- 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 3:57 pm to lsufishnhunt
Posted on 7/8/14 at 3:57 pm to lsufishnhunt
quote:
But I recognize how completely fricked millions of people/the entire country would be.
Yeah, that would definitely cause irreparable harm to our economy. All those refineries along the river need that water to operate.
1
Posted on 7/8/14 at 4:08 pm to Galactic Inquisitor
quote:
They didn't do it with my permission.
Dope of the day...
Posted on 7/8/14 at 4:11 pm to Galactic Inquisitor
Which is why the USACE will never allow it to happen, at least in the foreseeable future.
Sure, they have made their mistakes, plenty of them. But if they know one thing, it's the Mississippi River. They have complete control of the river and don't have any plans of losing that control. The entire country depends on the river, especially the lower 300 miles, and the USACE/Federal government knows this.
Sure, they have made their mistakes, plenty of them. But if they know one thing, it's the Mississippi River. They have complete control of the river and don't have any plans of losing that control. The entire country depends on the river, especially the lower 300 miles, and the USACE/Federal government knows this.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 4:55 pm to Galactic Inquisitor
quote:
Are you a lawyer?
Are you a coastal scientist?
Are you a civil engineer?
no.
quote:
what makes you think you have any idea what would happen in court?
the same hubris that makes you think you know what will happen in court
Posted on 7/8/14 at 5:02 pm to tigerinthebueche
quote:
the same hubris that makes you think you know what will happen in court
That's where you're wrong.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 5:09 pm to Galactic Inquisitor
quote:
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.
OK. Please provide a list of attorneys who will take this case on contingency. Then clarify that they will charge $0 for their time, their staff's time, etc. should they win nothing.
(And no, a "settlement" is not winning.) I mean a full blown judgement per a jury or judge. You find the attorneys who want to travel that road and report back.
additionally, to claim the case will cost nothing is ridiculous. You don't get far in a court of law without spending a few bucks. Ask anyone who has ever been there. And if you still believe you can be successful without money in our legal system, I'll point to the numerous convicts who were represented by public defenders. You can talk to them yourself at any prison/jail.
(no offense to public defenders. Just illustrative of the need for money in our legal system).
quote:
any money it would cost is money we wouldn't have had without
wut?
Posted on 7/8/14 at 5:17 pm to tigerinthebueche
quote:
OK. Please provide a list of attorneys who will take this case on contingency. Then clarify that they will charge $0 for their time, their staff's time, etc. should they win nothing.
(And no, a "settlement" is not winning.) I mean a full blown judgement per a jury or judge. You find the attorneys who want to travel that road and report back.
They already did that. Took it on a contingency fee. Standard is 30%, 40% if suit is filed and 45% if it goes through trial. I think this one may have been for less though, given the $$ involved, which is common. Yes, they will take nothing if they lose. Whether they get a judgment or settle is irrelevant.
Bear in mind, there are a lot of millionaire plaintiff attorneys that will (and did) take such cases - both for the publicity and the pay day - and that have the money to finance the whole thing. Happens every day.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 5:34 pm to BrotherEsau
Fair enough
but it will still cost the state money to proceed, no?
but it will still cost the state money to proceed, no?
Posted on 7/8/14 at 5:39 pm to tigerinthebueche
well, i guess that depends. I assume the details of the agreement were made public. Its possible they may have been required to pay costs all along, but that would be the exception, not the norm. Oh, and costs will come out of the recovery after the attys get their percentage. so state would see less than whatever its percentage is of the total award/settlement.
I was very excited about that lawsuit, wanted to see what would happen if "they" could make oil and gas pay and if they'd do anything useful with the money.
Something needs to be done, but I tell my fishing buddies all the time, the real problem is no one gives a frick besides fishermen. Politicians pay it lip service, but the majority of people just don't care or understand.
I was very excited about that lawsuit, wanted to see what would happen if "they" could make oil and gas pay and if they'd do anything useful with the money.
Something needs to be done, but I tell my fishing buddies all the time, the real problem is no one gives a frick besides fishermen. Politicians pay it lip service, but the majority of people just don't care or understand.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 5:51 pm to BrotherEsau
quote:
Something needs to be done, but I tell my fishing buddies all the time, the real problem is no one gives a frick besides fishermen. Politicians pay it lip service, but the majority of people just don't care or understand.
Where are the damn commercial fisherman who have just as much to lose? They sure have enough money to screw up the red snapper fishery, but not every other finfish/crustacean they base their survival on?
I guess the current politicians couldn't give a shite about the politicians in the future who will have to deal with more intense storms, much higher flood insurance premiums for their constituents if things keep going in the direction we're heading with the loss of wetlands.
I understand it's a problem that is a costly thing to fix, but the lost revenue and costs we are going to face in the future are much more significant.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 8:24 pm to jimbeam
About 11 years ago I worked at Lumcon and was surrounded by scientists whose sole purpose were to study long term effects of coastal erosion.
During this time, NOAA came in and did a study on everything south of I-10. The results were that everything south of I-10 in Southeast Louisiana that was part of the Miss River Delta was on average 2' above sea level and sinking at 1/2" a year!
The entire region is sinking. The entire region was build up over millions of years of the Miss River running its natural course. Now that the river has been channeled permenantly, all that naturally made land is sinking.
The problem is very complex beyond the O&G pipeline canals that were never damed off.
Southeast Louisiana is sinking
During this time, NOAA came in and did a study on everything south of I-10. The results were that everything south of I-10 in Southeast Louisiana that was part of the Miss River Delta was on average 2' above sea level and sinking at 1/2" a year!
The entire region is sinking. The entire region was build up over millions of years of the Miss River running its natural course. Now that the river has been channeled permenantly, all that naturally made land is sinking.
The problem is very complex beyond the O&G pipeline canals that were never damed off.
Southeast Louisiana is sinking
This post was edited on 7/8/14 at 8:27 pm
Posted on 7/8/14 at 9:05 pm to TJG210
quote:
They sure have enough money to screw up the red snapper fishery, but not every other finfish/crustacean they base their survival on?
The commercial fisherman didn't screw up the red snapper fishery. The Feds are using a Florida based model to set quotas in Louisiana.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 9:08 pm to DaphneTigah
quote:
The results were that everything south of I-10 in Southeast Louisiana that was part of the Miss River Delta was on average 2' above sea level and sinking at 1/2" a year!
I wonder how far north the land is sinking? Does this stop at a certain area in south Louisiana. Anyone know this?
I know the marsh sinks every year and the river is supposed to replenish it. I've seen that first hand down the river south of Venice.
Posted on 7/8/14 at 9:22 pm to JasonL79
Aren't the commercials actively lobbying to keep the catch ratio where they get 51% of the total catch?
Posted on 7/9/14 at 5:11 am to TJG210
quote:
Aren't the commercials actively lobbying to keep the catch ratio where they get 51% of the total catch?
Yes but how is that screwing the red snapper fishery up? The real problem is the low quota set by the FEDS.
Posted on 7/9/14 at 6:57 am to JasonL79
Commercial guys fished snapper to the brink of collapsing with the assistance of the shrimping industry.
Posted on 7/9/14 at 7:34 am to TJG210
quote:
Worst trip every year is the first one in spring to see a little more of Last Island washed away.
seems to be getting bigger the last few years
Posted on 7/9/14 at 7:36 am to JasonL79
quote:
The commercial fisherman didn't screw up the red snapper fishery. The Feds are using a Florida based model to set quotas in Louisiana.
pretty much this.
Florida catches all the damn snapper in the Gulf.
Posted on 7/9/14 at 7:39 am to Capt ST
quote:
Commercial guys fished snapper to the brink of collapsing with the assistance of the shrimping industry.
Brink of collapsing? That's debateable.
But that's another thread topic. I'm not hijacking this one any more than it has already been. I try not to get into these conversations on here too much because most people on this board only think one way.
Posted on 7/9/14 at 7:42 am to JasonL79
quote:
quote: The results were that everything south of I-10 in Southeast Louisiana that was part of the Miss River Delta was on average 2' above sea level and sinking at 1/2" a year! I wonder how far north the land is sinking? Does this stop at a certain area in south Louisiana. Anyone know this? I know the marsh sinks every year and the river is supposed to replenish it. I've seen that first hand down the river south of Venice.
Back on topic, does anyone know the answer to this. How much does the land sink each year? Is half an inch accurate and how far north does this occur?
This post was edited on 7/9/14 at 7:42 am
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News