- 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: Freshwater and Sediment Diversions - Do you agree with these guys?
Posted on 3/20/13 at 4:52 pm to Tigerlaff
Posted on 3/20/13 at 4:52 pm to Tigerlaff
quote:
Could you direct me to the source of this information?
The informantion is in LA coastal plan. Google it. So much I would like to write. They have a point to a degree, but what actually needs to happen they don't want to hear. You blow that thing open where it can divert heavy sands into the marsh and they'll be bitching because they beached their bay boat on a sand bar. It's the only way other than pumping. I would like them to pump initially then add to the system on high water events like we had a couple years back.
2
Posted on 3/20/13 at 4:57 pm to Capt ST
Dredging is the fastest way to put sediment in the system, however it is also the most expensive. The expense, plus the lack of usable sediment, makes the dredging nothing more than a bandaid for now. We will never catch up to the land loss with dredging alone.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 4:58 pm to Capt ST
The best way to restore the gulf, economically, is to obviously do as little as possible. This not building every single marsh structure. Let nature rebuild itself as much as possible. Aka let historic flow patterns reemerge.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 5:09 pm to lsufishnhunt
Freshwater diversions are worthless at building marsh, they need the sediment load.
Unfortunately all the diversions currently built are built only to capture water flow. To capture sediment you need a long diversion (think Morganza floodway or bonnet carre spillway).
I want to see caernarvon with a direct sediment injection (river dredge with outfall pipe in the channel). But it will never be permitted because it will "dirty up the water" and hurt the fish and shrimp. Also everyone hates unconfined disposal in the marsh since it silts in channels. Hell, USF&W and NMFS will threaten to shut down your project for unconfined spoil (containment dike blowouts) but everytime they have come to inspect they say nice job on the emergent wetlands area you created.
Unfortunately all the diversions currently built are built only to capture water flow. To capture sediment you need a long diversion (think Morganza floodway or bonnet carre spillway).
I want to see caernarvon with a direct sediment injection (river dredge with outfall pipe in the channel). But it will never be permitted because it will "dirty up the water" and hurt the fish and shrimp. Also everyone hates unconfined disposal in the marsh since it silts in channels. Hell, USF&W and NMFS will threaten to shut down your project for unconfined spoil (containment dike blowouts) but everytime they have come to inspect they say nice job on the emergent wetlands area you created.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 5:34 pm to eng08
This I agree with.
My entire point has been sediment AND freshwater diversions are necessary. Let me rephrase. Sediment AND fresh water, period. Doesn't have to be via diversions.
My entire point has been sediment AND freshwater diversions are necessary. Let me rephrase. Sediment AND fresh water, period. Doesn't have to be via diversions.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 5:40 pm to Fishhead
Right but it is. Very good option, probably the best, if it carries a sediment load
Posted on 3/20/13 at 5:58 pm to lsufishnhunt
They should at least be using what they are already dredging. Start with filling in sections of old o&g canals. It's going to take several different types of restoration working in conjunction. Spilling dredged silt into the Gulf is absurd.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 6:03 pm to Jester
I wonder if there would be a way to build controlled bars during high water events in the river that could be excavated during low waters and barged to projects.
This post was edited on 3/20/13 at 6:04 pm
Posted on 3/20/13 at 6:16 pm to Jester
No because at high water the river is most turbulent and energetic. What you describe would be something like the sill they build to stop the salt wedge but I want to say it washes away at around 800,000 cfs.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 6:35 pm to jimbeam
quote:Or just let the river go...which DOES carry sediment and freshwater.
Right but it is. Very good option, probably the best, if it carries a sediment load
Posted on 3/20/13 at 6:37 pm to Fishhead
Wouldn't the best way to start be to block off all of the O&G canals' exits leading into the Gulf? Seems like that would trap the sediment that came in during the tropical storms and hurricanes we have here. Would also catch all of the drainage sediment coming from up-stream. It would even be a good start in a plan to dump river water/silt down there. Gotta have a way to keep it all in, right?
Posted on 3/20/13 at 6:45 pm to Fishhead
quote:I'm probably the most ignorant person on the subject to post in this thread but it just seems like letting th Miss do its thing ( flow freely down the Atchafalaya and pick up sediment from outside the levee) is the only real solution. All the band aids and patchwork money can buy will only slow down the inevitable and never stop or reverse it.
Or just let the river go..
Posted on 3/20/13 at 8:04 pm to Fishhead
Best plan of all
Posted on 3/20/13 at 8:30 pm to jimbeam
I agree with Hat. You need to get the water flowing down Bayou Lafourche and Terrebonne.
Ask the bass fishermen if they like the diversions.
Ask the bass fishermen if they like the diversions.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 8:34 pm to ryan985
Man himself is what fricked up everything in a fraction of how long it took to build itself. We're going to have to compromise somewhere
Posted on 3/20/13 at 8:57 pm to jimbeam
The oil companies used to maintain their canals and most of them were closed off. They had several full time employees with a dragline who's only job was to maintain closures on canals that should be closed.
Come the regulatory requirements of the 70's and it takes thousands of dollars to remove 1 bucket of sediment in permits, so the oil companies just let the guys retire.
Come the regulatory requirements of the 70's and it takes thousands of dollars to remove 1 bucket of sediment in permits, so the oil companies just let the guys retire.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 10:51 pm to Fishhead
quote:
Or just let the river go...which DOES carry sediment and freshwater.
NEVER going to happen by USACE hands. Too many user groups. Two projects, one the Wax is coastal restorations poster child and the other West Bay. Neither did anything until impacted by 100 year floods. Miss River's sediment carrying capacity doesn't reach the levels required for any serious land building in a typical year. As someone stated earlier, we don't have a lot of areas offshore to mine enough sediment either. My thought is to mimic what has happened at those two places with dredged material to kick start the new project areas and add to them with the annual flood cycle. Regardless of how it's introduced, we have to get some meaningful amounts of sediment into the system and fast.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:09 pm to Capt ST
quote:
Two projects, one the Wax is coastal restorations poster child and the other West Bay. Neither did anything until impacted by 100 year floods
I call BS on the west bay diversion. It was creating land/ filling in before the high river. My uncle fought to keep this diversion open when people were saying it wasn't working. He knew it was and he was right.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:14 pm to JasonL79
One option too is domestic waste water introduction to wetlands. Increases soil accumulation as a byproduct of primary productivity. Just read about some studies from the Dulac Houma area
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News