SaltyCajun.com lake area banner

Notices

Go Back   SaltyCajun.com > Fishing Talk > Inshore Saltwater Fishing Discussion

Inshore Saltwater Fishing Discussion Discuss inshore fishing, tackle, and tactics here!

LMC Marine
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04-08-2014, 11:14 AM
BassYakR's Avatar
BassYakR BassYakR is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lake Charles
Posts: 3,551
Cash: 505
Default

Sounds like a good plan to me... Need to know someone in the "know" to get the ball rolling.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-08-2014, 11:18 AM
eman eman is offline
Swordfish
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,033
Cash: 556
Default

CCA is to busy leaning on this. http://www.nola.com/outdoors/index.s...se_louisi.html
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-08-2014, 11:23 AM
bayouchub bayouchub is offline
Tripletail
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: la
Posts: 965
Cash: 2,578
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eman View Post
Ohhh no. Not $7.50 one time per year. Lol
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-08-2014, 11:31 AM
eman eman is offline
Swordfish
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,033
Cash: 556
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bayouchub View Post
Ohhh no. Not $7.50 one time per year. Lol
Really don't care about the money, it's so they can get more scientific research. Why?,they ignore what research that is out there now.
# trout limits
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-08-2014, 11:35 AM
BassYakR's Avatar
BassYakR BassYakR is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lake Charles
Posts: 3,551
Cash: 505
Default

Id be willing to guarantee that that extra money is never spent on research of any kind! If it was for actual research to help the ecosystem in our area to keep this area the sportsmans paradise for future generations then I don't mind paying the extra money. BUT im pretty sure that this will not happen.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-08-2014, 11:54 AM
"W"'s Avatar
"W" "W" is offline
Catch fish in DA face!!
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Big Lake LA
Posts: 32,974
Cash: 7,829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadams View Post
I'm sure they would but u need an organization such as cca to lean on em.....they got a limit changed w no scientific data... Surely they can talk big business into doin a tax write off.... Everyone wins cca looks like a hero. Port writes it off... Fisherman preserve their lake


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I can provide 1000xs more evidence that we have an erosion problem than what they proved we needed a 15 trout limit
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-08-2014, 12:06 PM
MathGeek's Avatar
MathGeek MathGeek is offline
King Mackeral
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 2,931
Cash: 4,452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by "W" View Post
I can provide 1000xs more evidence that we have an erosion problem than what they proved we needed a 15 trout limit
Actually, some rock walls along the ship channel would probably be effective in reducing saltwater intrusion into the marsh also, especially if they were a nearly unbroken line with just a couple of cuts to allow boat traffic to pass (like the jetties). If this can be pitched as the primary motivating factor (along with erosion control) it might even be possible for some of the BP money to be redirected to the project.

It makes more sense from a cost and long term maintenance viewpoint than attempting a saltwater barrier across the channel at the jetties. The basic idea is to maintain more of a gradient with saltier water being kept in the channel, and lower salinities in the lake. If salinities in the lake were lower, then the weirs could be open more days each year to allow bait and fish to flow back and forth between the lake and the marsh. Looks like many parties could win in this arrangement, protecting the marsh from saltwater intrusion, protecting the banks from erosion, and maintaining and improving the inshore fishery.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-08-2014, 12:36 PM
tngbmt tngbmt is offline
Sand Trout
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: bmt
Posts: 21
Cash: 528
Default

with all the 'hot bite' posts from here from guides i thought that trouts were jumping in the boat by themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-08-2014, 12:38 PM
BassYakR's Avatar
BassYakR BassYakR is offline
Ling
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lake Charles
Posts: 3,551
Cash: 505
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tngbmt View Post
with all the 'hot bite' posts from here from guides i thought that trouts were jumping in the boat by themselves.
what reports? I haven't seen a single report lately from this side of the state! all have been from the east.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-08-2014, 12:42 PM
BuckingFastard's Avatar
BuckingFastard BuckingFastard is offline
Red Snapper
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Carlyss
Posts: 1,180
Cash: 2,347
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BassYakR View Post
what reports? I haven't seen a single report lately from this side of the state! all have been from the east.
oh yea the "dularge dinks" argument thread.... they really do catch a lot over there and they post lots of good pics.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-08-2014, 12:50 PM
toodeep toodeep is offline
Trophy Trout
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: raceland
Posts: 299
Cash: 949
Default

IF every boat that went out every day caught their limit. just using 100 boats. that would be 1000 trout left in the water everyday that have to eat only a given amount of food equal a dead lake in a few years.. the limit needs to raised to keep the fish and food supply in balance. fish are no different than deer. DMAP says you need to X amount of does to keep herd in check.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-08-2014, 01:36 PM
cgoods17's Avatar
cgoods17 cgoods17 is offline
Tripletail
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: lake charles
Posts: 611
Cash: 866
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by toodeep View Post
IF every boat that went out every day caught their limit. just using 100 boats. that would be 1000 trout left in the water everyday that have to eat only a given amount of food equal a dead lake in a few years.. the limit needs to raised to keep the fish and food supply in balance. fish are no different than deer. DMAP says you need to X amount of does to keep herd in check.

you just went completely off subject, but thats okay.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-08-2014, 03:07 PM
eman eman is offline
Swordfish
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,033
Cash: 556
Default

apples and horse shoes?
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-08-2014, 04:29 PM
"W"'s Avatar
"W" "W" is offline
Catch fish in DA face!!
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Big Lake LA
Posts: 32,974
Cash: 7,829
Default

Hand grenades and flowers
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-08-2014, 06:56 PM
neus neus is offline
Flounder
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Lake Charles, La
Posts: 64
Cash: 589
Default

beer bellies and boobs
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 04-08-2014, 07:44 PM
Goooh's Avatar
Goooh Goooh is offline
Swordfish
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Broussard
Posts: 5,660
Cash: 7,266
Default

alcohol and pot
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 04-08-2014, 07:46 PM
Smalls Smalls is offline
King Mackeral
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South Central LA
Posts: 2,822
Cash: 3,948
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MathGeek View Post
Actually, some rock walls along the ship channel would probably be effective in reducing saltwater intrusion into the marsh also, especially if they were a nearly unbroken line with just a couple of cuts to allow boat traffic to pass (like the jetties). If this can be pitched as the primary motivating factor (along with erosion control) it might even be possible for some of the BP money to be redirected to the project.

It makes more sense from a cost and long term maintenance viewpoint than attempting a saltwater barrier across the channel at the jetties. The basic idea is to maintain more of a gradient with saltier water being kept in the channel, and lower salinities in the lake. If salinities in the lake were lower, then the weirs could be open more days each year to allow bait and fish to flow back and forth between the lake and the marsh. Looks like many parties could win in this arrangement, protecting the marsh from saltwater intrusion, protecting the banks from erosion, and maintaining and improving the inshore fishery.
I'm shocked that any rock is going in anywhere. Last I heard, National Marine Fisheries was shutting down every attempt to rock coastline or anything. Said it destroys fish habitat.

All good points though. All of this would make a lot of sense, and would definitely solve a lot of problems. Would probably satisfy a lot of people. The big issue behind the weirs is salinity and holding it down. Reduce that, like you said, and e'ry body happy, happy, happy!!
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 04-08-2014, 09:33 PM
jchief's Avatar
jchief jchief is offline
Calcasieu Extreme Rods
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Carlyss, America
Posts: 10,371
Cash: 13,314
Default

One thing on this, I have also heard about them proposing to dredge the channel and put the spoil in the lake inside a rocked in area as they are doing on the channel now. There was a plan to fill in almost all of the Long Point area with spoil several years ago.

Going to have to keep an ear open to this.

Industry is the ones who pay to keep the channel open and at depth now. Long term, the rock will be cheaper than dredging, but it will take a while for them to finish what they started.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 04-09-2014, 06:11 AM
Goooh's Avatar
Goooh Goooh is offline
Swordfish
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Broussard
Posts: 5,660
Cash: 7,266
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jchief View Post
One thing on this, I have also heard about them proposing to dredge the channel and put the spoil in the lake inside a rocked in area as they are doing on the channel now. There was a plan to fill in almost all of the Long Point area with spoil several years ago.

Going to have to keep an ear open to this.

Industry is the ones who pay to keep the channel open and at depth now. Long term, the rock will be cheaper than dredging, but it will take a while for them to finish what they started.

Industry does not pay that, it is the Army Corps of Engineers via our tax dollars. They have allocated $10mm for the widening of a few miles this year.

You can call 504-862-1759 to find out when pertinent meetings will be held to voice your concerns and ideas.

Big business doesn't pay for anything, the govt pays for this stuff due to the economic impact of hindering the businesses that rely on the channel. They are there because of the channel, and only because of it - let the channel close up, and the businesses leave along with all their jobs and money....
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 04-09-2014, 06:26 AM
T-TOP's Avatar
T-TOP T-TOP is offline
Red Snapper
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: carlyss
Posts: 1,758
Cash: 2,569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goooh View Post
Industry does not pay that, it is the Army Corps of Engineers via our tax dollars. They have allocated $10mm for the widening of a few miles this year.

You can call 504-862-1759 to find out when pertinent meetings will be held to voice your concerns and ideas.

Big business doesn't pay for anything, the govt pays for this stuff due to the economic impact of hindering the businesses that rely on the channel. They are there because of the channel, and only because of it - let the channel close up, and the businesses leave along with all their jobs and money....
All of the local industies that share the ship channel, share the cost of dredging the channel. citgo, conoco, PPG, LNG etc. When I say dredging I mean maintaining the depth of the channel for ship traffic. The large dredge barges that we see every year in the channel dredging. I am not sure about the widening of the channel.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:26 AM.



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - [ARG:3 UNDEFINED], Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vB.Sponsors
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007 - 2008, PixelFX Studios
SaltyCajun.com logo provided by Bryce Risher

All content, images, designs, and logos are Copyright © 2009-2012,
Salty Cajun, LLC
No unathorized use is permitted
Geo Visitors Map