SaltyCajun.com http://www.matrixshad.com//

Notices

Go Back   SaltyCajun.com > Fishing Talk > Inshore Saltwater Fishing Discussion

Inshore Saltwater Fishing Discussion Discuss inshore fishing, tackle, and tactics here!

LMC Marine
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-09-2014, 11:03 PM
Smalls Smalls is offline
King Mackeral
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South Central LA
Posts: 2,822
Cash: 3,998
Default

Overall MG, the points you made in your original post went largely unanswered. I will say I did not stick around for the oyster discussion (I had pretty much had enough and had a 2.5 hr drive back home to deal with), but the rest of it was about what I expected. From my point of view, the weirs appear to be operating as they were intended for the most part. I think the fact that some of the weirs may not appear open when they actually are complicates things. I was unaware that some of the structures could be opened below the surface.

Other than that, and who actually sits on the Cameron-Creole Advisory Committee, I learned very little from the discussion of the weirs. They said nothing that I didn't already know.

In my opinion, the management plan is in no way "outdated". With the exception of the marsh, not much has changed that can be controlled. The potential is on the table for some freshwater introduction in the future, but for now, the management plan seems to he effective enough to curtail any additional loss of land. If not for Rita and Ike, things may be progressing very well. The evidence was there in the data that the Cameron-Creole was freshening, and that is in line with other research I've seen. Rita and the subsequent years of misoperation by the USFWS set back a lot of progress.

The dredging discussion was almost pointless, except to reveal that the Corps is essentially wasting dredge material by depositing it outside the jetties in the gulf.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-09-2014, 11:51 PM
MathGeek's Avatar
MathGeek MathGeek is offline
King Mackeral
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 2,931
Cash: 4,502
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smalls View Post
Overall MG, the points you made in your original post went largely unanswered. I will say I did not stick around for the oyster discussion (I had pretty much had enough and had a 2.5 hr drive back home to deal with), but the rest of it was about what I expected. From my point of view, the weirs appear to be operating as they were intended for the most part. I think the fact that some of the weirs may not appear open when they actually are complicates things. I was unaware that some of the structures could be opened below the surface.

Other than that, and who actually sits on the Cameron-Creole Advisory Committee, I learned very little from the discussion of the weirs. They said nothing that I didn't already know.

In my opinion, the management plan is in no way "outdated". With the exception of the marsh, not much has changed that can be controlled. The potential is on the table for some freshwater introduction in the future, but for now, the management plan seems to he effective enough to curtail any additional loss of land. If not for Rita and Ike, things may be progressing very well. The evidence was there in the data that the Cameron-Creole was freshening, and that is in line with other research I've seen. Rita and the subsequent years of misoperation by the USFWS set back a lot of progress.

The dredging discussion was almost pointless, except to reveal that the Corps is essentially wasting dredge material by depositing it outside the jetties in the gulf.
Thanks for the feedback, greatly appreciated. On the one hand, it is too bad that the dredge material can't be used to rebuild eroded land. On the other hand, putting it in the Gulf make it unlikely it will end up back in the channel and need to be dredged again. Rocking the length of the ship channel is a very expensive proposition.

I knew that the weirs had gates below the waterline both from personal observation as well as some of the reading materials. It would be nice if they could communicate to anglers when these were open, both for PR purposes and because fish are going to congregate in front of the weirs when the tide is flowing out if they are open.

I agree with you that I don't see where a management plan is outdated. If the science and data that went into the plan were good, the plan should still be good. "Outdated" is a cheap shot unless one can articulate precisely what scientific principles are better understood now than when the original plan was written.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-10-2014, 01:38 AM
Gerald Gerald is offline
Sailfish
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lake Charles / Moss Bluff
Posts: 4,648
Cash: 4,232
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathGeek View Post
Thanks for the feedback, greatly appreciated. On the one hand, it is too bad that the dredge material can't be used to rebuild eroded land. On the other hand, putting it in the Gulf make it unlikely it will end up back in the channel and need to be dredged again. Rocking the length of the ship channel is a very expensive proposition.

I knew that the weirs had gates below the waterline both from personal observation as well as some of the reading materials. It would be nice if they could communicate to anglers when these were open, both for PR purposes and because fish are going to congregate in front of the weirs when the tide is flowing out if they are open.

I agree with you that I don't see where a management plan is outdated. If the science and data that went into the plan were good, the plan should still be good. "Outdated" is a cheap shot unless one can articulate precisely what scientific principles are better understood now than when the original plan was written.
There have been many project over the years where the dredge material has been used to restore the marshes. Some on refuge land and some on privet land.

When dredging out in the gulf, the water/sludge mixture is pumped into a barge. Only a small % is heavy solids that settles out into the barge. The light "silt" like stuff flow out with the water and the Westward Gulf current carries it away from the channel that is being dredged.

I don't remember if she said what was done with the material in the barge. She did say that they get about 3 barge loads a day.

A representative from David Vittor's office was there to see what was going on at the meeting.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-10-2014, 07:21 AM
T-TOP's Avatar
T-TOP T-TOP is offline
Red Snapper
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: carlyss
Posts: 1,758
Cash: 2,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerald View Post
There have been many project over the years where the dredge material has been used to restore the marshes. Some on refuge land and some on privet land.

When dredging out in the gulf, the water/sludge mixture is pumped into a barge. Only a small % is heavy solids that settles out into the barge. The light "silt" like stuff flow out with the water and the Westward Gulf current carries it away from the channel that is being dredged.

I don't remember if she said what was done with the material in the barge. She did say that they get about 3 barge loads a day.

A representative from David Vittor's office was there to see what was going on at the meeting.
I agree this is what I heard. She said the material is to light to use, and it makes sense because of the westward currents. She said the 3 loads of heavier material they dump west of the channel in the gulf, I would assume what doen't settle out is taken away by the same westward currents.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-10-2014, 10:28 AM
jlincecum's Avatar
jlincecum jlincecum is offline
King Mackeral
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sulphur, LA
Posts: 2,206
Cash: 2,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerald View Post
There have been many project over the years where the dredge material has been used to restore the marshes. Some on refuge land and some on privet land.

When dredging out in the gulf, the water/sludge mixture is pumped into a barge. Only a small % is heavy solids that settles out into the barge. The light "silt" like stuff flow out with the water and the Westward Gulf current carries it away from the channel that is being dredged.

I don't remember if she said what was done with the material in the barge. She did say that they get about 3 barge loads a day.

A representative from David Vittor's office was there to see what was going on at the meeting.

it doesn't matter how light, fluffy, dense or heavy the material is, it is usable. It was once solid on the bottom and will be solid once again where ever they choose to dump it. The heavy stuff that you can actually move with a shovel is not the only viable substance that comes from this. If it stayed light and fluffy the need for that dredge to run 24/7 would not be needed because prop wash and turbulent waters that these large ships produce would keep it stirred up and these "strong western currents" that were brought up would just wash it all away. These materials being dumped right next to the channel being dredged is no the best use of this material, it is a waste. This is the point I tried to make last night but was just hit with the fluffy and cost too much reply. So which scenario costs more? Dredging and dumping next to your channel which requires equipment to never stop and no other benefit is gained other than a safe passage way for ship travel or getting the resource away from where you dig eliminating the chance of it going right back where it came from and rebuilding lost coast line with a side possibility of that channel not needing the dredge as often???
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-10-2014, 10:37 AM
T-TOP's Avatar
T-TOP T-TOP is offline
Red Snapper
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: carlyss
Posts: 1,758
Cash: 2,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jlincecum View Post
it doesn't matter how light, fluffy, dense or heavy the material is, it is usable. It was once solid on the bottom and will be solid once again where ever they choose to dump it. The heavy stuff that you can actually move with a shovel is not the only viable substance that comes from this. If it stayed light and fluffy the need for that dredge to run 24/7 would not be needed because prop wash and turbulent waters that these large ships produce would keep it stirred up and these "strong western currents" that were brought up would just wash it all away. These materials being dumped right next to the channel being dredged is no the best use of this material, it is a waste. This is the point I tried to make last night but was just hit with the fluffy and cost too much reply. So which scenario costs more? Dredging and dumping next to your channel which requires equipment to never stop and no other benefit is gained other than a safe passage way for ship travel or getting the resource away from where you dig eliminating the chance of it going right back where it came from and rebuilding lost coast line with a side possibility of that channel not needing the dredge as often???
I thought she said to get that much material to the beach would be over 30 million? "HER" budget is 11-14 million.... they dont have the money even if it was good material. She basiclly said they beg for people to help find and fund useful ways to use the material and have used it on projects in the past...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-10-2014, 10:57 AM
jlincecum's Avatar
jlincecum jlincecum is offline
King Mackeral
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sulphur, LA
Posts: 2,206
Cash: 2,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T-TOP View Post
I thought she said to get that much material to the beach would be over 30 million? "HER" budget is 11-14 million.... they dont have the money even if it was good material. She basiclly said they beg for people to help find and fund useful ways to use the material and have used it on projects in the past...

to get money you have to push for money. Im not talking about building a 12 million dollar pipeline to build up a spot in Joe Blows privately owned marsh. Im talking about taking it the beaches and rebuilding lost coastline. Yes this takes money from our gooberment but if it is taken to them in a viable manor stating what good could be done for our coastline rather some private entity it may not fall on deaf ears. How many campaigns and groups are out there pushing to restore coastline??? If these government officials preach it but dont feel the need to act upon it when it is put in front of them then we have found a root part of the problem and it will be up to us, "the people", to help solve the problem.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-10-2014, 11:16 AM
T-TOP's Avatar
T-TOP T-TOP is offline
Red Snapper
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: carlyss
Posts: 1,758
Cash: 2,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jlincecum View Post
to get money you have to push for money. Im not talking about building a 12 million dollar pipeline to build up a spot in Joe Blows privately owned marsh. Im talking about taking it the beaches and rebuilding lost coastline. Yes this takes money from our gooberment but if it is taken to them in a viable manor stating what good could be done for our coastline rather some private entity it may not fall on deaf ears. How many campaigns and groups are out there pushing to restore coastline??? If these government officials preach it but dont feel the need to act upon it when it is put in front of them then we have found a root part of the problem and it will be up to us, "the people", to help solve the problem.
correct,
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:48 AM.



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - [ARG:3 UNDEFINED], Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vB.Sponsors
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007 - 2008, PixelFX Studios
SaltyCajun.com logo provided by Bryce Risher

All content, images, designs, and logos are Copyright © 2009-2012,
Salty Cajun, LLC
No unathorized use is permitted
Geo Visitors Map