Weirs Closed
 

Infinity due to high salinity in April, going to be a long long long summer


Glad I did not waist that $350 to fish the marsh this year

Right around the corner from shrimp season....again...how ironic?!?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm new to fishing from a boat in the lake. What does this mean for the fishing?

It's not good. There is a ton of bait that comes from behind the weirs.

Marsh is the heart of your estuary, now the duck hunters don't like saltwater because it kills there wedgion grass and then they can't shoot ducks


Kill the lake for ducks is the motto

Wouldn't requiring face paint bring the ducks back though?

Here we go again. It also kills the Marsh. Geez. All Marsh is not created equal. Some Marsh cannot handle salinity as high as the lake gets at times. I've personally taken salinity readings behind the weirs at 32 ppt. That is gulf strength. And it is not good that Marsh, which cannot tolerate salinity that high.

I do agree with W that shutting the weirs off for a very extended period is not good for the lake. But neither is a dead Marsh.

So sick of this they are killing our lake ruining recreational shrimping just sick I have a refractometer I will be checking tomorrow I wanna see this for myself

There are monitoring stations out there. Check out USGS Water Resources and CRMS. Those have salinity readings. Not sure if all are updating in real time.

Its a double edged sword. Close the weirs to maintain the marsh, the lake hurts. Leave the weirs open permanently, eventually you lose marsh, which will also hurt the lake, and land to the north as well. That marsh is more than just wildlife habitat.

Yes we depended on the meters at the watershed last year then they said oops the meter was broken our bad

And the marsh was fine before the weirs but of course man thinks they can do it better there are plenty places with no weirs use rock ledges for erosion control and let nature work the rest

Says who? I've got maps and reports showing the change in vegetation. That was a fresh marsh, now its brackish, intermediate at best.

The reason shrimp catches were so good prior to installation of the weirs could probably be easily correlated to the amount of dead vegetation caused by increased salinities. Shrimp eat dead vegetation, but I'm sure you knew that.

I saw many acres of grass die 2 years ago due to high water and salinity behind those weirs. Not all marsh is created equal.

so the all the weirs will be close from now on? is that what your saying?

Before the Weir was closed this week, the lake level was 12 to 15 inches higher than the marsh level.....so the salt water was "pouring" into the marsh.

Does anyone know if the Weir will be open on the full and New moon?

Other wise there will need to be a 4+" rain in the marsh, to lower the salinity before the Weir will be opened again.

Good question, they are suppose to but who knows right now all our shrimp are coming in to our system to head into marsh and we shut the echo system down, ,just a matter of time till we ruin this lake.

Estuary can not survive with out the food cycle properly working as a system

Just glad I have another job that I don't have to depend on guiding to make my living because it's going to get bad

The weir management and impact on the estuary are suboptimal, but not the disaster some make it out to be.

The fish are a bit on the hungry side and a bit thinner than the statewide average. Over years, it means a bit slower growth, fewer trophies, and slightly lower reproduction rates. But in the long term, losing the marsh completely would be a worse outcome. The estuary will survive, just not as fat and happy as when being fed more by the marsh.

If that marsh gets destroyed, the productivity of the system will drop down to TX levels. There are also multiple factors in play: weir management, erosion, saltwater intrusion, channel dredging, destruction and recovery of oyster reefs, chemical pollution, etc. Things like chemical pollution have been improving lately in Calcasieu, so they don't get much discussion, but the system is still recovering from long term impacts of years gone by.

I think the angling public would do best to focus on issues with the most promise for action and improvement due to likely agreement among multiple stakeholders. As long as the salinity in the lower lake is 16-22 ppt (parts per thousand) as shown here ( http://waterdata.usgs.gov/usa/nwis/uv?site_no=08017118 ), those weirs aren't going to be opened unless there is a lot of freshwater behind them to flow into the lake. In the long term this is a necessary management decision to protect the marsh. There is a much better chance of positive outcomes for the fishery on other issues like dredging, oyster reef destruction, and construction of additional salt water barriers between the gulf and lake. Lining the channel with rocks from the Gulf to the lower lake seems to be a promising alternative to a saltwater barrier across the ship channel as this would both prevent erosion and reduce the salinity in the lake.

First of all, quit contradicting yourself. On the other threads here, you have continually preached that the main reason for fall in condition factor is loss of oysters or too many fish. You have repeated stated, when questioned, that you and your colleagues believe oyster loss to be the main causative factor, and that none of the other competing hypotheses explain the data as well.

So which is it? Are you just bending your argument to "please your audience"?

Haven't you been preaching that the smaller size is related to the destruction of oysters? Yes or no?

Yes, I do see that you address those other factors in the next paragraph, but you yourself have been advocating that the #1 cause of poor condition factor is related to oysters, NOT WEIR OPERATIONS! So which is it?

Like any complex ecosystem, there are multiple contributing factors and interpretation is nuanced.

The loss of relative condition in the more benthic feeding fish (black drum, gafftops, bull redfish) is more attributable to the loss of oyster reef habitat. These are the fish experiencing the greatest loss of relative condition factor, with many fish only 75-85% of their healthy body weight.

The loss of relative condition factor among fish more strongly dependent upon the marsh and coupling between the marsh and lake (specks, shorter length classes of redfish, puppy drum) is more attributable to stress and depletion of their food sources. These fish are experiencing smaller, but still statistically significant reductions in relative condition factor, most coming in at 90-97% of their healthy body weight.

So, the bottom line is that oyster reef destruction is having a bigger negative effect on the fishery, but weir operation is having an effect large enough to be detectable and significant.

Saying that the oyster reef destruction is the "main reason" does not contradict weir management as an additional factor.

why does the refuge limit access to the public through grand bayou? I would love to see it opened every sat and sunday so people would have access to the resource the govt is protecting for the people. I live at heberts. when the weirs are open parking lot is full. I see boaters all the time drive to landing find out weirs are closed and their day is ruined

Right on Preacher Man!!

Preaching to the choir again. I know all these things, but your last post spoke in a manner that suggested you felt the weirs were the main problem, when all other posts you have made in the past week pointed to oyster reefs. Just making sure you would clarify that for all your "constituents".

But again, we are talking about multiple causitive factors, are we not? It cannot just be attributed to weir management, or have we forgetten the large argument over the insufficient data that resulted in the unwarranted drop of the limit on specks? Is it possible that a nearly 50% reduction in the limit on speckled trout could be a big causitive factor in the decline of the fishery? You are, in theory, looking at a nearly 50% increase in that population. Couldn't that put a major strain on the food source for all species, if in fact they are all depended on the same organisms as you suggest?

So how can you attribute an "effect large enough to detect" to the weirs, if in fact multiple factors are causing this relative decline in body condition? Do you have data to back this up? You love data, so prove your point. How can you be so sure that it is in fact the weirs that is causing this relative decline?

By the way, half of my thesis was determining cause and effect relationships with multiple potential causitive factors. I know how this stuff works.

They had 3 leave today while I was waiting on my clients
All with kids and your taxes pay for that refuge

The primary objective of the NWR is to provide waterfowl habitat, not fisheries. If conditions are not favorable to proper management of that habitat, they are going to close the weirs.

No offense to anyone, I don't know much about all this scientific data, but I do know how to fish. I have lived at Heberts for 10 years now full time. Im lucky to get to fish more than most. The fishing is really bad guys. This is directly tied to Weirs. And another thing that sucks is I have young kids like most of you. I don't fish back there much but It was nice to take the kids back there for some easy fishing and crabbing. There's another thing, so many families including mine have enjoyed the summers back behind the weirs crabbing, that's a thing of the past now. sucks.

If you don't know much about the scientific data, how can you be so sure its directly related to the weirs?

Not trying to be a jerk, just stating the obvious. Anyone can argue the weirs are the problem with ni evidence. I still stand by the fact that the reason crabs and shrimp have been so abundant behind the weirs is because they feed on dead vegetation. High salinities kill almost anything back there. Some of the CRMS stations put the average salinity at 12 to 15 ppt from March to November. That's a high average, and the salinity gets pretty high back there.

I understand people are frustrated with the management, but its not just one contributing factor.

if the weir has to be closed make a boat lift to give the public access to the marsh. I have seen many days boat bay closed and gates open letting water into the marsh. no one can explain that one. the reason being they don't want the public back there.

I say it is because of in the field experience, my family has roots on the island here. I spent summers out here as a kid. All I know is when the weirs are open and the water is flowing in and out the fishing is great, when it's locked up tight the fishing declines dramatically. That's all I know...

That is probably because all of the bait species being funneled through certain locations. If the weirs and levee had never been put there, the fishing probably wouldn't be that good because you wouldn't have mass movements of multiple species at one time.

Hewes, As far as the boat bay, I don't know about that. Is it just at a certain time of year that it is closed, or are you talking about at different times it will be closed and other times open. I know they close it for a period when duck season opens.

Like today, the wife says hey lets take the kids behind the weirs and see if we can get some crabs to boil tonight, nope, can't go hun, no fun,

Smalls the gates are Closed majority of the time now. If it's closed now it will be closed most of the summer when the Lake gets the most salinity.

....
 

I know that's the reason the fishing is good or bad depending on the weirs, bait equals fish, simple...No one here doesn't know that. That's what we are all complaining about

no sir I have seen it at different time of the year boat bay closed and gates open. it was done in the spring, summer and fall. I would call to complain and nothing would change. why doesn't the refuge build a walkway and dock for people to crab and fish on the inside? why does the refuge have to be closed when boat bay is closed?

I decided a long time ago that there was no convincing anyone of the importance of the weirs, because people only want to look at the fish and what they do. That is not the purpose of the weirs. But people will always say they don't see anything wrong with the marsh, it looks fine.

I've never said I agree with how they have been operated, only that they are now needed to maintain the marsh. I don't know how to convince anyone of that when everyone wants to believe there is no problem, except that fishing is not good when the weirs are closed.

all im asking for is access to the refuge.

I agree this is a management of access issue recreational shrimping is being strangled out over the years used to be able to grab a cast net and shrimp anywhere over the years they have kept reducing it

First the nature trail well they wanted a tourist spot with no shrimpers

Second north line that's for crabbers they said

Third hog island shrimpers are trashing it up

Then all road sides

The blue crab

So people got boats to shrimp in refuge now no boat parking in the opening by bridge ( where shrimp are)

So now the weirs one week before they meet on shrimping season

And Smalls yes I do know what shrimp eat appreciate the effort there as well as your attempt to belittle everyone having a discussion on this civilly yet you are not even aware of what they are opening or closing this goes a lot deeper than making sure we have ducks for the hunters it's about total management of the ecosystem not just one group of animal in ecosystem

Dude, you haven't been here long enough to know what I stand for. I've been making that argument for over a year now. I know all about the ecosystem approach, I've been the one arguing that here. Ask W, me and him have been going at it over the weirs for a long time now.

I conducted research and worked in that marsh, and all the marshes in Cal/Cam for 2.5 years. I was not trying to belittle anyone, merely pointing out what many apparently neglect.

I have not been on here long enough to see you belittling me as well as calling math geek out that not a time issue I have no problem with what you stand for or my lack of knowledge of what you stand for I am posting my thought and so are you I have not directly belittled your thought only stated my thoughts I want access to be able to shrimp I joined this forum as a means to gain knowledge as well as share thoughts. I didn't know I had to be on here for a time frame before I was entitled to that.

Man, what got your boxers in a bunch? I was never belittling you. All I meant was you were not on here a year ago when just about everyone under the moon was calling what I was saying a lie and calling me a "duckgrass supporter".

Me and MG know each other, we've stood on the same side of many issues, and we've been on opposite sides as well. We are both scientists that value facts over biased opinions with no grounding. I was not "calling him out" as you say, merely pointing out an apparent inconsistency I saw. I may not always agree with him, but I respect what he does, and have even assisted him on some of this research he is talking about.

What did Mother Nature do before placement of weirs? Seams kind of like this global warming crap. Let's scare the sheepeople into thinking what we want them to. In my opinion a weir is sort of like blocking a canal that they want to keep people out of due to big money private water BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would completely removing the weirs solve the fishing/crabbing problem?

Nothing. The problems behind the weirs are not natural. The dredging of the ship channel introduced saltwater into the system. That marsh could not tolerate the increase in salinity, and it was dying. That is precisely the reason for the weirs.

Removing the weirs would create a temporary increase in shrimp and crab numbers, but inevitably the marsh would die and you would have one large lake.

Smalls I was on here last year when the weirs were closed it was one of the reasons I joined. If I misunderstood you I apologize. I appreciate your opinion and would enjoy continuing to receive information both sides.

We've for a winner! That's where I was trying to go. Weirs are a big band aid for the ship channel.

Hey it's cool man. Things get heated with this topic from time to time. Its the proverbial natural resources management discussion. Something is done that not everyone sees benefit from, or they don't fully understand the purpose, and this is what happens.

Here is a link to a report on some of the projects in that area. The first paragraph is what I keep talking about. Over 60,000 acres of marsh were lost, which does not necessarily mean converted to open water, between 1950 and 1970, which roughly coincides with many of the deeper dredging projects on the Ship channel. That loss is why the weirs were put in.

http://lacoast.gov/reports/project/3891096~1.pdf

Listen to this right here ^^^^^^^, the ship channel is one of the main culprits for saltwater intrusion, its also the reason there is a year round trout fishery in Big Lake rather than a largemouth bass fishery. The ship channel is the whole reason Lake Charles area is thriving. The weirs are there to mitigate for the ship channel. Its that simple. That area is not supposed to be saltwater, saltwater kills plants that are not salt tolerant.

Over 50 years ago, the saltwater barrier was installed north of Lake Charles, for the reason of keeping saltwater at bay, and had nothing to do with wigeongrass, ducks, CCA, oysters, chupacabras, black panthers, or anything, it was to keep saltwater out of a freshwater system. This was over FIFTY years ago, so its nothing new.

Go to Holly Beach and take a 5 gallon bucket of seawater and pour it in your yard and watch what happens (you won't have to mow that area:spineyes:)

Better question would be what did mother nature do before the ship channel? The ship channel does a lot more harm than people are wanting to talk about either because they don't realize it or because it's so vital to SWLA's economy. I'm no scientist and have no scientific data to back this but the need for a "saltwater barrier" in Westlake is a result of the ship channel too. If you could revert things back to before man, I'm sure mother nature could take care of herself, but we are taking about YEARS of man made issues (large and small) that are compounding.

There are several places you can go catch crabs in Cameron Parish and not even need a boat to do it

You don't have to buy into the manmade global warming, but you need to be aware that the sea levels are rising (due to polar ice caps melting), our land is subsiding (due to numerous things, mainly manmade levees, causing lack of sediment, freshwater, etc.) and saltwater is getting further and further into our marshes and will for the forseeable future, its much bigger than a weir keeping someone from going crabbing or catching some redfish. Much much bigger than that.

The ship channel was dug for the shipping industry in Lake Charles. Without the ship channel, Lake Charles wouldn't be much of anything, it relies on the shipping industry. The saltwater barrier was put in place over 50 years ago to mitigate for this. Weirs were installed later. Its that simple:)

Very nicely put.

So here the kicker guys I by all means support the ship channel for economic reasons we GOT to have it. So let's here what is the solution I especially would like to hear from the guys who support the weirs.

You've got to have some kind of salinity control. Like MG has said, the weirs are one level of control. There is a proposal to install some sort of saltwater barrier at Calcasieu Pass. MG likes the idea of rocks along the length of the channel. Both would work, both face considerable hurdles before they could happen.

You have to have something there to protect that marsh. If you don't, its gone. Multiple levels of salinity control will be the only way to protect the marsh and allow for public uses such as fishing and crabbing to be minimally effected by weir operations.

One thing that no one seems to have considered is why the entire ship channel was not rocked instead of the weirs being installed. Maybe there is a reason they decided on this complex levee and weir system instead of the simple move of rocking the entire channel. I would be curious to know that myself.

I feel like this concept should be re-thought. Waterfowl can literally go almost anywhere there is a little bit of water. That marsh is not very big in the grand scheme of waterfowl habitat in the state of louisiana. On the other hand, southwest louisiana has one estuary, and that should be the main concern IMO.