Is it possible that DU and Delta Waterfowl do more to stop coastal erosion than CCA does?

My guess would be yes, much more.

I am not blinded by anything, I know exactly how non-profit conservation organizations work. I have said it many times, I don't like everything CCA does or for that matter any organization. Reefs are not gonna save the coastline by any means but I believe some of the artificial reefs are a good thing as some were only put there to honor folks.

It takes multiple partners to get things done and when that happens each one gets credik for it. On many WMAs/NWRs you will see certain projects where multiple partners work on the project. They all claim that on their statements each year its not uncommon.

So CCA can pump out money to push for a 15 trout limit on Big Lake or the most stupid ever 3tail regulations

But can't spend a penny to help stop erosion ?


And what's good is a reef ? Hell I can put a reef in by just having a fund raiser and I bet people would donate the material like the Brad Vincent reef was


Instead of a reef how about stop 1 mile of erosion ? Or half mile ? Maybe restore land around steam engine?

Hell no it's too easy to just sunshine pump a $500k donated reef ! Cost CCA nearly zero !

Wonder who will get the name of the new reef they plan on installing in west cove ?

DU only does coastal work on their big donor's properties to help them hold more ducks:rotfl:

Well, then those are a few alternative organizations to support.

Haha that's what all the haters say, either way though, it is probably more than CCA is doing in this state. I'd be lying if I tried to act like I know anything about DU or Delta, but I doubt they go against science very often, and I know they do lots of work on the breeding grounds.

How bout you start an organization and get something going? Walk the walk, and not talk the talk.

There are literally THOUSANDS of worthwhile coastal projects that need addressing. CCA or DU or anyone for that matter can not take them all on.

There are actually a LOT of people in this very state that get really mad when DU or Delta spend money in Louisiana:shaking: Think it should ALL go to the breeding grounds. And got real mad when a portion of our state duck stamp sales went to DU to spend on the breeding grounds:rotfl: Its comical but sad. Can't win for losing. The CEO of DU makes a pretty good check too, and rightfully so

I think this is a great idea. Start an association focused on SWLA. Get funding to research oysters, erosion, etc. Work with local colleges and such to develope data and research.

All for it. Those other mentioned organizations are great and all but deal mostly with fishing regulations not erosion or oyster dredging.

Im joining em all.

Again
Name 1 thing CCA has done to help Big Lake ?

When I was a CCA board member all I heard was Lake Charles chapter is the best , we make the most $$$$$ at banquet
Have the best STAR results
Blahhh blahhhh blahhh

But the CCA gives Zero back !!!

And "no" installing 1 reef is not giving back !!

Giving back is let's do what our name stands far !! Let's protect what we have and restore what we lost !!

Placing reefs is great !! We have enough now !!! We have damn near a reef every half mile on big lake that holds fish !!!

We need land !!! Rocks !!!! Land and Rocks !!

Its not just Big Lake, its everywhere. No organization can fix everything that is wrong in this state. There are THOUSANDS of worthwhile projects in this very state.

CCA and many other non-profit conservation orgs get a bad rap from people who don't know what they are about. CCA got a bad rap a few years back because a few mouthbreathers on Louisiana Sportsman got all up in arms because they thought CCA should go up against all the private landowners in the state that owned property with "navigable water". Forget that this water was once marsh and these landowners still pay taxes on it, but a few got mad that they can't fish or duck hunt on this water and felt that CCA should fight it:rotfl: It wouls be suicide to try to tackle something like that and why in the world would CCA even get involved with that?

The Coastal Master Plan is already addressing a few large erosion projects (including Calcasieu Lake) so there is no need for CCA to try and reinvent the wheel and do something for it when its already planned.

Again, wait until some of these projects start rolling and you will see why no organization should gt in the middle of disputes. There will be guides against any salinity control measures on Big Lake just watch and see.

You yourself have even been against the weirs even though they have been operated EXACTLY how they were proposed to be operated:rotfl:

WEIRS arent supposed to be how any natural estuary operates but our area has damaged ours so bad with the promise of money. there are so many factors involved here.

Portie town has the rocks... might wanna ask for a donation.

people around here are just trying to get rich. look at what our industry has done to the area. and at what cost? how much have they made off of us and how much have they permanently damaged our area. CCA is not against them dredging the channel to be as deep as the gulf. just so a few people can get richer and the rest will lose their lifeline.

The weirs are only there because of the ship channel. It is mitigation for the saltwater intrusion. Just like the saltwater barrier that was installed over 50 years ago, the people who built it KNEW that when you have a straight line canal to the gulf of mexico that saltwater would get way into the freshwater system. Saltwater in a freshwater environment is bad. This was known over 50 years ago and its nothing new. Without the ship channel there are no weirs. Without the ship channel there is no saltwater barrier either, and without the ship channel Lake Charles would have a whole lot less people living there.

Wow:shaking:

Lake Charles is a ghost town without the ship channel and the industries. Are you against capitalism?

shoot, my family was here and doing well way before they did that to the channel. i wish it would have stayed the same. making money is one thing but making money at the cost of the environment should be left in the past. id love lake charles to be how it was back then. much more beautiful area. better hunting and fishing and less sports buying yellowfins stalking the waders.

I don't really have an opinion on donating or not donating to CCA but I would like to chime in on something.

In my opinion, Duckbutter is exactly right in 1 regard.

These non-profit organizations that rely on government intervention in Baton Rouge can not be ran by working class volunteers like you and me. They have to be ran by serious people that are willing to spend time and money in Political Action Committees and lots of time in Baton Rouge. Most of these people can and do make ALOT more money than CCA pays them in their businesses. He is also right in who is AVAILABLE to do this kind of work for CCA. Everyday Joe Schmoe can't do this type of thing because we have jobs.

"W" I think you are a pretty well thought out guy and I always value your opinion good or bad. However, I think you are missing an Elephant in the room on this one...

You have said numerous times "What has CCA done for Lake Calcasieu?"

This is what I think they have done: CCA and the STAR tournament have made you (and a lot of others) the guide you are today. Without that tournament for the last 20 years, saltwater fishing wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is today. The popularity and exposure are the reason our lake can sustain so many guides. You even stated in a previous post that you were on the CCA Board at one time. You probably realized at some point that you didn't support them anymore but by then you were ALL IN with the fishing fever.

For the record, I do not support CCA any longer and have not entered the STAR tournament in the last 2 years. I am a realist and try to look at all angles on any situation. I see both sides of this issue... I choose to not participate.