Weirs Closed

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

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?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

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.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

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.

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.

[hewes]

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

["W"]

Originally Posted by hewes

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

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

[Mr T]

please send some of that salt to Vermilion Bay!

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by hewes

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

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.

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

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.

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.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

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.

they can't just get by on water alone, they need food. Saltwater kills desirable waterfowl foods.

Look at the east side of the state in the marshes of Leeville/Golden Meadow, these areas used to be great duck hunting for dabbling ducks, now its a garhole due to a lack of desirable food. There isn't anything for puddle ducks to eat there, scaup and divers on the other hand...

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

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.

That's the purpose of every NWR. They aren't going to re-write the definition of an NWR for just because of where it is situated. The weirs are not operated by USFWS anymore and even so, the intent was not to manage for a given group of species, but to manage the marsh as a whole.

It just so happens that land behind the weirs is managed for waterfowl, and waterfowl benefit from lower salinity environments because the overwhelming majority of waterfowl food occurs in brackish and intermediate marsh, which is what the area is maintained as.

So, it is easy to assume the weirs are for management of waterfowl habitat, but they are not. They are in place to keep a delicate ecosystem in balance, by keeping salinities low enough to sustain those plant communities.

Also, NWRs are created through duck stamp funds. They can't re-write the definition of an NWR, and then continue to fund it with money meant for waterfowl management if the written purpose is not waterfowl management.

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

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.

Your quote, not mine

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

Your quote, not mine

Again, I was referencing two seperate things. Someone said the NWR should account for fish as well. They do not manage fish, they manage ducks. The weirs are there to manage marsh habitat. If conditions aren't right to maintain the marsh, they close the weirs.

[Jadams]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Again, I was referencing two seperate things. Someone said the NWR should account for fish as well. They do not manage fish, they manage ducks. The weirs are there to manage marsh habitat. If conditions aren't right to maintain the marsh, they close the weirs.

Why does laccasine do fish shocks and counts.... That's a nwr... Guess them coonasses ain't managing the fish they just shocking em 4 the hell of it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mallardhead]

Originally Posted by Jadams

Why does laccasine do fish shocks and counts.... That's a nwr... Guess them coonasses ain't managing the fish they just shocking em 4 the hell of it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rmfao

Sent from my LGL45C using Tapatalk 2