Weirs Closed

[noodle creek]

My question is, if we rocked the ship channel leaving a little cut where super cut used to be and a little cut at the washout, would the weirs still be just as necessary?

[Cripley]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

My question is, if we rocked the ship channel leaving a little cut where super cut used to be and a little cut at the washout, would the weirs still be just as necessary?

Good question

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

My question is, if we rocked the ship channel leaving a little cut where super cut used to be and a little cut at the washout, would the weirs still be just as necessary?

Good question. The answer is a definitive yes. To keep Big Lake as a brackish estuary with suitable salinities for good growth of oysters and reproduction of trout, etc. it needs to be saltier at times than you would want to have directly connected to the marsh between 5 and 15 ppt, depending on the time of year and water temps, etc.

It may also happen that the separation between the channel and lake is not always sufficient to keep salinities in the lake sufficiently low. An event like an extended period with low rain will eventually cause the salinity in the lake to approach 20-30 ppt. If there is no fresh water flowing into the system, the salinity will creep higher and higher. Reducing the coupling of the system to the Gulf just slows the process down and lowers the average salinity over time, it does not mean a high salinity event can never occur in the lake.

But keeping the salinity in the lake at 5-15 ppt most of the time would mean that the weirs could be open many more days per year than they are now - maybe an average of 240+ days per year: possibly 300 days in a good year and only 150 days in a bad year.

["W"]

Weirs should never ever be closed. Never

You already restrict the water going in to a minimum

[Natural Light Kid]

Originally Posted by "W"

Weirs should never ever be closed. Never

You already restrict the water going in to a minimum

Sure. And your guide business will be done soon.

["W"]

Originally Posted by Natural Light Kid

Sure. And your guide business will be done soon.

How do you know this??? Weirs were open for years and years and marsh stayed healthy??

Only took a beaten after two hurricanes but it's back to normal

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by "W"

How do you know this??? Weirs were open for years and years and marsh stayed healthy??

Only took a beaten after two hurricanes but it's back to normal

What proof Waltrip? What qualifications do you have to know the marsh was healthy? Because I know people with a lot more experience in marsh management that would disagree with you vehemently.

How do you know the marsh was healthy? You keep saying it, but I want to know what evidence you have to support that.

Do you know the difference between oystergrass and gulf cordgrass? What about between Sagitarria latifolia and Spartina patens?

["W"]

Originally Posted by Smalls

What proof Waltrip? What qualifications do you have to know the marsh was healthy? Because I know people with a lot more experience in marsh management that would disagree with you vehemently.

How do you know the marsh was healthy? You keep saying it, but I want to know what evidence you have to support that.

Do you know the difference between oystergrass and gulf cordgrass? What about between Sagitarria latifolia and Spartina patens?

Tell me how it's unhealthy? Tell me how saltwater is going to destroy marsh that has had saltwater for years

Have you been back there? Have you seen that some of the old boat runs are grown over? Who is saying it's not healthy?

WL&F biologist seem pretty confident that it has made a great come back after storms

So who is saying it's unhealthy? Because we sure are not hearing that

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by "W"

How do you know this??? Weirs were open for years and years and marsh stayed healthy??

Only took a beaten after two hurricanes but it's back to normal

reckon the saltwater had anything to do with that 'beaten' the marsh took?

[capt coonassty]

No one will ever be happy, there is no solution to a problem so complex. Deteriorating marshes lead to productive fisheries. But for how long and at what cost. The weirs are the only thing protecting the east side from completely breaking down. To keep the them open full time will produce some amazing fishing but will only be short lived. Fisheries go through different trends, some one year, others over 5 and 10 year peaks and lows. Other fisheries has been recorded to do so. I don't think that the trout fishery has enough data over enough time to show this but it could be on a downward side of a trend only to be compounded with other influences to produce lows.

For the ones who want the weirs open all of the time, do you recognize that this will have negative effects on the marsh that produces your great fishery? And are you fine with the fact that this short term success and irreversible?

[bjqx]

Where's all the silt go from dredging? They make spoil areas around Sabine and use those areas to do some mash restoration after it settles. Their up and down the ship channel on Pleasure Island and North between Port Arthur and Bridge city. They even make some good duck hunting for a young guy with good legs.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

[jchief]

Originally Posted by bjqx

Where's all the silt go from dredging? They make spoil areas around Sabine and use those areas to do some mash restoration after it settles. Their up and down the ship channel on Pleasure Island and North between Port Arthur and Bridge city. They even make some good duck hunting for a young guy with good legs.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

They are doing the same here. That is one reason for the rock on the channel. They are filling in with the dredge.

[MathGeek]

It's kinda funny. When others can't catch fish and complain, it must be because conditions changed and they just aren't good enough fisherman to get on them.

But when some more confident peeps can't catch fish, it must be because the sky is falling and all the fish have packed up and gone somewhere else.

Big Lake is a hard place to fish. Even experience doesn't always provide the right recipe for all the curve balls this lake throws.

Drawing conclusions about the health of the estuary from a string of unproductive fishing trips is unwarranted, regardless of the skill of the angler. There are just too many other places the fish could be, and too many valid reasons the fish could be right under you but not buying what you are selling.

This is why the most scientifically valid stock assessments use fishery independent sampling methods. Nets are placed at random locations throughout the estuary, and many, many net locations are used over a long period of time to arrive at a reasonable first order approximation of fish populations. Even this level of scientific effort and careful sampling protocol often yields error bars on the order of 50% for population numbers.

Reactionary fishery management because we're catching fewer fish than last year really isn't any better science than the non-sense pushed by CCA.

Opening the weirs does enhance the food supply for the fish in the lake, and the more days the weirs are open, the happier and healthier and fatter the fish will be. In the short term, the more days a year the weirs are open, the more fish there will be. But in the long term, you're trading a real increase on the order of 20% over a few years but sacrificing the long term (10+ years later) potential of the fishery by 50% or more.

Opening the weirs really does more in terms of making the fish predictable and easy to catch than it does in actually increasing the number and health of the fish.

[calcutta37]

I have never been behind the wiers so please forgive my ignorance. Is the ICW connected to that marsh in any way? Can you get into that marsh from the ICW thats to the north of all that marsh? If you can't get in that marsh couldn't you put a wier somewhere on the ICW to keep the water at a level that it would always flow into the lake? Just seems like the salinity in the ICW wouldn't be that bad for the marsh. Just a thought.

["W"]

Originally Posted by calcutta37

I have never been behind the wiers so please forgive my ignorance. Is the ICW connected to that marsh in any way? Can you get into that marsh from the ICW thats to the north of all that marsh? If you can't get in that marsh couldn't you put a wier somewhere on the ICW to keep the water at a level that it would always flow into the lake? Just seems like the salinity in the ICW wouldn't be that bad for the marsh. Just a thought.

No this is way south of ICW

They only way to flush with freshwater is from Miami Corp flat along hey 27, when we get lots of rain the flumes open draining into marsh behind weirs

[calcutta37]

They need to figure out how to keep a constant flow into Miami corp then. Even if it just creates a trickle of water atleast the wiers would stay open.

[Big pond]

These marshes do border the ICW to the west of gibstown bridge. 2years ago they we're installing large culverts under big lake rd. by Fred's . I heard the purpose was to relieve fresh water coming down the ICW from the east. Why not install large 1 way culverts into this marsh west of the gibstown to relieve this water thru. just a thought

[MathGeek]

The aerial/satelite photos I've reviewed make it clear that the marsh is being lost to erosion at an alarming rate. The type of vegetation is important because fresh/intermediate/brackish marsh vegetation resist erosion much better than the vegetation found in higher salinity salt marsh.

Each type of vegetation has a range of salinity that it can tolerate, and (generally speaking) the less salt plants tolerate, the better the land they grow on is going to resist erosion. So it may look good to the eye, but it has been shown with high confidence that salt marsh erodes more quickly during regular tide and storm events, and it is also much more susceptible to catastrophic large scale disappearance during tropical storms.

If the "marsh lovers" were blowing smoke on this, I'd be the first to call them out and cite all the sources that contradict them. But the "marsh lovers" are giving it to us straight. I've reviewed the data and the sources in some detail, and their inferences that we need to preserve that marsh and that keeping the salinity low back there is essential are spot on.

["W"]

They need to keep the salinity low for one reason

Save wedgion grass for duck hunters to hold ducks

But they will never say that but don't worry ones who spend countless days out here know the truth!!

[slickfish]

Originally Posted by "W"

They need to keep the salinity low for one reason

Save wedgion grass for duck hunters to hold ducks

But they will never say that but don't worry ones who spend countless days out here know the truth!!

Looks like that wind on bl has those bubble gums flapping again. Who am I kidding they never stop.