- 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
Louisiana Scenic Rivers are Under Attack!
Posted on 5/23/17 at 8:40 am
Posted on 5/23/17 at 8:40 am
quote:
The Louisiana Scenic Rivers Act is a gem of environmental law that that protects some of Louisiana’s most beautiful recreational waterways. The law currently protects 64 Scenic Rivers from destructive activities by setting up a permit system administered by Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries and by outright prohibition of clearing, snagging, and dredging. Six rivers in the Scenic Rivers system currently have exclusions in the Act so that clearing, snagging and dredging are allowed for flood control and drainage. SB 132 by Sen Bodi White in the current legislature originally proposed exclusions to allow clearing and dredging on three rivers, the Amite, Comite and Bayou Manchac. Then Sen Sharon Hewitt introduced an amendment in the Senate to include four more rivers, the Pearl, Tchefuncte, Bogue Falaya and Abita Rivers.
This bill will be considered in House Natural Resources and Environment Committee this coming Wednesday, May 17. Here is the committee agenda: LINK The original bill and the amendment proposes to use the August flooding in Tangipahoa and St. Tammany Parishes as an excuse to dredge scenic rivers and turn them into drainage ways for development. Clearing and snagging might not be so bad but dredging kills a river and the wildlife that depend on it for a long time. There is a rush to dredge these rivers but no studies have been conducted to identify the real causes and cures for flooding in the north shore area. We will be asking the legislators to hold off on dredging of rivers and conduct scientific studies to determine best solutions to the problem. Sierra Club is not against controlling flooding but we do want it to be conducted on the basis of sound scientific information.
We are asking interested persons to contact legislators on the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee and voice opposition to SB 132. The list of Representatives on the committee is at: LINK
If you see that a member of the committee represents your district please call your legislator first. You can go here to find out who your legislators are: LINK
Thanks for whatever you can do,
Haywood "Woody" Martin, Chair
Sierra Club Delta Chapter
hrmartin2sc@gmail.com
337-298-8380
quote:
Clearing and snagging might not be so bad
This used to be a regular occurrence on the Tchefuncte River, but the practice stopped years ago. Dredging, on the other hand, will kill the river. The ultimate goal of these developer types is to turn these rivers in to drainage canals not unlike Dawson's and Ward's Creek in Baton Rouge.
This post was edited on 5/23/17 at 8:43 am
6
Posted on 5/23/17 at 8:47 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
frick to hell all the the south shore yats that have moved to the north shore and ruined it. The flooding has very little to do with the rivers and all to do with horrible and corrupt planning and over building.
Will definitely be making some phone calls.
Link to the committee agenda doesn't work FYI
Will definitely be making some phone calls.
Link to the committee agenda doesn't work FYI
This post was edited on 5/23/17 at 9:12 am
Posted on 5/23/17 at 9:10 am to GREENHEAD22
It's already passed the Senate and is currently in the House as of yesterday.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 9:19 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
Dredging, on the other hand, will kill the river.
Explain this please. Not saying I disagree with you, just want to learn.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 9:20 am to Sasquatch Smash
It STT parish and development, way to many pockets will get lined so I fully expect it to pass, will just expedite my moving from the area.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 9:33 am to GREENHEAD22
Be very careful throwing your support in to Sierra Club causes. They'll be telling all of you Northshore people what you can and can't do if they have their way.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 9:33 am to GREENHEAD22
Certain developments in St Tammany shouldn't have happened, particularly in Slidell, but they happened, and drainage is now a serious problem. Mouth of Doubloon Bayou is silting in. Water cannot get out to the Pearl. Something needs to be done. You can't tell thousands of people "too bad."
Posted on 5/23/17 at 9:40 am to DVA Tailgater
clearing and snagging upstream can increase river efficiency, allowing water to drain faster and help with drainage...its great for the upper reaches of the river. On the other hand everyone downstream will now be at a higher risk. Water reaches them faster thus during intense rainfall the chance of flooding increases. Just a little basic hydraulics for you!!
Posted on 5/23/17 at 10:04 am to redfishfan
quote:
Explain this please. Not saying I disagree with you, just want to learn.
By turning it into a muddy, sediment-laden, drainage ditch that's not fit for anything. I just want to know where the "certain areas" are that will be excluded from the Scenic Rivers Act.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 10:10 am to hawkster
quote:
Be very careful throwing your support in to Sierra Club causes. They'll be telling all of you Northshore people what you can and can't do if they have their way.
I agree with them on this one, though.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 10:15 am to ScottieP
quote:
clearing and snagging upstream can increase river efficiency, allowing water to drain faster and help with drainage...
I don't have an issue with this. As I stated in my OP, this used to be a regular occurrence up through the late 1960's/early 1970's. Landowners did this as well which made the river easily accessible for fishing and swimming. It's the dredging that troubles me.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 10:27 am to DVA Tailgater
quote:
Certain developments in St Tammany shouldn't have happened, particularly in Slidell, but they happened, and drainage is now a serious problem. Mouth of Doubloon Bayou is silting in. Water cannot get out to the Pearl. Something needs to be done. You can't tell thousands of people "too bad."
A LOT of developments in St. Tammany should not have happened. However, the brain trusts in St. Tammany and every other Florida Parish continue to make the same stupid mistakes and allow development where there should be none; if you live near water, expect flooding. Build on piers or don't build at all. This is the way things used to be done before the federal government came along with the flood insurance program. Now you have people building in swamps or next to rivers then whine and cry when they flood. I can never understand why the plaintiff's bar has never gotten involved in this by either suing developers for bad development or the parish governments for allowing bad development.
The sad irony to this whole situation is we could not replace a trailer house we've had on our property that's been there for 40 years because of the elevation, but houses can be built just a few miles down the road that are literally in the river basin.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 11:37 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
If they don't dredge the mouth of the amite, pretty soon it wont flow at all
Posted on 5/23/17 at 12:58 pm to Tchefuncte Tiger
If the Sierra Club is against it, I'm in favor of it.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 2:03 pm to CypressTrout10
quote:
If they don't dredge the mouth of the amite, pretty soon it wont flow at all
They need to redirect flow back into the amite rather than the Diversion canal.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 2:12 pm to tenfoe
quote:
If the Sierra Club is against it, I'm in favor of it.
Yep, if it were up to these people, we'd all be living in mud huts
Posted on 5/23/17 at 2:35 pm to tenfoe
quote:I consider LEAN to be even worse.
If the Sierra Club is against it, I'm in favor of it.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 3:00 pm to GREENHEAD22
quote:
frick to hell all the the south shore yats that have moved to the north shore and ruined it.
cool.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 6:51 pm to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
Build on piers or don't build at all. This is the way things used to be done before the federal government came along with the flood insurance program.
I built my house in a VE zone last year. You cannot get a permit to build a house below the 100 year flood elevation. And this elevation was raised 2 years ago. And I went up 4 feet higher for the insurance break and peace of mind.
Anybody applying for flood insurance at below the flood elevation is going to get killed on FEMA insurance. There is a house near me that spent $50,000 to raise the house 6 inches to get it above base flood elevation. They really should have gone higher but what they did will still pay off in a few years.
Posted on 5/23/17 at 9:23 pm to Tchefuncte Tiger
I live on a scenic river on the north shore. I can tell you that infront of my home it used to be 15 to 25 foot deep and the whole river was average 10 to 15 foot deep according to old timers. Now it's 8 feet deep infront and the average depth is so low everyone has to run jet foot boats to keep from eating up a prop. The reason.. Gravel pits.. I'm sure this is a lot of the reasons elsewhere why the rivers arnt what they used to be and yes along with man made structures. It all comes into play it's a multitude of problems.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News