- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Diversion of the Mississippi to rebuild wetlands
Posted on 6/9/10 at 10:58 pm to CroTiger
Posted on 6/9/10 at 10:58 pm to CroTiger
quote:
No freaking way. That is not possible
Yeah thats kinda the point. Anything you do that doesn't include such a wide path will not protect the area from a hurricane, which is one of the reasons people want the wetlands rebuilt.
1
Posted on 6/9/10 at 11:08 pm to C
quote:
hurricane, which is one of the MAIN reasons people want the wetlands rebuilt.
each linear 2.7 miles of intact marsh knocks down the storm surge by 1 foot
Posted on 6/9/10 at 11:18 pm to Mudminnow
If it was not leveed up the river would run some where right east of the Atchafalaya basin, you would displace thousand of people.
Posted on 6/10/10 at 6:20 am to GREENHEAD22
Even if they did divert(which I think he means remove the levy's) the mississippi it still wouldn't matter. Not enough sediment comes down the river any longer. Unless the remove all the levys on the river which you and I know will never happen this plan is pointless.
Posted on 6/10/10 at 6:31 am to KLSU
quote:
Not enough sediment comes down the river any longer
Really?
Posted on 6/10/10 at 8:27 am to CroTiger
Long Overdue. The levee system is the single largest impact on coastal erosion. All that sediment is a good thing...650,000 Cubic feet per second of good mud!
This post was edited on 6/10/10 at 8:29 am
Posted on 6/10/10 at 9:31 am to C
quote:
Not enough sediment comes down the river any longer
Really?
Yes really. The upstream levees and locks serve to cut off the river from its source of sediment. The bed load has gotten less and less as man has gained control of the river.
Less bed load means less ability to create land.
Posted on 6/10/10 at 9:34 am to Drop4Loss
Its actually already being worked on... to a degree.
Posted on 6/10/10 at 9:37 am to Drew Orleans
The problem with doing it is that it will not only change to land but also drastically alter oyster beds and fishing. But sometimes you have to suck it up and do things to help long term.
Posted on 6/10/10 at 9:39 am to Drew Orleans
quote:
Its actually already being worked on... to a degree.
Yes the Breaux Act task force or the LCPRA or whatever has long wanted a large sediment diversion. This has spawned many studies into the current large grained/heavy sediments carried by the Mississippi River (bed load). Result of the studies, "It aint what it used to be".
Posted on 6/10/10 at 9:40 am to Drew Orleans
The Federal government has abused the Mississippi River Valley for almost a century. It shouldn't be up to BP to build back the wetlands. The Federal Government needs to make a commitment to the project.
BP needs to pay out the nose, but I don't think this is one area that they are liable for.
BP needs to pay out the nose, but I don't think this is one area that they are liable for.
Posted on 6/10/10 at 9:44 am to Pierre
quote:
The Federal government has abused the Mississippi River Valley for almost a century.
Yes, if by "The Federal government" you meant, "the citizens of the United States".
Posted on 6/10/10 at 9:51 am to Sid in Lakeshore
I have all sorts of documents on it. They have the funding and go ahead I believe. They were suppose to be working on it this summer but I'm sure the oil situation screwed that up.
Posted on 6/10/10 at 9:52 am to Drew Orleans
Which Diverstion, where?
Myrtle Grove?
Sediment Diversion or Freshwater diversion?
Myrtle Grove?
Sediment Diversion or Freshwater diversion?
Posted on 6/10/10 at 10:01 am to Sid in Lakeshore
Apparently it is not just the levees on the Mississippi, but also the lock and damn systems on other rivers, like the Arkansas and Missouri that are causing the loss of sediment load. The sediment load is said to be at least 50% of what it was before these systems were built. The locks and damns were built to allow controlled release of water in high water times to protect towns along the rivers from flooding.
When it comes time to decide whose interests are more important, do you think the people of South Louisiana will come out on top?
Looking for a silver lining in this giant cluster F#$@, all I can hope is that the focus on our wetlands from the media will make the rest of the nation realize how important that region is to everyone else. Maybe, just maybe, the people in South Louisiana will get the attention they need and deserve.
All of you down there fighting this, are constantly in my thoughts and prayers.
When it comes time to decide whose interests are more important, do you think the people of South Louisiana will come out on top?
Looking for a silver lining in this giant cluster F#$@, all I can hope is that the focus on our wetlands from the media will make the rest of the nation realize how important that region is to everyone else. Maybe, just maybe, the people in South Louisiana will get the attention they need and deserve.
All of you down there fighting this, are constantly in my thoughts and prayers.
This post was edited on 6/10/10 at 10:07 am
Posted on 6/10/10 at 10:21 am to PaddlingTiger
Weren't (aren't) they supposed to be putting a sieve in the levee at Donaldsonville to divert some of the Mississippi down Bayou Lafourche to bring sediment into the marsh?
I know the Corps has been marking and clearing the banks of BL, and I remember reading that they would need to both dredge the bayou, and raise about 30 bridges, because of the increased water volume.
I know the Corps has been marking and clearing the banks of BL, and I remember reading that they would need to both dredge the bayou, and raise about 30 bridges, because of the increased water volume.
Posted on 6/10/10 at 10:25 am to CroTiger
quote:
our wetlands were a problem long before BP.
If this is true, they should force each of the oil giants to fund the project based on their market share.
No way one company could be held to fund the entire project
Posted on 6/10/10 at 10:34 am to udtiger
quote:
to bring sediment into the marsh
I believe this is the claim. I also believe that it will only function as a freshwater diversion which will help stabilize the marsh and fight some of the dieback. It will also fight saltwater intrusion. Not much chance of diverting enough sediment to rebuild marshes.
BTW: there are already siphons at the head of B. Lafourche. It has been a long time since I looked but are they just adding to the number of siphons? Lot of information located at this webiste.
LACoast.gov
Posted on 6/10/10 at 10:46 am to Sid in Lakeshore
My understanding was that the Corps was actually going to install a concrete seive into the levee so that when the river reached a certain level, some of the water would just roll down the bayou (I don't recall whether there was supposed to be a gate on it or not).
Posted on 6/10/10 at 11:41 am to Drew Orleans
quote:
The problem with doing it is that it will not only change to land but also drastically alter oyster beds and fishing. But sometimes you have to suck it up and do things to help long term.
That mentally is what’s so wrong. Years ago when the marsh was still built up, you had to run to get to salt water. In Lafitte, you had to run to Barataria Bay to catch specks. Now you can catch them in Lake Salvador. People have gotten use to launching a boat and traveling minutes to do what years ago “because the marsh was built up” you had to run a long distance.
If they build up the interior marsh, yes you will have to travel further to do saltwater fishing. That’s how its suppose to be.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News