- 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: Jindal, Sand Berms, Len Bahr
Posted on 7/9/10 at 1:01 pm to Kickadawgitfeelsgood
Posted on 7/9/10 at 1:01 pm to Kickadawgitfeelsgood
Why would sand berms be bad? And how would it cause more coastal erosion?
The only way for the coast to build up would be from the river's sand. Building berms will not mess with the sand because the sand comes from within the river and not from the gulf. It might change tides for inside water and the way the tides work but nothing will good will come from outside waters in the way of building the coast. If anything the Berms may help collect sand from going out and washing away into the deeper gulf. That is how the delta was formed in the first place. By filling in shallow waters with river sand.
The only way for the coast to build up would be from the river's sand. Building berms will not mess with the sand because the sand comes from within the river and not from the gulf. It might change tides for inside water and the way the tides work but nothing will good will come from outside waters in the way of building the coast. If anything the Berms may help collect sand from going out and washing away into the deeper gulf. That is how the delta was formed in the first place. By filling in shallow waters with river sand.
0
Posted on 7/9/10 at 3:11 pm to TIGA 80
quote:
TIGA 80
quote:
I have been involved in coastal restoration or over 12 years and i know how the system works. Whatever funding is allocated to a project, the sponsoring agency such as EPA, NOAA or Corps takes 50% of those funds to subliment their salaries and operations. Private industry or local govt can have all the eng. surveys and wetland impacts done for 10% of the cost of the project. They take so long to do their studies, that by the time they are ready for construction the landscape has change so much that the studies are no longer viable and have to be studied again. Then they use the construction funds to fund the new studies.
I don't want to get in a pissing contest with you.
For coastal projects carried forth under the CWPPRA (fromer Breaux Act, former Breaux Johnson Act) program (the pre-imminent program for coastal restoration in LA), obtaining LERDD's (Lands Easements, Rights-of-ways and Dreding Disposal areas)is principally the responsibility of the LOCAL PARTNER. The Local Partner is the THE STATE OF LOUISIANA. The representative is either the LDOTD or the LDNR.
If you claim that land rights are holding up progress, the lion's share of that blame will rightly fall on the State and Local governments.
The value of the procured LERDD's obtained by the local sponsor are creditted towards the local financial matching requirement to share approximately 35% of the total project costs.
If you want actual project cost numbers, check out this website. There is much information, they have been at it for about 19 years.
CWPPRS Projects List
Barrier Island restoration was a recommended strategy in the LA2050 report submitted by USACE/LDNR and all the other CWPPRA agencies. In stuying the barrier islands and the whole barrataria system it was realized that Island building and Marsh Cretion must go forward together.
Open water in B. Bay is directly tied to tidal prism for B. Bay which directly affects the cross sectional area of the cuts allowing flow from GOM to B. Bay which affects Island building. Robbing Peter to Pay paul will not help in the long term and it may actually disrupt the source material locations that supply granular materials to create new or sustain the existing islands.
It is a ballance that is now lacking a sediment source. Anything that does not address the sediment source is doomed to faliure (other than armoring the whole thing).
/rant.....Sorry.
Posted on 7/9/10 at 4:21 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
Dont get me started with CWPPRA. I once described this group as a competitive feeding through from which all the federal agencies are fed with their subsidies.
The partnering agencies in CWPPRA submit project ideas within the coastal parishes and then those same agencies vote on which projects get the funding with each agency getting a little piece of the pie. There is definitely a conflict of interest with this system.
Why would an agency submit project proposals in the first place without First checking with the land owners. What you are saying is that The Feds submit the project, get the funding, then leave it up to the state to work out the details with the landowner. How absurd. Ive seen projects on the books for 10 years or more, where the state has tried to work out land owner issues and couldnt, all the while, the agency has spent most of the money researching the project when they didnt have landowner approval to begin with.
I understand the sediment source problem and support the pipeline slurry proposal. The corps dredges approx 90 million cubic yds a yrs and lets La. soil flow off the continental shelve. Congress needs to fund the beneficial use of those sediments to rebuild La. marshes.
I also understand the Tidal dynamics of Barataria bay and Terrebonne bay. Look back at some maps that go back only 40 years ago. East timbalier was a solid land mass and the bay behind it was not much larger than it is today. Scofel Island is now just under the water surface My point is Islands that have disappeared due to storms should be rebuilt and can without disrupting the tidal prism. When the Chandalier island chain was intact and most of the islands were above water, was there a problem with the tidal prism? No, so what is the problem with rebuilding those barrier islands now.
As for rebuilding the marshes, i say where appilcable, use the nearby waterbottom sediments. its recycling sediments that were once part of the land masses anyway. The waterbottom will eventuall fill in again. Every location canal ever dug has to be dug out again because the canal fills in. Until we have a new source of sediments that are introduced into the system, all we can do is recycle what is there.
Which will come first , the chicken or the egg. Something has to happen for us to get started. In the 12 years I have been involved, nothing has even gotten off the drawing board. Maybe by building the barrier islands, the Feds will get off their buts and rebuild the marshes. Doing nothing as we have been will lead to having nothing within the next ten years. The platforms on which to rebuild the barrier islands will have completly washed away with the channels getting deeper.
In all the objections including yours, enviro scientist use the words MAY affect. One thing for sure is that the oil WILL affect us if we cant stop it.
I dont want to get into a pissing match either. Im just someone who is involved and im tired of watching La. wash away while we study our disappearance.
The partnering agencies in CWPPRA submit project ideas within the coastal parishes and then those same agencies vote on which projects get the funding with each agency getting a little piece of the pie. There is definitely a conflict of interest with this system.
Why would an agency submit project proposals in the first place without First checking with the land owners. What you are saying is that The Feds submit the project, get the funding, then leave it up to the state to work out the details with the landowner. How absurd. Ive seen projects on the books for 10 years or more, where the state has tried to work out land owner issues and couldnt, all the while, the agency has spent most of the money researching the project when they didnt have landowner approval to begin with.
I understand the sediment source problem and support the pipeline slurry proposal. The corps dredges approx 90 million cubic yds a yrs and lets La. soil flow off the continental shelve. Congress needs to fund the beneficial use of those sediments to rebuild La. marshes.
I also understand the Tidal dynamics of Barataria bay and Terrebonne bay. Look back at some maps that go back only 40 years ago. East timbalier was a solid land mass and the bay behind it was not much larger than it is today. Scofel Island is now just under the water surface My point is Islands that have disappeared due to storms should be rebuilt and can without disrupting the tidal prism. When the Chandalier island chain was intact and most of the islands were above water, was there a problem with the tidal prism? No, so what is the problem with rebuilding those barrier islands now.
As for rebuilding the marshes, i say where appilcable, use the nearby waterbottom sediments. its recycling sediments that were once part of the land masses anyway. The waterbottom will eventuall fill in again. Every location canal ever dug has to be dug out again because the canal fills in. Until we have a new source of sediments that are introduced into the system, all we can do is recycle what is there.
Which will come first , the chicken or the egg. Something has to happen for us to get started. In the 12 years I have been involved, nothing has even gotten off the drawing board. Maybe by building the barrier islands, the Feds will get off their buts and rebuild the marshes. Doing nothing as we have been will lead to having nothing within the next ten years. The platforms on which to rebuild the barrier islands will have completly washed away with the channels getting deeper.
quote:
Robbing Peter to Pay paul will not help in the long term and it [b]may[/b] actually disrupt the source material locations that supply granular materials to create new or sustain the existing islands.
In all the objections including yours, enviro scientist use the words MAY affect. One thing for sure is that the oil WILL affect us if we cant stop it.
I dont want to get into a pissing match either. Im just someone who is involved and im tired of watching La. wash away while we study our disappearance.
Posted on 7/9/10 at 4:47 pm to TIGA 80
CWPPRA is far from perfect......Agreed.
Beneficial use of dredged material is a must.....Agreed.
I feel your pain.
Beneficial use of dredged material is a must.....Agreed.
quote:
Im just someone who is involved and im tired of watching La. wash away while we study our disappearance.
I feel your pain.
Posted on 7/10/10 at 9:21 am to TIGA 80
quote:
TIGA 80, Sid in Lakeshore
Yall have emails, I'd Like to ask a few questions about the industry and how to get involved
This post was edited on 7/10/10 at 9:22 am
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News