coastal restoration efforts and overall health of the region
 

nice interview with Billy Nungesser about whats going to happen with the BP money

http://coastalanglermag.com/nola/201...-things-first/

Unfortunately I agree that there are going to be a BUNCH of projects that have nothing related to the coast and that its going to be a money grab.

When the spill was happening Billy N was fired up and seemed to be a voice of reason. Now I believe he has fallen into the politics trap and is just wanting to get some attention for a potential governor run. He talks a whole lot, but when he was asked about his marina getting revamped by BP money he was suddenly silent:eek:

typical LA politician, means well at first but gets in and forgets everything he stood for, just sees dolla dolla bills and power

I don't even listen to anything Nungesser says anymore, for the exact reasons DB said.

I hate to say it but I agree with DB. As much as I would like to see the money spent the right way I doubt it will happen. The marsh will continue to die and that really sucks.

There is large salinity control project in the planning stage for the big lake area, that looks very promising. I attended a meeting a few weeks ago it was a presentation of the three options. LWF biologist are evaluating the options now. LCPRA hopes to have an option chosen by the end of the year. To me it looked very promising.

These options were???
Hopefully they will rock the washout/9 mile area.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Kind of hard to go into detail, but yes it does involve rocking off the bottom end of the lake and other areas. openings in to west cove, old river, a sector gate in the channel etc. The presentation was what they had done studies on this year. NOAA and LWF will have input on specifics so that not to have negative impacts on the wildlife in the estuary

Thanks for the info

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Compared to the rest of the gulf states Louisiana is years ahead of the others in terms or restoration. Besides the fact that were loosing more land then all of them combined were only getting a percentage of the money, and only a percentage of that will be dedicated to restoration. This is how the the Restore Act dictates it.

We are years ahead because we have to be. Even with all the restoration, I believe we still see a net loss every year. The rate got pretty low before 2005, but a couple of year set us back a decade in terms of where we were at. If I remember right, we lost more land from 2005-2008 than we lost over the course of nearly 2 decades.

More has to be done.