- 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: When will something actually get done to stop these islands from washing away?
Posted on 7/8/14 at 2:59 pm to jimbeam
Posted on 7/8/14 at 2:59 pm to jimbeam
quote:
Fourchon beach used to extend a mile further into the gulf not too long ago
i'm not arguing that. I'm arguing its a stupid waste of money to try and win a law suit I don't think the state will win. There are some better alternatives. As for Fourchon beach, it will be smaller the next time another hurricane batters it. I dont think you can win- in a court of law- that the oil cos are responsible for that. Again, its a waste of time and money IMO.
1
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:00 pm to tigerinthebueche
quote:
I guarantee you you will not find a consensus that the oil companies are solely responsible for what has happened.
It doesn't have to be fault based all the time. They have a lease. Lease says restore the land. They dug a canal. Canal must be filled in. All structure removed, pits re-filled etc.
Nothing will ever be done though. The other part of the problem is that anything that is proposed will be opposed by some group. Let's say they agreed to fill in every canal in St. Bernard marsh. Every recreational and commercial fisherman will go ape shite because that's where they fish. Oyster men will sue to stop anyone from doing anything that will affect salinity or muddy their beds.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:01 pm to bayoudude
quote:
The oil companies could back fill every pipeline canal ever made and after a few storms it would wash away just like every beach refurbishment project on last island. Without new natural sediment there is nothing to keep the man made land from washing away. Just look at a map everything between the Atchafalaya and MS river is washing away there is nothing to keep the marsh healthy.
It has to be a suite approach. Back-filling the canals is a huge first step. We are never going to get the full delta effect with regular river flooding, but diversions will help when designed well.
Now, to imply that filling the canals is pointless is foolhardy. Those canals absolutely accelerate land loss by giving storm surge easier channels to pass through to healthier land.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:02 pm to BrotherEsau
quote:
Oyster men will sue to stop anyone from doing anything that will affect salinity or muddy their beds
All for oyster beds that shouldn't be there in the first place
You can't make everyone happy yet these same fishermen will be the first complaining when the water is lapping their back porch due to coastal erosion. Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:02 pm to tigerinthebueche
quote:
I don't think the state will win.
Are you a lawyer?
Are you a coastal scientist?
Are you a civil engineer?
If no to all of the above, what makes you think you have any idea what would happen in court?
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:02 pm to TJG210
More water, more fish. And since it's all navigable, we all can fish it!
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:04 pm to BrotherEsau
quote:
It doesn't have to be fault based all the time. They have a lease. Lease says restore the land. They dug a canal. Canal must be filled in. All structure removed, pits re-filled etc.
This is not debatable at all. This is why the suit was so dangerous for them. They have very little legal standing to defend themselves against it.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:04 pm to Galactic Inquisitor
quote:
Now, to imply that filling the canals is pointless is foolhardy. Those canals absolutely accelerate land loss by giving storm surge easier channels to pass through to healthier land.
Oh I am not denying that. We would be better off without any of those pipeline canals but they are literally everywhere. It is sad that we have family land that my great grand parents once raised cattle on and now you can run a lafite skiff with skimmers. Out of 110 acres there is maybe 10 acres of saltwater marsh where there was cattle grazing less than 100 years ago.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:07 pm to BrotherEsau
quote:
The other part of the problem is that anything that is proposed will be opposed by some group. Let's say they agreed to fill in every canal in St. Bernard marsh. Every recreational and commercial fisherman will go ape shite because that's where they fish. Oyster men will sue to stop anyone from doing anything that will affect salinity or muddy their beds.
this too. I promise you no matter what is proposed some environmental group somewhere will oppose it. Its just a big shite storm. I don't see the need to spend more money on it.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:16 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
More water, more fish. And since it's all navigable, we all can fish it!
Hellz yeah! Pretty soon we won't have to drive all the way to Cocodrie to launch either.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:17 pm to bayoudude
quote:Or Blame the citizen of New Orleans for needing the River.
Yep if there is a finger to point it is at the Corps of Engineers for diverting the MS river and starving off its natural tributaries
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:17 pm to tigerinthebueche
The lawsuits were filed by parishes and levee boards at no cost to the state. The only time the attorneys would be paid is if they win the case, so you can't argue that suing costs the state money, as any money it would cost is money we wouldn't have had without it.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:23 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
More water, more fish. And since it's all navigable, we all can fish it!
I knew you'd come around!
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:23 pm to bayoudude
quote:
Yep if there is a finger to point it is at the Corps of Engineers for diverting the MS river and starving off its natural tributaries most importantly bayou lafourche that feeds Terrebonne parish via bayou terrebonne.
I remember several years ago when they opened up the pumps and allowed the MS river to flow into bayou Lafourche. The whole bayou came to life. The water cleaned up. People were catching tons of fish. Before then and since then, it's disgusting.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:26 pm to Galactic Inquisitor
quote:
The only time the attorneys would be paid is if they win the case,
Yea......and those bastards would take a lions share of the money. Great plan.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:30 pm to TJG210
quote:
Yea......and those bastards would take a lions share of the money. Great plan.
There is a limited amount they can take. Furthermore, isn't 80% of a bunch of money better than 100% of no money?
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:34 pm to Mung
quote:The Krotz Springs Marina is gonna rock. Hit Kartchner's on the way home.
Hellz yeah! Pretty soon we won't have to drive all the way to Cocodrie to launch either.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:43 pm to Galactic Inquisitor
quote:
This is not debatable at all. This is why the suit was so dangerous for them. They have very little legal standing to defend themselves against it.
Exactly. But what they lacked in legal defenses, they made up for with power and money, which sometimes is better than having the law and sometimes lead to having all three.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:46 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
Or Blame the citizen of New Orleans for needing the River.
A small part of me would love to see the Ms overpower the old river control structure and flow through the Atchafalaya, just so that we can see the shear awesomeness of nature and what would be left of the current river course.
But I recognize how completely fricked a lot of people/communities would be.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:54 pm to BrotherEsau
quote:
But I recognize how completely fricked millions of people/the entire country would be.
Fixed
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News