorgonio and requires experienced mountaineering skills.

Officials did not provide any further details about the circumstances surrounding their disappearance.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending