- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Planned freshwater diversions will doom LA salt fishing
Posted on 3/31/13 at 10:56 pm to man in the stadium
Posted on 3/31/13 at 10:56 pm to man in the stadium
quote:
so Mike/Ricks/Deege,
you come in here trying to falsely represent yourself as a neutral, questioning citizen, but in the end, we see what you are. you ask slanted questions, refuse to do any reading on topics or consider answers provided by those who know and care, even manage to get on wwl only to have the opinion poll be in favor 3 to 1 for diversions, and have now resorted to garbage name calling of the master plan when you have been exposed. your amateur hour is up.
I hope I have not come across as someone/something I am not. I admit to being an amateur. A week ago I had not heard of the Master Plan. I read RodnReel.com pretty regularly because I glean useful information from some of the posters. The posts of Capt Ricks and Dr Fitzpatrick raised valid concerns in my mind about collateral effects of diversions, as well as the efficacy. Also, I was impressed that so few of my friends knew anything about it.
I am on little mission to educate myself and others. I don't know Ricks, Fitz or Lane, or anyone else with a real dog in the fight.
If I seem to be slanted or persistent, it is because I don't feel that you guys are making a good argument. Or at least I don't feel that you are satisfactorily answering my questions, or my concerns.
It may appear that I have an agenda. I might end up with one, dont have it yet. Hate to say it, but seems to me a few of you do, might have something to do with your livelihood.
I am now heading to FishHead's discussion to see what I can learn.
Cheers
2
Posted on 3/31/13 at 10:57 pm to Fishhead
quote:
Feel free to join the discussion here, Deege (and all others)
Thanks Fishhead, heading that way.
Posted on 3/31/13 at 11:07 pm to Deege
ok man, sorry i popped off there.
Posted on 3/31/13 at 11:24 pm to Deege
The study’s results confirm that the state’s plans to build diversions along the Mississippi River’s banks, using designs that would slow the movement of floodwaters into Barataria Bay and Breton Sound, will build land
In July, a similar study in Nature Geoscience by researchers with the University of Illinois and the Army Corps of Engineers found that last year’s floodwaters deposited significant quantities of sand grains in the Bonnet Carre Spillway, which acts like the historic mouth of the Mississippi when it is opened to allow floodwaters to enter Lake Pontchartrain.
Combined, the two studies provide clear evidence that properly designed diversions that mirror the river’s historic distribution system will create land efficiently, Jerolmack said.
Atchafalaya Delta's levees are around 15 miles apart from Krotz Springs to Morgan City. When Morganza was used during the 2011 flood this study was based on, that's roughly 90 miles thru a forested swamp. So the diversons going into Breton Sound need to be much larger cuts in the levee and diverted to larger areas of marsh so we can get some overland flow so the river velocity will decrease rapidly. The shoaling that will occur across channel will need to be dredged so you can get that dredged material you've been wanting. Thanks for the link.
In July, a similar study in Nature Geoscience by researchers with the University of Illinois and the Army Corps of Engineers found that last year’s floodwaters deposited significant quantities of sand grains in the Bonnet Carre Spillway, which acts like the historic mouth of the Mississippi when it is opened to allow floodwaters to enter Lake Pontchartrain.
Combined, the two studies provide clear evidence that properly designed diversions that mirror the river’s historic distribution system will create land efficiently, Jerolmack said.
Atchafalaya Delta's levees are around 15 miles apart from Krotz Springs to Morgan City. When Morganza was used during the 2011 flood this study was based on, that's roughly 90 miles thru a forested swamp. So the diversons going into Breton Sound need to be much larger cuts in the levee and diverted to larger areas of marsh so we can get some overland flow so the river velocity will decrease rapidly. The shoaling that will occur across channel will need to be dredged so you can get that dredged material you've been wanting. Thanks for the link.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 7:57 am to Deege
quote:
If I seem to be slanted or persistent, it is because I don't feel that you guys are making a good argument. Or at least I don't feel that you are satisfactorily answering my questions, or my concerns.
It may appear that I have an agenda. I might end up with one, dont have it yet. Hate to say it, but seems to me a few of you do, might have something to do with your livelihood.
Most of us are here as saltwater fishermen, first and foremost. However, we don't have our heads so far up our asses as to think catching a couple of specs right now is worth losing the marsh, which is the best, most natural spawning habitat for specks and reds.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 9:15 am to Deege
quote:I checked...you aren't there.
Thanks Fishhead, heading that way
Come on over. 
Posted on 4/1/13 at 9:23 am to Jester
quote:
Most of us are here as saltwater fishermen, first and foremost. However, we don't have our heads so far up our asses as to think catching a couple of specs right now is worth losing the marsh, which is the best, most natural spawning habitat for specks and reds.
This. It bothers me that the main vocal minority is, and always has been, those worried about having to move operations a little due to some fresh water.
Thing is, I would not be the least bit surprised to see the fishing IMPROVED by this plan's effects. Ricks complains about the salinity in Black Bay during a specific few days in January, but doesn't bother to include that was right during a very low water cold snap, with north winds humming along. I can tell you this, and there's a report on here to prove it. During that same timeframe, I was smoking the specks and reds out of Hopedale! From a 16' flats boat with a 50 Yamaha on it. So you know I wasn't travelling far to do so!
The salinity was affected during that time by the north winds emptying the freaking marsh more than Caenarvon.
And how, if all that freshwater is destroying the fishing, am I catching 24" speckled trout within spitting distance of Reggio Marina? I personally stood with Mike (Reggio Marina Mike) on Friday on the dock at Reggio Marina and caught specks, NICE specks, right there in the canal. I had been crawfishing up the road and drove down to visit a minute. While crawfishing with my sons, we caught a few crawfish, but the most alarming thing was that we also caught BLUE CRABS! Saltwater isn't supposed to be there. Anyone who thinks otherwise is going to come across as agenda driven.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 9:50 am to Fishhead
quote:
While crawfishing with my sons, we caught a few crawfish, but the most alarming thing was that we also caught BLUE CRABS!
That's normal. We have blue crabs in basin and Verret annually.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 10:57 am to Capt ST
I'm talking about a ditch on the side of the road lol. But they were probably put there by Isaac, although I was inside of the flood gate.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 11:01 am to Fishhead
The crabs can handle fresh water...
Posted on 4/1/13 at 11:13 am to wickowick
Can they spawn there? Redfish and trout can handle it, but can't spawn in it. Not sure about crabs, but yes, I know there's plenty of crabs in near fresh water. So I guess that makes sense.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 11:16 am to Fishhead
quote:
Can they spawn there?
Yep...
Posted on 4/1/13 at 12:06 pm to Fishhead
quote:
This. It bothers me that the main vocal minority is, and always has been, those worried about having to move operations a little due to some fresh water.
Having to go further out to find adult fish is not among my chief worries. You know as well as I do that already there are times that a trip to Breton Island is not worthwhile due to river water (high river and or just west winds).
The introduction of freshwater will change existing spawning habitats. What assurances are there that intermediate and saltwater marshes will simply move out further. What assurances are there that they will be rebuilt as fast as they will be lost to fresh water?
BTW, I will sign up on your board but right now there is more robust repartee here.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 12:12 pm to Deege
quote:
The introduction of freshwater will change existing spawning habitats. What assurances are there that intermediate and saltwater marshes will simply move out further. What assurances are there that they will be rebuilt as fast as they will be lost to fresh water?
It WILL change their spawning. It will ensure that they have a place to spawn in the next 50 years. It seems to me you want to ensure the status quo of increased saltwater intrusion into freshwater swamps.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 12:29 pm to Jester
Here's something I have a problem with regarding Capt Ricks and Mike Lane voicing this opposition. They are focusing on solely one area of the state. They seemingly aren't even considering the Lake Maurepas swamp or other areas that are absolutely dying due to saltwater intrusion. They are screaming that it isn't the way it's supposed to be with freshwater in the St. Bernard marshes, but that isn't even true. There IS supposed to be freshwater in those marshes.
Another thing that bugs me is they only scream about the diversion, and only tout dredging as the solution to a broad issue. Nobody mentions the ridge restoration, reef building, marsh plantings, etc...included in the CMP.
Ridge building. Look at it in the CMP. It's present at Bayou La Loutre all the way from MRGO to the end. Take a boat trip along that route and look at all the dead trees. They completely line the entire route. You can't convince me there's not supposed to be some semblance of fresh water in that area. Stump Lagoon has stumps on purpose.
It's just the short sighted-ness of their argument that drives me insane. It comes across as them being concerned only about the short term, and only about their personal agendas. It's hard not to view it that way.
Another thing that bugs me is they only scream about the diversion, and only tout dredging as the solution to a broad issue. Nobody mentions the ridge restoration, reef building, marsh plantings, etc...included in the CMP.
Ridge building. Look at it in the CMP. It's present at Bayou La Loutre all the way from MRGO to the end. Take a boat trip along that route and look at all the dead trees. They completely line the entire route. You can't convince me there's not supposed to be some semblance of fresh water in that area. Stump Lagoon has stumps on purpose.
It's just the short sighted-ness of their argument that drives me insane. It comes across as them being concerned only about the short term, and only about their personal agendas. It's hard not to view it that way.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 12:32 pm to Deege
quote:I'm not saying you're wrong, but maybe you could introduce some evidence of this into the discussion. How can trout reproduce in the Venice area with the Mississippi River flowing constantly into the area?
The introduction of freshwater will change existing spawning habitats. What assurances are there that intermediate and saltwater marshes will simply move out further. What assurances are there that they will be rebuilt as fast as they will be lost to fresh water?
Posted on 4/1/13 at 12:36 pm to Jester
quote:
It WILL change their spawning. It will ensure that they have a place to spawn in the next 50 years. It seems to me you want to ensure the status quo of increased saltwater intrusion into freshwater swamps.
Look, I think diversions are as inevitable as overall loss of coastlines.
There is a right way and a wrong way to approach such a project as restoration. I do not believe Best Practices toward the wildlife and ecosystems and building land by diversion to be mutually exclusive.
I just want to know that those funding and managing to plan are not as callous to my concerns as you seem.
A thought, what if the plan was modified so that for first several years diversions would on be installed on one side of the river, for observation and study. I think it would be interesting to let the political forces decide whether East side or West side gets to go first.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 1:10 pm to Deege
Deege, your most recent response, when compared to the very title of this thread that YOU started, do not jibe with each other. You call people "callous" to your concerns, but the very title of this thread is about as callous as it gets, my man.
This post was edited on 4/1/13 at 1:12 pm
Posted on 4/1/13 at 1:16 pm to Deege
I know a lot of guys at the CPRA, USGS, LSU and so on who are heavily involved in coastal Louisiana on a daily basis. These people also are some of the biggest outdoorsmen I know. They are in duck blinds or bay boats damn near every weekend all across the state because they love it so much that they not only reap the recreational benefits, but have dedicated their whole livelihoods to preserving those services for everyone... Callous to these issues is not a word that describes any of them.
Posted on 4/1/13 at 2:02 pm to man in the stadium
quote:...
I know a lot of guys at the CPRA, USGS, LSU and so on
quote:
Callous to these issues is not a word that describes any of them.
I'm not sure that I addressed any of these people as callous.
Page 17 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News