Thoughts on CCA meeting tonight on state of Calcasieu fishery

[fishwater]

Yeah i mean CCA is one way to do it but that money goes to the entire state and we see what has been done in the past 4 years. They have the data we saw last night way before we have seen it but have not addressed the problem until now. I have lost my trust in CCA for the time being, all we hear from any of the people that were at the meeting is we will look into it thats not good enough anymore. I dont live in lake Charles but they are a chapter that you would think could get things accomplished with as many people that live there and have some influence in govt.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Reggoh

I didn't realize that there was so much full time flow between the lake and the marsh through the fish slots and lower gates being opened on moon cycles. If you are only concerned with access to the marsh and the boat bay is closed, you would say the weirs are closed all the time... when in essence the shrimp, fish, and crabs can travel back and forth in the provided slots.

Is water flow being restricted? Sure... but to say the weirs are totally choking off the lake of bait is just not true.

Good point. Boat travel back and forth is not essential to the health of the fishery. High levels of exchange of shrimp, fish, and crabs are essential.

[jchief]

Originally Posted by fishwater

Yeah i mean CCA is one way to do it but that money goes to the entire state and we see what has been done in the past 4 years. They have the data we saw last night way before we have seen it but have not addressed the problem until now. I have lost my trust in CCA for the time being, all we hear from any of the people that were at the meeting is we will look into it thats not good enough anymore. I dont live in lake Charles but they are a chapter that you would think could get things accomplished with as many people that live there and have some influence in govt.

I know a lot of the guy's on the board and in this chapter. I hope to start making meetings and talking to them.

That said, if it don't work, I'll be glad to help form another organization and I have been involved in many and formed a few over my 37 years in the fire service. And I have formed many good relationships with legislators.

That said, if we want to try and get a bill on oystering in the upcoming session, we need someone from our area to put the bill foward and since the upcoming session is fiscal, each legislator only gets 5 such bills and it needs to be put in early, pre-filed is best.

It would be great if we can get Senator Morrish on board with this as he was the one that presented the other CCA bill to start with. A complete ban will not fly in my opinion. Will have to be some type of compromise. Also, here is a list of the Senate Natural Resource Committee that the bill will have to go through.

Natural Resources Committee
Committee Members

Senator Gerald Long (Chairman)
P.O. Box 151
Winnfield, LA 71483
(318) 628-5799
longg@legis.la.gov

Senator Rick Ward, III (Vice-Chairman)
3741 Highway 1
Port Allen, LA 70767
(225) 246-8838
wardr@legis.la.gov

Senator R.L. "Bret" Allain, II
600 Main Street
Suite 1
Franklin, LA 70538
(337) 828-9107
allainb@legis.la.gov

Senator "Jody" Amedee
2109 S. Burnside Ave.
Suite A
Gonzales, LA 70737
(225) 644-1526
amedeej@legis.la.gov

Senator Norbèrt N. "Norby" Chabert
P.O. Box 2417
Houma, LA 70361
(985) 858-2927
chabertn@legis.la.gov

Senator Jean-Paul J. Morrell
New Orleans Lakefront Terminal Building
6001 Stars & Stripes Blvd., Suite 221
New Orleans, LA 70126
(504) 284-4794
morrelljp@legis.la.gov

Senator Dan "Blade" Morrish
119 W. Nezpique Street
Jennings, LA 70546
(337) 824-3979
morrishd@legis.la.gov

Senator Page Cortez (Interim Member)
101 W. Farrell Road
Bldg. 5, Suite 100
Lafayette, LA 70508
(337) 993-7430
cortezp@legis.la.gov

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by Reggoh

I didn't realize that there was so much full time flow between the lake and the marsh through the fish slots and lower gates being opened on moon cycles. If you are only concerned with access to the marsh and the boat bay is closed, you would say the weirs are closed all the time... when in essence the shrimp, fish, and crabs can travel back and forth in the provided slots.

Is water flow being restricted? Sure... but to say the weirs are totally choking off the lake of bait is just not true.

Which has been my argument several times. I've stated before on this forum that there were slots in the weirs that kept the system from being 100% shut off. People didn't listen.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Which has been my argument several times. I've stated before on this forum that there were slots in the weirs that kept the system from being 100% shut off. People didn't listen.

I don't think those underwater slats are always open. If there is a visible height difference in front and behind, there should be some observed current (though small) if the underwater slats are open. I've seen it dead still from close enough to be sure that no flow or exchange was occurring.

[jchief]

They are not on every weir and some are always opened. I believe the ones at Lamberts are always open.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by jchief

They are not on every weir and some are always opened. I believe the ones at Lamberts are always open.

Thanks for the clarification. I'll try and have a closer look next time I'm there.

I tend to think about the lake/marsh exchange as a percentage of the maximum possible on any given day. 100% on a given day would be all weirs having all their gates open. Then the percentage is lowered from there according to the proportion of the maximal cross sectional area that is actually opened and for what portion of the 24 hour day.

I know the focus is often on Lambert's and Grand Bayou weirs, but the West Cove weirs are also important from the viewpoint of feeding the lake via exchange with the marsh. The weirs over on that side have mechanical gates that can close and cover the slats.

I know 5% of the total area open is better than zero, but it's still a small fraction of the maximum possible exchange, and I bet whatever remains open at Lambert when all the gates are closed is less than 5%.

[Reggoh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Thanks for the clarification. I'll try and have a closer look next time I'm there.

I tend to think about the lake/marsh exchange as a percentage of the maximum possible on any given day. 100% on a given day would be all weirs having all their gates open. Then the percentage is lowered from there according to the proportion of the maximal cross sectional area that is actually opened and for what portion of the 24 hour day.

I know the focus is often on Lambert's and Grand Bayou weirs, but the West Cove weirs are also important from the viewpoint of feeding the lake via exchange with the marsh. The weirs over on that side have mechanical gates that can close and cover the slats.

I know 5% of the total area open is better than zero, but it's still a small fraction of the maximum possible exchange, and I bet whatever remains open at Lambert when all the gates are closed is less than 5%.

MG, the slideshow that CRPA did covers all of the weir operation. I found it very informative.

If I remember correctly, 2 of the 5 East side weirs only have upper gates and their fish slots are underwater where the lower gates would normally be. The other 3 weirs have fish slots on the sides and he said those lower gates are usually opened on lunar cycles even if the upper gates remain closed. Sometimes only the upper gates are opened. Sometimes all gates are opened.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Reggoh

MG, the slideshow that CRPA did covers all of the weir operation. I found it very informative.

If I remember correctly, 2 of the 5 East side weirs only have upper gates and their fish slots are underwater where the lower gates would normally be. The other 3 weirs have fish slots on the sides and he said those lower gates are usually opened on lunar cycles even if the upper gates remain closed. Sometimes only the upper gates are opened. Sometimes all gates are opened.

Thanks.

Hopefully, they'll post the presentation to put all the definitive info in one convenient place.

[Reggoh]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Thanks.

Hopefully, they'll post the presentation to put all the definitive info in one convenient place.

http://coastal.la.gov/wp-content/upl...n-7-9-2014.pdf
http://coastal.la.gov/wp-content/upl..._CCA-final.pdf


BOOM!! Here ya go!

The first is the history of the weirs and their operation... the 2nd is the scientific stuff that im sure you will spend hours poring over.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Thanks.

Hopefully, they'll post the presentation to put all the definitive info in one convenient place.

The power point presentation has pictures of each weir and shows the under water gate design of each weir.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Reggoh

http://coastal.la.gov/wp-content/upl...n-7-9-2014.pdf
http://coastal.la.gov/wp-content/upl..._CCA-final.pdf


BOOM!! Here ya go!

The first is the history of the weirs and their operation... the 2nd is the scientific stuff that im sure you will spend hours poring over.

BOOM!! That was awesome. Thanks.

[Reggoh]

Mr. Perrodin did mention that the Grand Bayou structure has some type of flap structures underwater which allow water to flow out of the marsh but do not allow water to flow in. Like a check valve. I don't think he said how many there were or how big they were. He did not have a slide showing the layout of grand bayou weir... only the 1 picture of the boat bay.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by Reggoh

Mr. Perrodin did mention that the Grand Bayou structure has some type of flap structures underwater which allow water to flow out of the marsh but do not allow water to flow in. Like a check valve. I don't think he said how many there were or how big they were. He did not have a slide showing the layout of grand bayou weir... only the 1 picture of the boat bay.

Got that in a report. I'll try and scan it and post it.

[Smalls]

Biggest thing to me in that second slide show is slide #11. From 1989 to 2004, 3300 acres of marsh were restored in the CCWS. One hurricane wiped it out. I would like to see what has happened since 2012, but I'm sure there's not enough data yet. So, when weirs are operated, marsh is gained. When they are not, marsh is lost.

Can this be disputed?

["W"]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Biggest thing to me in that second slide show is slide #11. From 1989 to 2004, 3300 acres of marsh were restored in the CCWS. One hurricane wiped it out. I would like to see what has happened since 2012, but I'm sure there's not enough data yet. So, when weirs are operated, marsh is gained. When they are not, marsh is lost.

Can this be disputed?

Yea marsh was lost in 2005 from hurricane Rita and Ike
And levee was blow out

Keeping weir gates open will not have that great of effect like you think

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by "W"

Yea marsh was lost in 2005 from hurricane Rita and Ike
And levee was blow out

Keeping weir gates open will not have that great of effect like you think

Are you nuts? Do you not see what you just said?

With the levee blown out, more saltwater would have been able to enter the marsh.

Why do you think all that marsh disappeared prior to 1988? Hurricanes every year?

Weren't the weirs not operated after Rita? Wasn't the argument y'all made that the fishing was better after the hurricanes because the weirs were open? Doesn't that also correlate with the increased land loss and increased salinity in the marsh after 2005?

Come on Waltrip. The proof is there that the weirs were working. Quit trying to argue that they weren't.

["W"]

The "committee " hired the quacks to take the heat while the "committee " gets ready for duck season


Keeping Grand bayou open is not going to affect that marsh

Did you hear how many times they said " could"

["W"]

Before Rita and Ike the weirs stayed open 90% of the time

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by "W"

Before Rita and Ike the weirs stayed open 90% of the time

Maybe so. Doesn't explain the difference between pre-1988 and post-1988.

None of that changes the fact that after the weirs and levee were in place, the land change was reversed, and land was gained. None of that changes the fact that salinities decreased after the levee and weirs were in place.

Where does it stop? All of your arguments are still proving false. After the weirs were installed, land was gained, salinities decreased. What else could have caused that? Hmmm? Can you find anything else that could have?