re: Louisiana not waiting for barrier approval any longer

quote:

---

I say shut down the LOOP and every pipeline until we get approval and the COE help

---

This.

We need to get their attention somehow.

Is any action happening yet? Until it does, all idle threats.

quote:

---

Would anyone really trust Plaquemines parish to properly allocate any money they receive from donations? That parish has a longstanding reputation for corruption and "good old boy" politics

---

yeah same parish that "stole" thousands of acres from folks back in the 20s and 30s....

ask the bohemia heirs about it...

quote:

---

That and BP to pay for it too

---

quote:

---

Mudminnow

---

I'm shocked you'd be for this solution....

quote:

---

it will further damage the environment and spend massive sums of money on something that will essentially be a boondogle.

---

Wait, its essentially just building up the already existing barrier islands, right? Why is this bad? Will it change tide, depth, etc? Just wondering.

quote:

---

Wait, its essentially just building up the already existing barrier islands, right? Why is this bad? Will it change tide, depth, etc? Just wondering.

---

changing the environment 2 ways...First, that material needs to come from somewhere, and wherever you take it from will be profoundly affected. Second, you change the flow dynamics, which can be extremely detrimental to the natural system, not to mention elevation effects, etc.....

quote:

---

Lets see if anything happens tomorrow, if it does I will have major kudos for Bobby. I've been back and forth on my opinion of him, but if he has the stones to stick up to the feds on this one. He deserves major props.

---

same here, i have questioned his passion for Louisiana as anything other than a spring board to the next political stop. He is really acting like he gives a shite about Louisiana.

quote:

---

the whole fricking problem is that since the interior marshes are blowing out and disappearing, there is a larger tidal prism and larger amounts of water flow through the passes between all the islands. higher tidal velocities make for more and more erosion in the passes and the interior marshes every year, which in turn continues the snowball effect of killing interior marshes with more saltwater. flow dynamics my arse; beefed up islands would only help in that regard. we can talk about killing wildlife, but that is going to happen anyway if oil gets in.

---

Uhh, marshes can handle high salinities. you have no idea what you're talking about. Further, the reason the marshes are eroding is not because they don't have enough plants, but not enough sediment flowing into the system. This is moving more of the same system around, not adding anything new. BTW, by the time they "buil them up" the oil will already be inside, restricting movement of water will by eliminating recruitment of larvae KILL the fishing industry.

ETA: also the eutrification of the water actually creates instability in the structure of the marsh. Sealing it off from the marine environment, which happens to transport a large volume of these excess nutrients offshore DOES NOT help the marsh, it merely confounds the problem by exposing them to higher levels of nutrients for extended periods of time.

quote:

---

something done in this case is much better than nothing

---

Spoken like a true idiot who then complains later when things are more f-d up than when they started. They aren't unintended consequences if you actually think through the problem BEFORE you act.

call up the office of coastal protection and restoration and talk to them about it. take coastal engineering classes. work for them. there is no realistic way to completely seal off the whole breton sound, the whole barataria bay, the whole terrebonne bay; however you can greatly reduce the tidal prism, which will not cause wildlife kills. i had 2 LADNR engineers visit the lab where I work and say it themselves. the whole point in saving barrier islands is that they maintain a salinity barrier. yes the water is salty inside of them but look at the myriad of studies done on freshwater diversions and projected salinity levels and you can see the natural difference. marsh erosion is not solely a function of subsidence. its saltwater intrusion, subsidence, and erosion from an ever increasing tidal prism. once again, it wont matter how good or bad the quality of water is in the system if there is oil sludge in it also.

it is not simply moving more of the same around. barrier islands are disappearing; there is no arguing that. why are they disappearing? because long shore transport, which erodes and builds beaches in places like florida, only erodes here since there is a sand-starved coastal environment. you introduce all of this sand back into the system and you kick-start the long shore sediment transport process you dont have to drop tens of millions in one spot or another spot over and over...its a one time process that will last 20 years instead of tons of 5 year projects that all cost tens of millions. you lose the barrier islands and in wont matter what is behind them because it will all be gone pretty quickly. plus, they arent going to dredge up the bay, they will mine sand from places like ship shoal and other offshore deposits.

if saltwater intrusion is no big deal, why the hell is LADNR, OCPR, NRCS and every other governmental body dropping tens to hundreds of millions on "land bridge" projects like the barataria land bridge or the lake mechant land bridge project? to keep salt water out...maybe? why are they planning new freshwater diversions and siphons? why are they taking the control gates off of bayou lamoque? why are they planning on regrading bohemia to allow more flow through it? why are they talking about enlarging davis pond?

pretty interesting stuff here LINK, do some reading of the hundreds of studies that have been done on all of this.

why do you think wildlife flourished back in the early 1900's and late 1800's to an extent much greater than today? because of all the saltwater that WASN'T in the marshes back then?

humans have been thinking about this problem for the last 30-40+ years, its time to act. id rather be someone who acts now than does a study about the feasibility of the effectiveness of a different study of a theory about what might happen if something is done. animals will die either way, but i would rather give them a place to come back to when its all over.

quote:

---

if saltwater intrusion is no big deal, why the hell is LADNR, OCPR, NRCS and every other governmental body dropping tens to hundreds of millions on "land bridge" projects like the barataria land bridge or the lake mechant land bridge project? to keep salt water out...maybe? why are they planning new freshwater diversions and siphons? why are they taking the control gates off of bayou lamoque? why are they planning on regrading bohemia to allow more flow through it? why are they talking about enlarging davis pond?

---

it's what is in freshwater that is not in saltwater...sediment.

quote:

---

it is not simply moving more of the same around. barrier islands are disappearing; there is no arguing that. why are they disappearing? because long shore transport, which erodes and builds beaches in places like florida, only erodes here since there is a sand-starved coastal environment. you introduce all of this sand back into the system and you kick-start the long shore sediment transport process you dont have to drop tens of millions in one spot or another spot over and over...its a one time process that will last 20 years instead of tons of 5 year projects that all cost tens of millions. you lose the barrier islands and in wont matter what is behind them because it will all be gone pretty quickly. plus, they arent going to dredge up the bay, they will mine sand from places like ship shoal and other offshore deposits.

---

Long shore drift, which you seemto have combined with Ekman Transport are two processes which have effects on sediment transport. These processes have and will occur FOREVER. The issue is not the processes and trying to stem the tide. The issue is that these processes continue to work, however there is now no new sediment being retained in the estuary. THAT is why they are building bigger and proposing more diversions. Not to stop the saltwater, but to provide much needed sediment to the system.

quote:

---

pretty interesting stuff here LINK, do some reading of the hundreds of studies that have been done on all of this.

---

Again I see sediment delivery as the issue from your links. Reducing the inlet, as I'm sure you know from physics merely increases the velocity of the water through that location. Further, larval recruitment has been shown to be better accomplished through number and size of access points to estuary, not velocity of water exchange between the marsh and the open water.

quote:

---

once again, it wont matter how good or bad the quality of water is in the system if there is oil sludge in it also.

---

Agreed, however this solution does not keep the oil from the marsh. It doesn't, hell even if they started construction today, they are are a long way off of completion

quote:

---

why do you think wildlife flourished back in the early 1900's and late 1800's to an extent much greater than today? because of all the saltwater that WASN'T in the marshes back then?

---

.

Actually, more open water in a marsh environment actually provides better nursery grounds for fishing, until the open water reaches too much area, it comes down to edge habitat. A complete marsh has limited edge habitat, as does a completely open water area, a balance in the middle is best. If you want the marsh to rebuild, stopping the ocean is stupid, increasing the sediment transport from fresh water sources is the solution. Your links and most research asserts this as well.