Interesting little article

[alphaman]

Parts of Southern Louisiana Are Actually Growing.

http://www.weather.com/science/news/...SCI_JK_21315_6

[Smalls]

I can't believe that is still being reported like its something new. People familiar with that Delta have known this for years. That's what happens when nature is allowed to run its course. Even back to when the Mississippi was leveed, its course was changing to the present day course of the Atchafalaya. The only reason it currently functions as a distributary and not the main channel is because of the construction of the 3 Rivers control structure.

Regardless, the river is functioning as it should, and new land is being built there. Scientists will, unfortunately, never be able to replicate what is happening naturally. We can build marshes, build ridges, rebuild islands, but we have yet to be successful in projects of this magnitude. Just look at the failed Caernervon Diversion. It was never really successful at building land. Yet, in 2011, during the massive flood event, a portion of the levee below New Orleans was breached. This breach functioned in the way that the CD was supposed to, but never did. That breach resulted in new land.

Let nature run its course. It will do its thing.

[Gottogo49]

Let nature run its course. It will do its thing.
Weirs too?
That works for me.
Global warming/climate change?
Some things will be different, animals adjust or go extinct.
It used to be the great Sahara forest.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by Gottogo49

Let nature run its course. It will do its thing.
Weirs too?
That works for me.
Global warming/climate change?
Some things will be different, animals adjust or go extinct.
It used to be the great Sahara forest.

At a certain level, you can't do anything. My comment was in reference to scientists trying to use this as a reference. They are not going to recreate such a complex mechanism. There is a difference between a mechanical control, such as weirs, and a process, such as land formation through sedimentation, which is what they are trying to do with diversions. Some things you just cannot recreate. Some things just have to be left to nature.

As far as the Sahara and weirs comments....those are two complete different things. The Sahara transformed naturally due to shifts in the Earth's orbit. The weirs are a response to a much more localized and simpler problem. Land formation through sedimentation and land loss due to unnatural salinity increases are on opposite ends of the spectrum of complexity. There are proven ways to reduce salinity. I cannot think of a single example of a successful MAN-MADE sediment diversion to create land in Louisiana.

And the climate change topic is ridiculous in my opinion. Humans have "sped" the process up somewhat, but this is something that has always happened. Louisiana was once covered with Glaciers.

[capt coonassty]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1424110480.116476.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[capt coonassty]

Originally Posted by capt coonassty

Attachment 82849


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just wanted to put this out here and bring up this point. Caernarvon diversion was designed to be a fresh water diversion. The main goal was never to build marsh, only reduce salinity and reduce stress and lessen the loss rates. But even though it isn't feeding off of the bottom of the river where the heavier sediments are it still building land. Same thing with the Naomi siphon.

The Diversions planed are going to be designed for sediment transport and will have a better ability to build land in the outfall.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by capt coonassty

I just wanted to put this out here and bring up this point. Caernarvon diversion was designed to be a fresh water diversion. The main goal was never to build marsh, only reduce salinity and reduce stress and lessen the loss rates. But even though it isn't feeding off of the bottom of the river where the heavier sediments are it still building land. Same thing with the Naomi siphon.

The Diversions planed are going to be designed for sediment transport and will have a better ability to build land in the outfall.

Why is it that so many look at that project as a failure then? Isn't it supposed to benefit a much larger area? Why has it and the management of it continually been criticized?

There has definitely been some land gain there, which is good, but I've heard nothing but criticism of that project.

[capt coonassty]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Why is it that so many look at that project as a failure then? Isn't it supposed to benefit a much larger area? Why has it and the management of it continually been criticized?

There has definitely been some land gain there, which is good, but I've heard nothing but criticism of that project.

This is a good question that I don't exactly have an answer for. But yes the diversion benefits a much larger area as far as salinity reduction.

As far as the criticism I think it has to do a lot with a few people who happen to fish oysters. For sure the Save Louisiana Coalition is the squeakiest wheel and seems to spread a lot of misinformation. They love to use some imagery of before and after a hurricane and claim that the diversion is responsible from interior land loss.
They also love to cite some research paper and use the worst possible outcome of it and said that a diversion would displace fisheries by 40Km(or something like that)

[RichWentFishing504]

The diversions will push the trout out more. I'm looking to buy a new boat soon and am factoring that into the equation.

[alphaman]

Where will this diversion be?

[RichWentFishing504]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1424149896.358117.jpg

All up and down the river. Not one diversion but multiple.

[capt coonassty]

Originally Posted by RichWentFishing504

The diversions will push the trout out more. I'm looking to buy a new boat soon and am factoring that into the equation.

Really only when the diversions are running when salinities would be low anyway. People are so afraid of this but when you think about it when the river is low you can catch trout miles upriver the same will be true if a diversion is there or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[capt coonassty]

Originally Posted by RichWentFishing504

Attachment 82890

All up and down the river. Not one diversion but multiple.

I would only count on one near MG. Funding for these isn't really in place at the moment. And with these things costing hundreds of millions they won't be built anytime soon.

There some interesting work going on with fisheries and Mardi Gras Pass. This will give us a better look at what a smaller diversion would do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RichWentFishing504]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1424200195.722030.jpghere is a better picture.

Right now I can't find the documents online that detail when and how much flow the diversions will be operating at.

Does anyone really know how often the diversions will be open and how much water is going to flow through them.

[capt coonassty]

The state will be implementing a program called SWAMP. It will be real time salinity stations set up within the outfall and basins that the diversions dump into. They will be able to monitor isohaline lines and adjust flow as needed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RichWentFishing504]

Looks to me that dumping water into the upper, mid, and lower Breton diversions will push the trout out the Delacroix and lower Hopedale areas.

The central diversion will finally finish off the fishing out of bayou Bienvenue. I used to fish that area pretty regularly.

The west Maurepas diversion will make the lake more fresh.

That will only leave the Biloxi marsh and eastern Hopedale areas the least affected by Nola metro trout fisherman.

[capt coonassty]

Look even if every single one of these could be built (will never happen) they would never get to run at the same time due to how much water they would be pulling off of the river. And these cycles that they talk about running them are over years.

You say that this will be the end of trout fishing but look at Vermilion bay. VB salinity drops low enough at times of the year to catch white catfish, other times of the year trout.

Yes trout fishing will change, no its not the end of the world. Our wetlands are falling apart and sinking everywhere except for the places that river water is touching. Have some foresight and realize that apart from manually dumping sediment onto the marshes this is the only way to protect our marshes.

[Smalls]

Not to mention most of these places were never trout habitat to begin with. Its no different than southwest Louisiana.....Big Lake and Prien Lake. If you could go back 200 years, heck, probably only 150 years, Ponchartrain wouldn't have held trout. It would have held bass. Didn't there used to be cypress all over out there? I know there was in Maurepas. Cypress don't grow in salt water, bud!!

Why is trout fishing the measure that everyone goes by? Its not like that species is some amazing indicator of the health of the ecosystem. Go to any of the top trout spots in Louisiana today, and I bet 100 years ago, they weren't there in most of them. It was too fresh. They are only there because humans degraded the system to a point that they could live there.

[RichWentFishing504]

I'm not saying that it doesn't have to be done and it's the end of the world.

Far from it. In fact I'm looking to get a new boat made right now.

All I'm saying is that the trout will be pushed further away and I'm factoring that into my future plans.

I was looking intently at a 19-20 ft flat bottom shallow water boat. Now I'm second guessing myself and think that I'll need the range and speed of a much larger bay boat to get out to where the trout will be. I'd also like to discuss what will happen to the trout once this project commences.