Weirs Closed

[Natural Light Kid]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Nothing. The problems behind the weirs are not natural. The dredging of the ship channel introduced saltwater into the system. That marsh could not tolerate the increase in salinity, and it was dying. That is precisely the reason for the weirs.

Removing the weirs would create a temporary increase in shrimp and crab numbers, but inevitably the marsh would die and you would have one large lake.

We've for a winner! That's where I was trying to go. Weirs are a big band aid for the ship channel.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by Cripley

Smalls I was on here last year when the weirs were closed it was one of the reasons I joined. If I misunderstood you I apologize. I appreciate your opinion and would enjoy continuing to receive information both sides.

Hey it's cool man. Things get heated with this topic from time to time. Its the proverbial natural resources management discussion. Something is done that not everyone sees benefit from, or they don't fully understand the purpose, and this is what happens.

Here is a link to a report on some of the projects in that area. The first paragraph is what I keep talking about. Over 60,000 acres of marsh were lost, which does not necessarily mean converted to open water, between 1950 and 1970, which roughly coincides with many of the deeper dredging projects on the Ship channel. That loss is why the weirs were put in.

http://lacoast.gov/reports/project/3891096~1.pdf

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Nothing. The problems behind the weirs are not natural. The dredging of the ship channel introduced saltwater into the system. That marsh could not tolerate the increase in salinity, and it was dying. That is precisely the reason for the weirs.

Removing the weirs would create a temporary increase in shrimp and crab numbers, but inevitably the marsh would die and you would have one large lake.

Listen to this right here ^^^^^^^, the ship channel is one of the main culprits for saltwater intrusion, its also the reason there is a year round trout fishery in Big Lake rather than a largemouth bass fishery. The ship channel is the whole reason Lake Charles area is thriving. The weirs are there to mitigate for the ship channel. Its that simple. That area is not supposed to be saltwater, saltwater kills plants that are not salt tolerant.

Over 50 years ago, the saltwater barrier was installed north of Lake Charles, for the reason of keeping saltwater at bay, and had nothing to do with wigeongrass, ducks, CCA, oysters, chupacabras, black panthers, or anything, it was to keep saltwater out of a freshwater system. This was over FIFTY years ago, so its nothing new.

Go to Holly Beach and take a 5 gallon bucket of seawater and pour it in your yard and watch what happens (you won't have to mow that area)

[Natural Light Kid]

Originally Posted by outdoorsman

What did Mother Nature do before placement of weirs? Seams kind of like this global warming crap. Let's scare the sheepeople into thinking what we want them to. In my opinion a weir is sort of like blocking a canal that they want to keep people out of due to big money private water BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Better question would be what did mother nature do before the ship channel? The ship channel does a lot more harm than people are wanting to talk about either because they don't realize it or because it's so vital to SWLA's economy. I'm no scientist and have no scientific data to back this but the need for a "saltwater barrier" in Westlake is a result of the ship channel too. If you could revert things back to before man, I'm sure mother nature could take care of herself, but we are taking about YEARS of man made issues (large and small) that are compounding.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by biglaketiger

Like today, the wife says hey lets take the kids behind the weirs and see if we can get some crabs to boil tonight, nope, can't go hun, no fun,

There are several places you can go catch crabs in Cameron Parish and not even need a boat to do it

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by outdoorsman

What did Mother Nature do before placement of weirs? Seams kind of like this global warming crap. Let's scare the sheepeople into thinking what we want them to. In my opinion a weir is sort of like blocking a canal that they want to keep people out of due to big money private water BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You don't have to buy into the manmade global warming, but you need to be aware that the sea levels are rising (due to polar ice caps melting), our land is subsiding (due to numerous things, mainly manmade levees, causing lack of sediment, freshwater, etc.) and saltwater is getting further and further into our marshes and will for the forseeable future, its much bigger than a weir keeping someone from going crabbing or catching some redfish. Much much bigger than that.

The ship channel was dug for the shipping industry in Lake Charles. Without the ship channel, Lake Charles wouldn't be much of anything, it relies on the shipping industry. The saltwater barrier was put in place over 50 years ago to mitigate for this. Weirs were installed later. Its that simple

[Natural Light Kid]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

You don't have to buy into the manmade global warming, but you need to be aware that the sea levels are rising (due to polar ice caps melting), our land is subsiding (due to numerous things, mainly manmade levees, causing lack of sediment, freshwater, etc.) and saltwater is getting further and further into our marshes and will for the forseeable future, its much bigger than a weir keeping someone from going crabbing or catching some redfish. Much much bigger than that.

The ship channel was dug for the shipping industry in Lake Charles. Without the ship channel, Lake Charles wouldn't be much of anything, it relies on the shipping industry. The saltwater barrier was put in place over 50 years ago to mitigate for this. Weirs were installed later. Its that simple

Very nicely put.

[Cripley]

So here the kicker guys I by all means support the ship channel for economic reasons we GOT to have it. So let's here what is the solution I especially would like to hear from the guys who support the weirs.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by Cripley

So here the kicker guys I by all means support the ship channel for economic reasons we GOT to have it. So let's here what is the solution I especially would like to hear from the guys who support the weirs.

You've got to have some kind of salinity control. Like MG has said, the weirs are one level of control. There is a proposal to install some sort of saltwater barrier at Calcasieu Pass. MG likes the idea of rocks along the length of the channel. Both would work, both face considerable hurdles before they could happen.

You have to have something there to protect that marsh. If you don't, its gone. Multiple levels of salinity control will be the only way to protect the marsh and allow for public uses such as fishing and crabbing to be minimally effected by weir operations.

One thing that no one seems to have considered is why the entire ship channel was not rocked instead of the weirs being installed. Maybe there is a reason they decided on this complex levee and weir system instead of the simple move of rocking the entire channel. I would be curious to know that myself.

[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.

[noodle creek]

Originally Posted by Natural Light Kid

Would completely removing the weirs solve the fishing/crabbing problem?

That along with a few other changes. Look at Sabine lake, it's black and white. Put all scientific data aside and just use common sense, weirs closed=bad fishing. It doesn't take an expert to figure this out. Boy i love how scientists like to discredit observations made by people who fish the lake at least 100 times a year for last 10,20,30 years.

[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.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

That along with a few other changes. Look at Sabine lake, it's black and white. Put all scientific data aside and just use common sense, weirs closed=bad fishing. It doesn't take an expert to figure this out. Boy i love how scientists like to discredit observations made by people who fish the lake at least 100 times a year for last 10,20,30 years.

does Sabine have a ship channel like Big Lake? therein lies your answer

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

That along with a few other changes. Look at Sabine lake, it's black and white. Put all scientific data aside and just use common sense, weirs closed=bad fishing. It doesn't take an expert to figure this out. Boy i love how scientists like to discredit observations made by people who fish the lake at least 100 times a year for last 10,20,30 years.

Sabine lake is a different system. Major differences between the two.

For one, there are two freshwater inflows into the Sabine, the Neches and Sabine Rivers. Big Lake has one, that also happens to be disrupted by a saltwater barrier.

It has nothing to do with discrediting fishermen. Fishermen see fish, and crabs, and shrimp and say the marsh is fine. A wetland scientist looks at the plant community and sees rapid changes occurring. Changes that, if left unchecked, will result in massive expanses of open water where marsh once existed. It has happened, there is proof.

Sabine and Big Lake are different systems. You can't compare the two without considering the major differences. There is definitely more freshwater flowing into Sabine than there is into Big Lake.

BTW, back in 2002, plans were put in motion to install water control structures on the east bank of Sabine.

[Natural Light Kid]

Originally Posted by noodle creek

That along with a few other changes. Look at Sabine lake, it's black and white. Put all scientific data aside and just use common sense, weirs closed=bad fishing. It doesn't take an expert to figure this out. Boy i love how scientists like to discredit observations made by people who fish the lake at least 100 times a year for last 10,20,30 years.

I'm afraid some aren't seeing the big picture. If u dynamite the weirs the fishing will be great like right after Rita. Problem is it won't last. The marsh will die and all the things that make it great when the weirs are open will no longer be there. When the weirs are open, and bait enters the lake, it's great for the fishing. If the marsh is dead, and their is no bait entering the lake when the weirs are open, then you will not have good fishing or hunting. I think we (me included) need to try to look at the big picture and come up with a solution to solve the problemS, not the problem like we've been doing. Things are cyclical. You cannot have great fishing 24/7/365. Im sure back in the day before the ship channels, there were good times and bad times, but man wasnt there to freak out if they didnt load the boat up one day with fish. The estuary is dependent on lots of things including certain levels of salinity, freshwater flushings, thriving surrounding marshes, etc. I wish there was a way that we could return things back to as original as possible.

[mr crab]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

does Sabine have a ship channel like Big Lake? therein lies your answer

ummm yes

[mr crab]

Originally Posted by Smalls

Sabine lake is a different system. Major differences between the two.

For one, there are two freshwater inflows into the Sabine, the Neches and Sabine Rivers. Big Lake has one, that also happens to be disrupted by a saltwater barrier.

It has nothing to do with discrediting fishermen. Fishermen see fish, and crabs, and shrimp and say the marsh is fine. A wetland scientist looks at the plant community and sees rapid changes occurring. Changes that, if left unchecked, will result in massive expanses of open water where marsh once existed. It has happened, there is proof.

Sabine and Big Lake are different systems. You can't compare the two without considering the major differences. There is definitely more freshwater flowing into Sabine than there is into Big Lake.

BTW, back in 2002, plans were put in motion to install water control structures on the east bank of Sabine.

saltwater barriers on the neches and the sabine. Also the main determining factor for the freshwater flowing into Sabine is he dams on Rayburn and Toledo. When they ain't generating power at those dams, the water don't flow. And the gulf pours directly into sabine...straight shot. It doesn't sit off to the side of the channel like B.L. does, so if anything, I would say Sabine receives more of a direct saltwater influx from the gulf?

[MathGeek]

Smalls, I agree there are challenges when assigning importance to competing hypotheses when multiple factors are in play. We've developed new analysis techniques (based on multivariate analysis techniques in other fields) that are effective in unravelling food web dynamics of complex ecosystems given sufficient years of data. With a decade of data, inferences are possible with greater statistical confidence than possible now. If hypothetical causes are relatively uncorrelated, confident inferences may result from only 5-7 years of data. Empirical methods to estimate interaction matrix elements in the coupled Lotka-Volterra equations are something of a holy grail in population modeling. Our analysis approach shows promise toward accurately estimating species interaction coefficients (matrix elements) as well as making inferences regarding competing hypotheses in food web dynamics.

For example, suppose current trends hold for a decade (they might not). If the mean annual relative condition factors of a given length class of a given species (say bull redfish > 800 mm) have a strong correlation (r > 0.8; P < 0.05) with oyster stock assessments, but relatively weak correlations with other hypothetical factors (r < 0.5; P > 0.2), then there would be greater statistical confidence that oyster reef condition plays the strongest role in bull redfish condition. Likewise, suppose a different length class/species combination (say redfish 400-500 mm TL) is most strongly correlated with the exchange between the marsh and lake (r > 0.7; P < 0.05), but only weakly correlated with other factors (r < 0.5; P > 0.2); one could confidently infer that weir operation has a strong role. Finally, suppose that the shortest sampled length class of specks (290-400mm TL) is most strongly correlated with exchange between marsh and lake (r > 0.8; P < 0.05), weakly correlated with population of speckled trout (r > 0.5; P < 0.05), and uncorrelated with other factors. This would suggest a rank ordering of weir operation (lake-marsh exchange) then speck overpopulation (limits) above other hypotheses regarding the relative condition factor of specks 12-16" TL.

Right now, there are three years of data, and we'll have a fourth year by the end of June. More can be said than with one or two years of data, but less than possible with a decade of data. For example, if the speck limit were a dominant factor in the lake's food web impacting redfish and drum and gafftops as well as specks, one would expect that the condition factor of specks (especially the shorter length classes, since they have the highest populations) would be more strongly reduced than the relative condition factors of redfish. This is because the food competition is stronger within a given species than with other species. One would also expect Kn of different length classes and species to be highly correlated with each other, since the underlying cause would be the same. However, that is not what we see. The Kn of shorter specks has been between 0.95 and 1.05 in all sampling years (2011, 2012, and 2013); whereas, the Kn of redfish in the 500-650mm length class (that tend to stack up strongly at the weirs) has dipped below 0.95. Weir operation seems to be having a bigger impact on redfish between 20-26" long than the change in the speck limit. This seems more likely than not with available data , but cannot be inferred with a 90% or 95% confidence level. With a decade of data, this apparent inference might wash out in the noise or it might be established with greater confidence.

Another factor to consider is that Kn for all length classes and species (except for Gaftops 450-550 mm TL and bull redfish) rebounded strongly in 2013 over 2012. Only the shorter length classes of specks and redfish 400-500 mm TL topped 1.0 (returned to normal). Most length classes and years had Kn increase by about 5%, whereas specks (combined lengths) had a Kn increase of 9% (+/- 1.5%). This rebound cannot be explained by a recovery of the oyster reefs. However, the rebound does coincide with much lower salinity levels in the lake for the first six months of 2013 (compared with 2011 and 2012) that allowed the weirs to be opened and bait to flow back and forth from the marsh and lake. Based on available data, it seems more likely than not that the exchange with the marsh plays a significant role in relative condition factors in these cases. Once again, this inference might wash out in the noise with a decade of data, or it might be established with greater confidence.

Salinity levels have been a bit in 2014 than in the same period in 2013, but lower than 2011 and 2012; however the weirs have hardly been opened so exchange with the marsh has been small. If we had LDWF's 2014 oyster stock assessment data (not available yet), we could weight the different factors and make some Kn predictions for each length class and species based on past years and our current understanding of the relative importance of each factor. If the 2014 oyster stock assessments are still down, I expect Kn's closer to what was measured in 2012 than in 2013.

Louisiana law mandates wildlife resources be managed with the "best available" science. My issues with the speck and tripletail limits is that CCA pushed for more restrictive regulations with no data at all. Available data was not reviewed; there were no hints of stock assessments; existing data from trawl studies and LDWF's fishery independent surveys was not consulted. In contrast, oyster stock assessments and the best available fisheries dependent data for Big Lake both suggest that oyster dredging is doing real and lasting harm. Volumes of published scholarly papers document valuable ecosystem services provided by oyster reefs, additional annual fisheries production around restored reefs, and the negative consequences on estuaries from the destruction of oyster reefs.

It is sad to think that a humble relative condition factor study may constitute the "best available" data on the state of the fishery in Calcasieu Estuary, but until LDWF and CCA improve their scientific committment, this may be the situation. Air Force support for the project dried up about the time of the sequester and furlough, right before I left the Academy and moved back to Louisiana. The study moves forward on a bit of private funding, exiting equipment, many volunteer hours, and kindness of those who let us weigh and measure their fish. Will we manage to get hundreds of fish weighed and measured in a three week window every year from now until 2021? I don't know.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by mr crab

saltwater barriers on the neches and the sabine. Also the main determining factor for the freshwater flowing into Sabine is he dams on Rayburn and Toledo. When they ain't generating power at those dams, the water don't flow. And the gulf pours directly into sabine...straight shot. It doesn't sit off to the side of the channel like B.L. does, so if anything, I would say Sabine receives more of a direct saltwater influx from the gulf?

But freshwater inflows are still greater when they occur. You have a much larger drainage area for the Sabine and Neches rivers than the Calcasieu.

I admit, I did miss the Neches SWB though.

For whatever reason saltwater has had a greater effect to this point on Big Lake than on Sabine.