Oyster Overharvesting in Calcasieu Estuary in 2010- 2011: References needed

[jchief]

I am assuming that this would be something along the line of the locks on the Panama Canal if it were to happen. That would suck on going offshore.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by jchief

I am assuming that this would be something along the line of the locks on the Panama Canal if it were to happen. That would suck on going offshore.

More than likely not. There have been techniques applied where an underwater barrier of some sort is constructed to reduce saltwater floW. With how busy the ship channel is, a structure like the one up the river would not be very effective at controlling salinity levels. An underwater structure would still allow ship access while reducing salinities because of the fact that salt water is typically lower in the water column.

I remember about a year or two ago hearing about a type of structure that was inflated or something, like a balloon or one of the barriers used in the oil spill (the name escapes me right now). Ships could still pass over it, but it would block much of the salt water.

What's funny about this is there would be plenty of opposition to such a project if it actually comes to fruition, but yet the public already had a chance to comment on these projects. There were quite a few projects that were modified after the comment period too.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I847 using Tapatalk 2

[jchief]

Originally Posted by Smalls

More than likely not. There have been techniques applied where an underwater barrier of some sort is constructed to reduce saltwater floW. With how busy the ship channel is, a structure like the one up the river would not be very effective at controlling salinity levels. An underwater structure would still allow ship access while reducing salinities because of the fact that salt water is typically lower in the water column.

I remember about a year or two ago hearing about a type of structure that was inflated or something, like a balloon or one of the barriers used in the oil spill (the name escapes me right now). Ships could still pass over it, but it would block much of the salt water.

What's funny about this is there would be plenty of opposition to such a project if it actually comes to fruition, but yet the public already had a chance to comment on these projects. There were quite a few projects that were modified after the comment period too.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I847 using Tapatalk 2

I think most people don't really pay a lot of attention when they have a comment period on something like this because of how far out the project would be. So many things change daily these days, technology/science that the plan is usually revised before implementation.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by jchief

I think most people don't really pay a lot of attention when they have a comment period on something like this because of how far out the project would be. So many things change daily these days, technology/science that the plan is usually revised before implementation.

I believe they actually had pretty good turnouts to these.

The problem is, a lot of people don't care to pay attention to comment periods until it will directly affect them in some way. So when it comes time for a project to be implemented, they are caught off gaurd and get offensive about it as if they never had a chance to weigh in. Several of my previous supervisors who keep up with this kind of thing did weigh in on it and attend meetings.

I've had personal experience with these comment periods, and the agencies do take into account public and interagency comments. I've had to draft responses to those comments, either justifying why something was being done, or modifying the plans.

As I said before, some projects were modified after the comment period and public meetings. CPRA did take comments into consideration.

That being said, I still think some of the projects are boneheaded, and some, like this barrier, will likely never see the light of day because the calcasieu system has been in its current state for so long, that no one will want to let anything chance that.

If they wanted to install this barrier, they should have funded it while the legislature that voted unanimously for it were still in office. Because as "W" alluded to earlier, when future legislators get voted in, it will be much more likely that people try and get them to oppose it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I847 using Tapatalk 2

[PaulMyers]

Originally Posted by Smalls

An underwater structure would still allow ship access while reducing salinities because of the fact that salt water is typically lower in the water column.

That wouldn't really work in the ship channel or at the jetties because the ship channel is dredged to 42' and most of the ships coming in have a draft of 39~40 ft. We have ships that have to liter offshore to even be able to come in to our crude docks.

["W"]

I dont think my kids will ever have to worry about this in there lifetime!! Not going to happen ever in our lifetime


Ever!! So rest ashore we will not have to even worry about this issue at all!! We will be dead and gone before the 1st ground breaking of the project even hits paper

[MathGeek]

How can the public be expected to comment intelligently when there really is no "plan" or design, just a vague intent and a 20 year date range?

Has the public been informed whether a saltwater barrier of this size and scope (and cost) has ever been implemented before?

Where?

Was it completed on budget?

Was it successful in its ecological goals?

What was the economic impact?

Did it have a negative impact on shipping?

Did it have a negative impact on recreational uses?

Did it have a negative impact on commercial fisheries?

Put the answers to these questions in writing along with a specific design, and then give the public opportunity to comment.

[Smalls]

Like I said, MG, I never said the plan was very good, or that CPRA has put all of these things to paper. I never advocated a saltwater barrier either.

What I did say is that the arena to pose these questions was presented, and whether or not people showed up to ask those questions was completely up to the public. I know people that did go and sit in these meetings and ask questions. According to the Master Plan website, somewhere in the area of 2000 people commented on the Plan.

Judging by some of the reactions on this forum, we have members here that did not show up, and were not aware of this type of project being planned.

So, in my opinion, the problem lies just as much with the people that did not show up to ask questions as it does with CPRA for not planning this.

Then again, maybe they have, and no one has asked the right questions. As far as I can tell, they haven't released specific details on any project yet.

[TarponTom]

And demand for Oysters is only going to impact SW La even more now that Georgia shut down their oyster fishery and the production of oysters on the East side is down close to 60 to 65% from a year ago.

http://www.wwltv.com/news/local/Oyst...260320441.html

The Louisiana Seafood & Promotion Board has to keep the animal alive and that animal right now is in BL/Sabine/etc. Sadly its going to get much worse for the trout fishery for you guys over there.