Land use report, phase I

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Land

Use
Report
Phase I

south
centrol
plonni 9
I n
L

n,
a
C May 1980
deve ooment
commission
P.O. BOX 846 THIBODAUX, LOUISIA.NA 70301

~1p~652;144;16;88q!~2p~856;224;36;20q-~2p~~~~~~~ATA ~. No. 2. 3. ~ ~ ~~~~~ 'I, A C C ~ 0.
SHEET
4. Title and Subtitle ~S. Report Date
May, 1980
LAND USE REPORT: PHASE 1 6.

7. Au~hor~q(s~q) ~q8. Pc~qH~orm~ing Organization Rcpt.
Edwin J.~*Durabb, ~q@P~qroject Director No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address ~10. Proi~ect/T~ask/Wo~rk Unit No.
South Central Planning & Development ~6qG~0qm~qy~qnission
P.O. Box 846 ~q1~q1. Contract/Grant No.
Thibodaux, Louisiana 70301 ~q(~q:~2qPA~-~2qLA~-06~-48~q-1090

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report ~& Period
Louisiana Department of Urban and C~qc~n~0q=ity Affairs Covered
Office of Planning and Technical Assistance Final 1979~-1980
5790 Florida Boulevard (P.O. Box 44455) 14~.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804
1~5. Supplementary Notes

N/A

16. Abstracts
This.. report provides base data on land use and land over in the South Central Planning
& Development Com~nission district available to local planners and local government
officials.

~7. Key Words and Document Analysis. 17~c. Descriptors
N/A

17~b. Id~entifi~er~s/~qOp~en-End~ed Terms

N/A

17c. COSATI F~qi~qeld/G~qr~qo~qup
18. Availability S~qt~qa~qt~qe~qr~qn~qen~qt~: 19~q.. S~qec~qj~q. icy Class (This 21. No. of ~qPa~qs~qe~qg~q;
South Central Planning & Development Co~6qm~6qn~6qission ~0qR~qep~qo~qr~qc~2q@ 199
~0qU\~q'~qC~q-~q1-~q@~8qS~20qa~qW~0ql~4qF~qr) I ~6q-
20. Security Class (This 22. Price
Page
U ~qN C I F I ~qE D
FORM ~qNT~q1~q5~q-3~q5 (REV. ~q10-73~q? ENDORSED BY ANSI ~qAND LIN ~qE~qS~qC~0qO. THIS ~qF~q0~q1~q0~q-~q1 MAY BE REPRODUCED ~qu~qs~qc~qo~qm~qm~q-~q;~2q@~qC ~q.~q2~q.~q@~q,~2q-7~q.

LAND USE REPORT: PHASE I

For The

SOUTH CENTRAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

Prepared By

SOUTH CENTRAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

THIBODAUX, LOUISIANA

THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT CPA-LA-06-48-1090 BY SOUTH CENTRAL
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT WAS
FINANCIALLY AIDED THROUGH A COMPHRENSIVE PLANNING GRANT FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND THROUGH THE ASSISTANCE OF
THE STATE OF LOUISIANA, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, AND
BY SOUTH CENTRAL PLANNING & DEVELMENT COMMISSION.

Property of

MAY 1980
U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413

SOUTH CRURAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMINr COWISSION, INC.

POLICY BODY COMPOSITION

NAME (BY PARISH) REPRE,=ING TITLE

ASSUMPTION

Gilbert Dupaty Minority Citizen Interest Businesman

Ridley P. Guillot Police Jury Police Juror

Floyd Labarre Town of Napoleonville Mayor

Elvin Simoneaux Police Jury Police Juror

LAFOURCHE

Jervis Autin Town of Golden Meadow Town CounciLnan

Sondra Barrios Town of Lockport Director, ODA

Earl J. Brown Minority Citizen Interest Businessnan

Ronald Callais Police Jury Police Juror

Irving Legendre, Jr. Police Jury Police Juror

John Robichaux City of Thibodaux Mayor

ST. CHARLES

Philip Cortez Police Jury Police Juror

Clayton Faucheaux Police Jury Police Juror

Curtis Johnson Police Jury Police Juror

COMMI SS ION M@MERS (Cont d)

NAME (BY PARISH) REPRESENTING TITLE

ST. JAMES

Pep Detillier Police Jury Police Juror

Whitney Hickerson Police Jury Police Juror

Dale Hymel, Sr. Town of Gramercy Town Councilman

Paul Keller Police Jury Police Juror

Guy Poche Town of Lutcher Town Councilman

ST. JOHN THE BAFrIST

Dick Sorapuru Police Jury Police Juror

Brent Tregre Police Jury Police Juror

Richard Wolfe, Police Jury Police Juror

TERREBONNE

Howard Dion Minority Citizen Interest Businessman

Donald Landry Police Jury Police Juror

Eduard Lyons City of Houna, Mayor

Ray Marcello Police Jury Police Juror

Ernest Moss Minority Citizen Interest Businessman

Blake Pitre Police Jury Police Juror

ORGANIZATIONAL STAFF CHART

FUI.I.r-TIME STAFF

Ba.rry Brupbacher - Executive Director

Edwin J. Durabb - Director of Planning/HUD Planner

Cheryl S. Breaux - Section 8 Administrator/HUD Regional Planner

Mike Strausser - CDBG Grant Administrator

Jim Edmonson - Director of Grant-,qnmship and Program Development

Irwin Fingerman - CZM/208/Solid Waste Planner

David House - EDA Coordinator

Marcia Shaffer Public Information Specialist

Jessica Chenier Bookkeeper/Accountant

Betty Maggio - Executive Secretary

Ka.ren Weaver - Secretary

Jo Anna Moore Secretary

Sarrmy Campbell Student Intern

PART-TIME EMPLOYEES

Joe Horan - Executive Assistant

Gwen Galiano - Secretary

Mary Vaughn - Librarian (will not be employed by July 1, 1980)

Janice Till man - Secretarial Assistant

STUDENTS

Ray Babin - Drafting

Jody Chenier - Draftino,
t>

Clyde Harmer - Accounting

PROJECr SrAFF

PROJECT DIRECIIOR

Edwin J. Durabb - Director of Planning

CO=IBUTING AUIHORS

Dr. Paul Leslie - Nicholls State University

Irwin Fingennan - CZM/208/Solid Waste Planner, SCP&DC

Jim Edwnson - Director of Program Development and
Grantsmanship, SCP&DC

DRAFTING

Ray Babin - Head Draftsman

Jody Chenier - Assistant Draftsman

EDITING AND GRAPHICS

Marcia Shaffer Public Information Specialist

Edwin J. Durabb Director of Planning

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

PLANNING AREA OF SOUTH CTZ?rRAL PLANNING
I AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

PART I - THE NATURAL =ING

CHAPTER I - CLIMATE.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Terrperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Winds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

CHAPTER 2 - GEOLOGY

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Economic and Structural Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Sunnary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

CHAPTER 3 - GBDMORPHDLOGY

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Recent Geologic History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Recent Alluvial Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Sumk,u-y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

CHAPTER, 4 - SOILS

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
General Soil Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

CHAPIER 5 - NATURAL VEGETATION

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 57
Forested Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Non-Forested Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Mixed Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Surmary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

CHAPTER 6 - DRAINAGE AND GROUNDWATER RESOURCES

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Drainage Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

CHAPTER 7 - THE WEILANDS ECOSYSTEM

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Sediment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Detritus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Living Organism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
O-ther Properties of Estuaries . . . . . . . * * , , , , '99
A View of the Ecosystem of the Estuarine Basin . . . . . 101
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

PART I I - LAND USE

CHAPTER - POPULATION AND SETTLENINT PATIERNS

General History . * * * , , , * * * * , * * * , , , * , ill
Settlemnt Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

CHAPTER 2 - AGRICULTURE

History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Sugarcane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Other Crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Farmland Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

a=R 3 - INDUSTRIAL LAND USES

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Industrial Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
The Mississippi River Parishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
St. John the Baptist Parish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Oil and Gas Exploration And Support
Facilities: The Coastal- Parishes . . . . . . . . . . 144
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

CHAPTER 4 - CONFLIM IN LAND USE

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Uses of the Land Versus the Environment . . . . . . . . . .163
Conflicts Between the Uses of Ilan . . . . . . . . . . . . .175
Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Sumary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

LIST OF TABLES

P.AIG I THE NATURAL SEITING

TABLE 1. 1
Morgan City 1951-1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

TABLE 1.2
Houma 1951-1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . 11

TABLE 1. 3
Ca.rville 2 SW 1951-1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

TABLE 1. 4
Average Relative Humidy New Orleans, Louisiana . . . . . . 15

TABLE 1.5
Air Quality Monitoring Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

TABLE 1.6
Ambient Air Quality Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

TABLE 1. 7
Suspended Particulate 1978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

TABLE 1.8
Nitrogen Dioxide Bubbler 1978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

TABLE 1.9
Sulfur Dioxide Bubbler 1978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

TABLE 4.1
Soil Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

TABLE 5. 1
Percentage of Tree Species in Cypress-Tupelo Gun
Swan'p and Bottomland Hardwood Forest of the
Barataria Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

TABLE 5.2
Percentage of Plant Species in Fresh Marsh
Portions of Barataria Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

TABLE 5. 3
Percentage of Plant Species in Brackish
Marsh Areas of Barataria Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

TABLE 5.4
Percentage of Plant Species in the Saline Marsh Region
of Barataria Basin . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

TABLE 5.5
Plant Species Conposition of Spoil Banks and
Natural Levees in Coastal Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

TABLE 6.1
Lake Pontchartrain Basin Stream
Segment Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

TABLE 6.2
Terrebonne Basin Stream Segneent Description . . . . . . . . 82

TABLE 6.3
Terrebonne Basin Major Rivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

TABLE 6.4
Terrebonne Basin Major Lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

TABLE 6.5
Parishes in Lower Mississippi Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

TABLE 6.6
Mississippi River Drainage Basin: Major Tributaries . . . 91

TABLE 6.7
Punpage of Water in South Central Louisiana
by Parish, Source, and Principal Use, 1975 . . . . . . . . 94

TABLE 7.1
Physical Properties Governing Productivity
of Estuarine System

TABLE 7.2
Ecological Roles of Sow Estuarine Species 103

TABLE 7.3
U. S. Comercial Landings . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

TABLE 7.4
U. S. Conm-@--rcial Landings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

TABLE 7. 5
Benefits of the Estuarine Ecosystem . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

PART II - LAND USE

TABLE 1 * 1
Total Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

TABLE 1.2
White Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

TABLE 1.3
Black Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

TABLE 2. 1
Major Crops in the South Central Region . . . . . . . . . . 130

TABLE 2.2
Total Cropland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

TABLE 3. 1
Recent History of Industrial Investment by Parish
for East South Central Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

TABLE 3.2
Existing Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

TABLE 3.3
St. John the Baptist Parish Proposed Industry . . . . . . . 142

TABLE 3.4
St. John the Baptist Parish Employment
By Industry, 1978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

TABLE 3.5
Manufacturers in Lafourche Parish (1972) . . . . . . . . . 146

TABLE 3.6
LandTarks of Resource Development in Lafourche Parish . . . 148

TABLE 3.7
Landmarks of Resource Development in Lafourche Parish. 150

TABLE 3.8
Landmarks of Resource Development in Lafourche Parish. . . 151

TABLE 3.9
Employment in Oil and Gas Related Primary and Secondary
Industries in Lafourche Parish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

TABLE 3.10
Percent of Offshore oil and Gas Production
in the Houma District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

iii

TABLE 3.11
Eaployment in Seafood Industries in Lafourche Parish
for 1975-1976 By Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158

TABLE 3. 12
Canwrcial Seafood Landings for Golden Meadow-Leevile Port . 159

TABLE 4.1
Major Reclamation Projects in the South Central
District to 1961 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

TABLE 4. 2
Surface Area of Natural and @kumiade Water Bodies
1931-1942) 1948-1967, and 1970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

TABLE 4.3
Highways Crossing Wetlands Areas in the South
Central Central District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176

TABLE 4.4
Sanitary Landfill Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180

TABLE 4.5
Sewerage Disposal Methods SCP&DC District . . . . . . . . . . 183

TABLE 4.6.
Fish and Shellfish Landings and Value for Louisiana . . . . . 186

TABLE 4. 7
Percentage of Trapping Harvest From Louisiana Wetlands . . . 187

TABLE 4.8
Average Annual Harvest of Pelts From Louisiana
Wetlands (By Species) 1970-1971 ThroLgh 1974-1975 . . . . . . 188

TABLE 4. 9
Annual Harvest of Pelts in Louisiana (All Species)
1967-1968 Through 1975-1976

TABLE 4.10
Average Annual Pounds of Meats From Louisiana Wetlands
(By Species) 1970-1971 Through 1974-1975 . . . . . . . . . . 190

TABLE 4. 11
Annual Harvest of Meats From Furbearing Animals In
Louisiana (All Species) 1967-1968 Through 1976-1977 . . . . . 191

TABLE 4. 12
Estimated Gross Economic Contribution ofa Wetland Acre
in the Barataria Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192

TABLE 4.13
Estimated Net Economic Contribution of a Wetland Acre
in the Baxataria Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

TABLE 4..14
Revised Estimate of Gross Economic Contribution of a
Wetland Acre in the Barataria Basin Based on U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

LIST OF FIGURES

PART I - THE NATURAL =ING

FIGURE 1. 1
Solar Radiation Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

FIGURE 1.2
Average Yearly Ten-perature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

FIGURE 1.3
Average Yearly Precipitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

FIGURE 2. 1
Geologic Tim Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

FIGURE 2.2
Louisiana Physiographi Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

FIGURE 2.3
Gulf Coast Geosyncline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

FIGURE 2.4
Salt Dome Geologic Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

FIGURE 2.5
Salt Dom Map . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
FiGURE 2.6
Cross Section of a Salt Dome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

FIGURE 2.7
Fault Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

FIGURE 3.1
Deltas of the Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

FIGURE 3.2
Approximate Position of the Shoreline During
Maxinm Gulf of Mexico Transgression . . . . . . . . . ... 38

FIGURE 3.3
Ice Age Louisiana Shoreline Greatest Seaward Advance . . . 39

FIGURE 3.4
Identification Map for Delta Lobes of the Mississippi . . . 41

FIGURE 3.5
Tim Sequence for Mississippi Delta Lobes . . . . . . . . . 42

FIGURE 3.6 1@
Life Cycle Cross Section of a Deltaic Plain . . . . . . . . 48

FIGURE 3.7
Geomorphological Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

FIGURE 4. 1
Soils of South Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

FIGURE 5.1
Vegetation of South Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

FIGURE 6. 1
Drainage Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

PART II - LAND USE

FIGURE 3.1
Manufacturing Shipments and Plants in East South
Central Louisiana, 1977 . ... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 136

FIGURE 3.2
Manufacturing Locations and Employment Levels
in East South Central Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

FIGURE 4. 1
Project Design Capacity: Mississippi River . . . . . . . . 166

FIGURE 4.2
Land Loss Acres Per Year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174

vii

DISTRICT LOCATION IN THE STATE

CITY LOCATIONS IN THE DISTRICT

Gramercv
Lutcher STJOHN
HE BAPTIS
ST JAM
Naooleonvill
Assuh;.PTIO ST. CHARU

Tlvbodaux

Lockport

Hou m a LAFOURCHE

TERSESONNE
Golden Meado

INMDUMON

The production of this se ries of reports under the HUD 701 Program

has been needed in our area for quite some time. Nu-nerous documents,

research papers, books, maps, etc., exist providing detailed descriptions

of the physical components of the South Central Area. However, there is

currently no one source available to present a complete overview of the

region without becoming embroiled in the minute details of the physical

parameters discussed in this document. This report is therefore an

attempt to collect and present such data in a single document for use by

the many clients served by South Central Planning.

The Report Series is divided into three phases:

(1980-81) 1. Description of Land Cover (Geology, Climate, etc./
Land Use) in the South Central Region

(1981-82) 2. Cor@arison of Land Use Changes from the 1973 Iand
Use and Data Analysis (LUDA) land use study to the
1980 Land Areal Resource Information System (LARIS)
land classification

(1982-83) 3. Project Future Land Uses and Policies to deal with
anticipated changes

The phasing of this report was necessary due to the limited financial

resources of the agency, the unavailability of essential land use data

this year, and the lack of personnel to do the vork.

1980-81 REPORT: DESCRIPTION OF LAND ODVER

The body of this year's report is divided into two sections.

Part I - The Natural Setting:

Chapter 1 - Climate
Chapter 2 - Geology
Chapter 3 - Geomrphology
Chapter 4 - Soils
Chapter 5 - Vegetation
Chapter 6 - Drainage and Groundwater
Chapter 7 - The Wetlands Ecosystem

Part II - Land Use:

Chapter 1 - Population/Settlement Patterns
Chapter 2 - Agriculture
Chapter 3 - Industrial Land Uses
Chapter 4 - Conflicts in Land Use

The above topics cover the main parameters of importance within our

region regarding land use. Special chapters on the Wetlands Ecosystem

and the Oil and Gas Industry were also added, due to the tremendous

importance these areas have for the region as well as the entire country.

CONCLUSION

We feel that the elements included in this year's report will

provide several inportant services to the user.

1. Provide a general information base about the region.

2. Provide a bibliographical source list if wre detailed inform-

tion is needed by the user.

3. Fill a gap in infonmtion availability for our agency.
4. Serve as a base for the many grant applications and requests

that utilize this kind of data.

5. Provide a resource document for local officials to use in

the planning process.

Although this report uses technical terms and descriptions, we have

attempted to compron-Lise the two considerations of easy readability and

technical information so as to reach the greatest range of people with

the information contained herein.

Finally, we intend to update this and subsequent reports to keep

the information current and usable to all who request it. This report

will be made available to local governmental entities for their use. We

hope that you, the reader, find this docunent interesting, informative,

and capable of meeting your planning needs.

Director of Plantfing

PA RT
I

THE NATURAL SETTING

CHAPrER 1 - CLIMATE

Edwin J. Durabb

INTRODUCTION

The climate of the South Central District has been categorized by

the Koppen-Geiger system of climatic classification as a "Cfa" type

climate, i.e. warm and moist with a warm summer (Muller and Oberlander,

1978). One reason for the moisture and heat that dominates our climate

is the Gulf of Mexico. This body of water provides the heat and moisture

supply for the entire eastern half of the United States for significant

portions of the year. The land area of our planning district sits

immediately adjacent to this moisture source. Water temperatures in the
Gulf, off the Louisiana coast, range from a low of 64OF in February to
849F in July (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1979). This accounts for the

moderating influence of Gulf air in the winter and hot, humid air in the

straner.

Another main factor in our climate is our subtropical latitude.

Although the geomorphology and climatic patterns of the United States

and Canada allow colder continental air to intrude into the region on

occasion, our subtropical latitude moderates the effect of these incursions

in the winter. We receive high levels of solar radiation and actually

receive more solar radiation than we lose to space for nearly eleven

months out of the year (see Figure 1.1). Thus, the main components that

shape our climate are latitude and proximity to the Gulf of Mexico. The

following is a brief sumnary description of the parameters that make up

the climate of the South Central Region.

FIGURE 1. 1

SOLAR RADIATION BUDGET
600
Outgoing terrestrial
radiation to space
500
Gain 0

7
400 - Deficit
CL

300

200
4-- Incoming solar
:3
CL radiation absorbed

100

w 0. 1 A
(y 10* 200 300 4e 5 do 6d* 700 900
SCPaDC
LOCAT 10 N
1AL
a-t tude (ON)

SOURCE: Muller Ek Oberlander 1979 - pg 71

TBUYERATUIRE

Yearly average temperatures for the region reflect the subtropical

latitude of the area, (see Figure 1.2). The area is categorized by

long, hot summers and short, cool spring, fall and winter periods.

Temperatures are uniformly hot with a high humidity in the summers.

Highest temperatures generally occur in the inland areas. Spring, fall

and winter generally consist of moderately warm humid periods dcminated

by tropical Gulf air, broken occasionally by Pacific or Polar continental

drier-cooler air masses. The polar air incursions occur most often in

the winter and can bring large sudden drops in temperature. In the

winter, as in the summer, the coldest local temperatures occur inland

and away from wetlands and water bodies. Extreme temperatures for the
district range from 11OF at Carville in the north in January, to lW'F

at the same station in August. (See Table 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 for detailed

temperature observations from three selected st ations.

The growing season in the southern part of Louisiana is extremely

long averaging over three-hundred days in the northern part of the

district and nearly three-hundred, sixty-five days near the coast.

Occasionally, an early frost or freeze can damage the agricultural

interests in the district since the main crop of sugarcane is a tropical

plant susceptible to freeze damage. However, the average number of days
when the minimum temperature drops below 32OF is only seventeen at

Carville, fifteen at Houma, and thirteen at New Orleans. Rarely do
temperatures drop below 209F anywhere in the district.

1Note that there are no recording weather stations in the northern part
of our district. Therefore, we have chosen the closest station avail-
able outside of the district boundary which is Carville, Louisiana.

FIGURE 1.2

M s s I s p p

L%
V.-

6
66.9*

67.4*
%7:Z
am. " 0= 67.4*

67.4*

L AKE Boy St
67.7
68.01

LAKE PWMAIN

ri q
rA.6' Pd,.d,.
F ... kli. . 69

LAKE
A SAL.0
9.3 if

r,.73,
S0,00
% 00

L@?

soam...l.
k2l

AVERAGE YEARLY TEMPERATURE

S"CE Map
by tf@ompil d by Wthor from worm. so-es
DISTRICT BOUNDRY provided U.S. Department of Comm.rc*
Scal. 1 500,000 Notio".1 OCGGnic & Atmoi,pheric Administraflam
Oalialcol *.-rias.scpam crofti"O...-
WTE Tid. -p iS K@mf f. ilWOr.tiom pl-.i.9
P.P.0s Wly.

----------

- - --------- ----

There are several factors that periodically effect the local climate

picture. These are:

1. Proximity to the Gulf of Mexico.

2. Proximity to wetland areas and inland waters.

3. Proximity to the Mississippi River.

4. Urban influences.

. Proximity to the Gulf of Mexico

Proximity to the Gulf of Mexico accounts for a significant increase

in yearly temperature. More iniportantly, the impact of occasional

surges of cold polar continental air is moderated by both wetlands and

the Gulf itself thus altering temperatures. Water stores large quantities

of heat and releases it slowly over time. This accounts for the fact

that water takes longer to warm up and cool down in relation to the land

surface. This fact causes a reduction in the temperature range over

water and the adjacent land-masses. This is reflected in the fact that

Black Mangrove, a tropical type plant intolerant to freezes or even

frost, is found inmediately along the coast. Although there are no

reporting weather stations on the coast in our distri-@t, the existence

of Black Mangrove suggests a mre n-oderate climate than in the interior
where temperature occasionally drops below 320F in the winter.

Proximity to Wetland Areas and Inland Waters

Temperature differences between water and land account for the sea

and land breezes that moderate temperatures along the coast. Louisiana,

with its vast inland marshes, swamps, bays and lakes, allows this nx)der-

ating effect of water to extend far inland. Sea and land breezes can

occur along lakes, for example, Lake Pontchartrain in the north of the

region, and the water moderates temperatures wherever it is located.

Since eighty-two percent of our district has water cover for most of the

year, the influence in climate is significant (South Central Planning &

Development Commission: 1976:1.)

Proximity to the Mississippi River

Since the Mississippi River is a large volune stream, local temper-

ature irregularities are sometimes felt due to temperature differences

between the water and the land. Whereas the Gulf of Mexico and local

lakes are usually warm, the river water is cold, especially in the

spring, causing localized fog and colder temperatures near to the channel.

Urban Influences

The predominantly rural South Central Planning and Development

District only has three significant areas of man-made influences that

alter temperatures. The cities of Thibodaux and Houna are large enough

to generate heat and change the local micro-climate. The large industrial

complexes along the River also produce enough heat to locally radse

temperatures significantly.

The following tables (Table 1.1, 1.2, 1.3) list climate sumaries

for three communities that possess complete data collection capacity in

or near our region. (Refer to Figure 1.2 for an overview of district

temperature differences.)

TABLE 1. 1

h1WAN CI7Y
1951-1973
LXf 290 041' N
1DA3 91 111 W
TI-WERAIURE (or) P11M.IPITATION TCFfALS (inchels)

Means a traw- s Mean Greatest Monthly Year
Month Naxl,,= Monthly Record Year I Day lRecord Year Mean
I Itigh LOW I
Jan. 64.3 43.6 53.9 84 1957 31st 12 1962 lIth 4.14 10.64 1966 .0

Feb. 66.6 45.5 56.1 86+ 1957 5th 17 1951 3rd 4.89 11.22 1966 .1

Mardi 72.2 51.4 6i.@ 88 1955 16th 28+ 19GB Ist 3.61 9.41 1973 .0

Apri 1 80.0 59.5 69.8 92 1955 30th 39 1953 19th 4.53 15.30 1973 .0

hly 85.7 65.3 75.5 96 1953 28th 45 1960 l3th 4.46 10.30 1969 .0

June 90. 6 70.9 80.8 101 1954 30th 55 1956 3rd 4.99 15.82 1963 .0

0 JU ly 91.8 72.9 82.4 99 1973 21st 60 1970 4th 7.90 20.34 1964 .0

Aug. 91.6 72.5 82.1 100 1962 12th 56 1956 23rd 6.65 10.05 19(30 .0

Sept. 88.9 69.4 79.2 99 1970 l3th 46 1967 30th 6.G4 18.00 1973 .0

'Out. 82.0 59.3 70.7 94 1954 4th .34 1952 30th 3.98 9.75 1959 .0

W,)V. 72.6 50.2 61.4 91 1973 5-th 28+ 1959 l8th 3.61 11.65 1963 .0

Dec. 66.7 45.5 56.2 84 1.951 7th 12 1962 13th 5.44 11.80 19G3 .0

YrAt 7-3.4 53.8 69.2 101 19fA June 1:2) + 1962 Dec. 60.84 20.34 July .1
30th 13th 1964

+ Also recorded on earller dates. SDURCE: U.S.

Morgan City Supplemental Data
Mean Number of days Maximum 90 0 and above: 94 days
Mean Number of days Minimum 32 0 and below: 12 days
Greatest Daily Precipitation: 7.17" - June 17, 1963

TATIE, 1. 2

IICUMA
IA,r 290 35' A 1951-1973
WAG 900 44' W Elevation 15 feet

'III&MIUM. (or, PRBCIPITNrION WrAIB (indies)
Means Dctruws Mein Greatest Mont1ily Year Snow, Sleet
I,= Monti, ly Record Makimul" Ilontkily Year
Itigh low I
Month Maximn Min Year I Day Record 177_t

Jan. 65.0 44.5 54.8 83 1952 2nd 12 1962 11th 4.58 12.36 196G .0 .0

reb. 67.3 46.3 56.8 85 1957 4th 13 1951 3rd 4.8G 10.28 1966 .1 2.5 1958

March 72.7 52.0 62.4 88 1965 25th 28+ 1968 1st 4.13 9.50 1973 .0 .0

April 79.8 59.6 69.7 90+ 1965 13th 34 1971 8th 4.37 14.06 1973 .0 .0

I&I'y 85.3 65.1 75.3 96 1953 28th 44 1952 12th 4.78 15.44 1959 .0 .0

Julie 90.1 70.3 80.2 99 1954 30th 55 1966 2nd 6.45 14.08 1963 .0 .0

Ju ly 90.9 72.5 81.7 99 1960 22nd 59 1967 16th 8.09 18.85 1-954 .0 .0

Aug. 90.7 72.2 81.5 100 1951 15th 60 1967 12Lh 6.51 10.55 1960 .0 .0

Sept. 87.7 69.2 78.5 98 1964 1st 44 1967 30th 8.05 19.41 1973 .0 .0
CICL. 81.5 58.6 70.0 94 3.962 9th 31 1952 30th 3.10 11.60 1659 .0 .0

I\bv. 72.8 50.5 61.7 87+ 1956 2nd 25 1951 18th 3.20 13.26 1963 .0 .0

00c. 67.5 46.2 56.9 84+ 1956 7 th 15 1-962 l3th 5.17 11.56 1967 .0 .0

YEAR 79.3 58.9 69.1 100 Aug. 12th 12 Jan. Ilth 63.59 19.41 Sept .1 .0
1951 1962 1973
+ Also on earlier dates SOUfff,: U.S. Department of Comwrce, 1975.

Houma Supplemental Data
Mean Number of days Maximum 90 0 and above: 83 days@
Mean Number of days Minimum 32 0 and below: 15 days
Greatest Daily Precipitation: 11.35" - May 31, 1959

TABLE 1. 3

CARVILI-E. 2 SW
1951-1973
Elevation 26 feet

LAT 3(P 12' N
LoiqG 910 071 W
'11-MIERAIMIE (Or) PRECIPITATION WrALS (inches)
Means n(tremes Mean Greatest Monully Year Snow, Sleet
Wily Record ar Day Ifean
K-L,l,um Mini. ;;@@Ot Day .!@@dte--qr P"iman blontlijy ear
jan 63.1 41.6 52.3 82 1957 31st 11 1962 11th 4.30 10.65 1966 less 1.0 1973
than
reb. 65.7 43.5 54.6 84 1.957 4 th 13 1951 2nd 5.39 14.36 19G6 1 2.0 1973
6hrdi 71.9 49.2 60.6 88 1967 15th 24 1968 Is t 4.20 9.32 1972 .0 .0
April 79.5 57.2 68.4 91 1955 30th 35 1971 801 4.32 11.22 1969 .0 .0
May 85.7 63.9 74.8 96-1. 1953 28th 43 1970 4 Lh 4.96 11.21 1959 .0 .0
June 90.9 69.8 80.3 100 1954 30LIt 55 1952 Ist 4.13 10.91 1957 .0 .0
July 91.7 72.3 82.0 100 1960 22nd 58 1967 15th 6.70 12.52 1959 .0 .0
Aug. 91.5 71.8 81.7 102 1962 l0Lh 60 1,956. 23rd 5.61 1-1.24 1960 .0 .0
Sept. 88.4 68.4 78.4 97+ 1963 4Lh 45 1967 30th 5.28 15.58 1973 .0 .0
Oct. 81-1 58.0 69.6 93+ 1962 13th 34 1957 28 Lit 2.66 9.51 1.964 .0 .0
Nov. 71.2 .19.0 60.2 87 l9r7l 2nd 25+ 1970 24 th 3.86 8.36 1957 .0 .0
Dec. 65.1 44.1 54.6 92 1971 31st 13 1962 13LIi 6.22 14.48 1971 .0 .0
YEAR 73. 8 57.4 68.1 102 Aug. 10th 11 Jan. 11th 57.63 15.58 Sept. .1 .0
1962 1962 1973
SOURCE: U.S. Department of C"merce, 1975.

+ Also recorded cm earlier (hites.

Carville Supplemental Data

0
mean Number of days Maximum 90 0 and above: 90 days
mean Number of days Minimum 32 and below: 17 days
Greatest Daily Precipitation: 5.85" - December 10, 1961

PRECIPITATION

Precipitation in the district is heavy throughout the year. There

are, however, t%o wet periods and one drier season. The two wet seasons

occur in July-August, and Deceirber, respectively.

The drier period extends from late Septenber to mid-Novenber (U.S.

Department of Conmrce, 1979). Rainfall in the sum)er is usually

associated with tropical air mass afternoon convection thunderstorms.

Precipitation is heavy but of short duration. Rainfall in the winter is

usually associated with cold frontal passages and, occasionally, low-

pressure areas in the Gulf of Mexico. This rainfall is moderate and

more widespread in nature. Sometimes heavy rains are associated with

tropical waves or stomis in the late sumner and fall.

Fran 1954-1976, nine tropical storms or hurricanes passed through

or near enough to the district to effect local precipitation (U.S.

Department of Interior, 1977).

Snow and sleet are extremely rare inland and almost non-existent

along the coast. For example, measurable snow has occurred only once in

Houma during the period of 1951-73 and twice in Carville, Louisiana.

Figure 1.3 illustrates that maxinum yearly precipitation occurs

soniewhat inland from the coast line. This is probably due to the warn-dng

effect of the land as mist ocean air passes over it. The large expanse

of coastal marsh make the transition from a water to land base extremely

.Slow.

Relative hunidity, the component of the local climate that makes

our weather most uncomfortable, is high throughout the year. Table 1.4

illustrates the yearly mans of Relative Humidity for New Orleans. The

driest and wettest monthly averages are also included.

FIGURE 1.3

M S S i S I p p I

ON.
61.28*
60.44"

63.00*

62"

6 .56
ZG@225V
lbolon

54..

is in -0
56 58

LAKE
57-241' MAUM

LAKC PWCHOrRAIN
ej

'41
% to 60.20"

rift 06 a 'j

63.4d" S@

62.81'
,onkiln
SA LAKE
4MMM-000"',
4

64" 65.7?
% 4* 0 10 000
W.' 62
%
Q)
'ell 57-59'

LIT

AVERAGE YEARLY PRECIPITATION
Map conWilled by wittior firime. micks sulac
P. R by the U. S. Departmentl of Conscience
Naikx at Oceanic & Atmoophoic Adininislivilon
DISTRICT BOUNDRY Scale 1- 500.000 statistical woommarkims. SCPaW Omhiq Depmri@.
110TE-Thiso
nff Is meant for ill-tatlon planning
v.
porticoes on Y.

TABLE 1. 4

AVERAGE RELATIVE HUM1DI`IY

NEW ORLEANS, LDUISIANA

Midnight 6:00 A.M. Noon 6:00 P.M.

(Dry) March 83 % 85 % 61 % 65 %

(Dry) November 84 % 86 % 60 % 74 %

(Wet) July 89 % 91 % 66 % 73 %

YEARLY AVERAGE 85 % 88 63 71 %

SOURCE: U. S. Departmnt of Comwrce, 1979.

WINDS

Prevailing winds generally blow from a southerly direction for

about half the year. In the late fall, winter and early spring, intru-

sions of continental air into the region cause the resulting direction

to shift primarily to a northeast or northerly component.

Winds are generally light in the sumier with maximum speeds associ-

ated with the brief localized down drafts of afternoon thunderstoms.

Winds can occasionally be much stronger in the late sumier and fall due

to tropical storm or hurricane activity. For example, along the coast

at Grand-Isle, estimated peak winds during Hurricane Betsy exceeded 120

MPH. This extreme wind is rare and always localized to coastal regions.

In the winter, strong southerly winds or northerly winds associated with

low pressure system and high pressure centers blow for brief periods.

2
Wind velocities are generally higher in the winter. At New Orleans

average wind speed ranges from 6.1 MPH in August to 10.3 MPH in March.

The average being 8.4 MPH (U. S. Department of Goniwrce, 1979).

2New Orleans was the closest available station with wind data. There
are no stations within the SCP&DC district that keep this type of
record.

AIR QUALITY

Due to the recently developed heavy industries associated with the

petro-chemical industry in the South Central District, and in response

to the National Clean Air Act, Louisiana has-established an air quality

mnitoring and control Program. Table 1.5 lists the air quality monitoring

stations in and near the South Central Region. Table 1.6 lists the air

quality standards currently being used in Louisiana to mnitor pollutants.

Figures 1.7, 1.8 and 1.9 represent air quality monitor records (for

five selected status) for the year 1978 to provide a reference point to

determine the air quality in the SCP&DC district.

TABLE 1. 5

AIR QUALITY MONITORING SIIES

CITY S ITE NAME ADDRESS PARISH

Carville USPHA Hospital Highway 75 Iberville

Donaldsonville Riverdale Subdivision Highway 18 Ascension

Garyville Mobile Trailer Lot Azaleas, Apricot St. St. John

Geismar Wintz Mart Market Highway 75 Ascension

Harvey West Jefferson P.H.U. 1901 8th St. Jefferson

Metairie Borden Company 1751 Airline Hwy. Jefferson

Metairie East Jefferson P.H.U. 111 N. Causeway Blvd. Jefferson

SOURCE: Louisiana Air Control Commission, 1978: p. 3, 4.

MONITORING PAFLAA1ETERS

Continuous Non-Continuous

03 SO2 TSP S02 N02

Carville X X X X

Garyville X X X X

Geismar X X X

Harvey X X X

Metairie

Donaldsonville

02 = Ozone
S02 = Sulphur Dioxide
N02 = Nitrogen Dioxide

TSP = Total Suspended Particulates

TABLE 1. 6
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

(Non-continuous Data)

MAXIMUM ANNUAL ANNUAL CONVERSION FACTORS
PARAMETER 24 hour average GEOMETRIC ARITHMETIC (25*C 760mm Hq)
MEAN MEAN

Total Prim. 260 ug/m3 75 ug/m3
Suspended
Particulate Sec. 150 ug/m3 60uglm3

365 ug/m3 80 ug/m 3
Sulf ur Prim. (0.14 ppm) (0.03ppm) 3
Dioxide 3 3 ppmx2620=ug1m
260 ugim 60 ug1m
Sec.
(0.10 PPM) (0.02 ppm)
100 ugim3
Nitrogen Prim. 1015 ppm) 3
Dioxide 10ougIM3 F,Prn x 1880 ugim
Sec.
(0.05 ppm)

1.50COH/1000 0-60COH0000 0.75COH11000
Soiling Prim. linear ft. linear ft. linear ft.
Index

Sec.

SOLTEE: Louisiana Air Control Con-mission (1978), page 32.

01 N N (A (A
0 0 0 0 0 0 01
0 0 0 0 0 0

CARVILLE
cn USPHS HOSPITAL

GARYVILLE

TRAILER

GEISMAR
WINTZ MEAT MARKET*

HARVEY
WEST JEFFERSON PH.U

LN)
po

M E TA I R I E . ......
BORDENS COMPANY

x
z

01 (A
0 0 0 0 01 0 (31
0 0 0 0 0 0

CARVILLE

USPHS HOSPITAL

GARYVILLE

TRAILER

GEISMAR
En
WINTZ MEAT MARKET

HARVEY
WEST JEFFERSON PH-U

METAIR I E
BORDENS COMPANY

01 ()j Qj
0 0 0 0 c" 0 01
0 0 0 0

CARVILLE

USPHS HOSPITAL

GARYVILLE

TRAILER

GEISMAR

WINTZ MEAT MARKET

HARVEY
WEST JEFFERSON PH-U

META I R I E
BORDENS COMPANY

m
>
z

BIELIOGRAPHY

Louisiana Air Control Commission (1979) Ambient Air Data Annual
Report, 1978. Department of Health and Human Resources.

U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (1979) Climatological Data: Annual Summary
Louisiana, 1978, Vol. 83, No. 13. U. S. Department of Cayrwrce,
Environmental Data and Information Service, National Climatic
Center, Ashville, North Carolina.

Muller, R. A., and Oberlander, T. M. (1978) Physical Geography
rfbday: A Portrait of a Planet. Random House, New York, New York.

U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (1975) Climatology of the United States No. 20:
-Climate of Carville.2 SW Louisiana. U. S. Department of Commerce,
Environmental Data and Information Service, National Climatic
Center, Ashville, North Carolina.

U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (1975) Climatology of the United States No. 20:
Climate of Houma, Louisiana. U. S. Department of Commerce,
Environmental Data and Information Service, National Climatic
Center, Ashville, North Carolina.

U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (1975) Climatology of the United States No. 20:
Climate of Morgan City, Louisiana. U. S. Department of Commerce,
Environmental Data and Information Service,National Climatic Center,
Ashville, North Carolina.

U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (1979) Local Climatological Data: Annual Summary
with Comparative Data: 1978. New Orleans, Louisiana.

U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (No Date)
Tropical Cyclone In The Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean 1954-
1976. New Orleans Outer Continental Shelf Office, Bureau of Land
Management. U. S. Department of The Interior, U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C.

CHAPTER 2 - GBOLOGY

Irwin Fingerman

INTRCDUCTION

The South Central Region lies within a geologic basin which has

been collecting sedirwnt since the Mesozoic Period (see Figure 2.1 for a

geologic tirm scale). The depth of this sediment to crustal rock is

estimated to be in excess of 60,000 feet. Fluctuations in sea level,

over time, have caused these sediments to consist mainly of sand, gravel,

clay, shale and linie-stone, during their sequential deposition. During

the Cretaceous and Tertiary Period, carbonate coral reefs were distributed

in the northern portions of St. John the Baptist, St. Charles and St.

Jams Parishes, and a layer of salt was deposited during the Jurassic

Period. The sinking of the Gulf Coast Geosyncline (a belt shaped basin

area that subsides deeply) is a continuous process. The basin has down-

warped, partially from the weight of the sedimnt load it has collected

and partially from the conpaction of the sedimnt itself. This process

has gone on for over 200,000,000 years. Recently, the downwarping has

led to subsidence of surface features and to uplifting of the Pleistocene

terraces to the north (Figures 2.2 and 2.3). These features are currently

extant today in the Florida Parishes of Louisiana and in the South

Central District area.

FIGURE 2A
GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE

DURA710N IN
MnLICNS OF MILLIONS OF
YEARS-AM YEARS
ERA PERIOD EPOCH (approx. ) (approx. IMPORTAW BIOLOGICAL EVENns

Recent began 10,000 years ago
Quaternary RF-n-nt
Pleistocene 2.5-3 2.5-3
CDMOIC - Pliocene 13-15 First am
Miocene 12 First manlike primates
Tertiary Oligocene 11 First apes
Eocene 22 Grass spreads widely
Paleocene 68 5m-7 -First elephants
First horses
Extinction of dinosaurs, giant marine reptiles,
Cretaceous 72 flying reptiles, and ammonites
First primates
Angiosperms spread widely
kx=IC- 140 First snakes
Jurassic 65 First sequoias
First birds
205
First turtles and lizards
Triassic 25 First dinos-, and m=mals
L 230 Last giant amphibians
Permian 55 Extinction of trilobites, fusulinids, many corals,
crinoids, and other inver-cebrates
285 First mmmLl-like reptiles
Pennsylvanian 40 First conifers, ferns, and ginkgoes, first reptiles
..325 First flying insects
First fusulinids
Mississippian 25 Extinction of graptolites
350 Fi t seed plants
First land-living vertebrates
Devonian 60 First sharks
First forests and insects
410 First ammonites
PAI=OIC- Silurian 430 20 First land vegetation and air-breatting aai"ni

Ordovician 70 First bone bearing animals
First corals and bryozoans
500
First cephalopods
First pelecypods
First oonodonts
Cambrian 100 First graptolites
First gastropods
Appearance of many invertebrate phyla: arthropods,
L 600 mollusks, sponges, and echinoderms
Upper --Uthough many local subdivisions are
PREC.IMBRIAN Middle recognized, no worldwide system of naming
has been evolved. The Precambrian lasted
Lower for at least 3.5 billion years. Until
more is learned, this lengthy interval
may be divided into Lower, Middle, and
Upper without fornal names

SOURCE'. STOKES(1973): p9.122-123

FIGURE 2.2

LOUISIANA PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS

Uplands

I st c emn eI . . . . . . . .
Pei
T

Alluvial

V
y
al le

Deltaic
Plaim, Deltaic
Plain

SOURCE: MORGAN (1977)

FIGURE 2.3

GULF COAST GEOSYNCLINE

$--Zone of Subsidence q Zone of UPI ift

Uplifted Terraces

Deltaic Plal
Soo Level

Flood Plain

Recent Demic
Deposits
74vom
queftce's
.........

Subcrustal Flow

SOURCE- MORGAN (1977)

FIGURE 2.4

SALT DOME GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE

f'Y.:

GAS

00
WATER
ROLLOVER C@p RdCK
ANTICLINE

SALT OOME
FAULT
(OVERHANG)

(-7GOUGE

30URCE: TEXACO (1979)

FIGURE 2.5

SALT DOMES OF SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA

3 LAKE
0 AUREPA

LAKE
4 PONTCHARTRAIN

9
,0000000
13L KE
ORGNE

17
14 16

LAKE
SALV OR
19

21 BRETON
SOUND
20 23 24

26
25

28
30

32 35 36 J1 38 AQ
0 " 1 0 37
0
47 48
46
40 43 i P
41 4
OT i 44 5
0 ',@ 0 0

50 52
0 51

@ALTWNIIE-.URFACE
10 REFERENCE NUMBER NOTA-r10IN OF ACCURACY* SOURCE: COMPILIED AND EDITED BY
This Map IsTo Be Used For Planning .. E. LLACE. BASE MAP
Pur MO
Al DOMES A'.Poxes ONLY. Su-ey Mecamments DIFWlED(FROM LA. GEOLOGICAL
OISITRICT BOUNDARY Not To Be Mo; Fr- This MAP SUFIV EY 1959)
PARISH BOUNDARY

SAIX DCKE IOCATER MART

IBERVILLE PARISH PLAQUEMINES PARISH TERIUMONNE PARISH
1. Bayou Choctaw . . . . . 9S - 11E 13. Stella . . . . . . . . 14S - 23E 31. Bay Junop . . . . . . 21S - 14E
2. Bayou Bleu . . . . . . . 9S - 10E 24. Lake Hermitage . . . . 18S - 25E 32. Four Isle Dcme . . . . 21S - 16E
3. St. Gabriel . . . . . . 9S - .2E 27. Potash . . . . . . . . 18S - 15E 33. Dog Lake . . . . . . . 21S - 16E
4. White Castle . . . . . . IIS - 12E 28. Quarantine Bay . . . . 19S - 17E 34. Bay St. Elaine . . . . 22S - 18E
29. Lake Washington . . . . 20S - 26E 35. lake Barre . . . . . . 21S - 20E
38. Venice . . . . . . . . 22S - 30E 42. Lake Pelto . . . . . . 23S - 18E
ASCENSION PARISH 39. Delta Duck Club . . . . 21S - 20E 43. Caillou Island . . . . 23S - 20E
5. Darrow . . . . . . . . . 10S - 2E 48. West Bay . . . . . . . 23S - 30E
6. Sorrento . . . . . . . . IOS - 4E 49. Garden Island Bay . . . 23S - 32E OFFS11DRE

MAIN PASS AREA
ST. MARTIN PARISH LAFaiRmE PARISH 30. BL. 46
7. Lake Mongoulois . . . . IOS - 9E 14. Chacahoula . . . . . . 15S - 15E
11. Lake Chicot . . . . . . 11S - 10E 15. Raceland . . . . . . . 15S - 19E GRAND ISLE AREA
21. Valentine . . . . . . . 17S - 20E 37. Bl, 18
23. Cut Off . . . . . . . . 18S - 21E 46. BL. 16
ASSUMPTION PARISH 25. Bully Carrp . . . . . . 18S - 20E
8. Napoleonville 12S - 13E 26. Clovelly . . . . . . . 18S - 22E SHIP SHOAL AREA
36. Leeville . . . . . . . 21S - 22E 40. BL. 32
44. Timbalier Bay . . . . . 23S - 21E 41. Coon Point (BLIK. 39)
ST. JAMS PARISH 54. Bay de Chene . . . . . 19S - 24E 50. BL. 72
9. Hester-Vacherie . . . . 12S - 13E 53. BL. 113

JEFFERSON PARISH BAY MARCHARD AREA
ST. CHARLES PARISH 19. Barataria . . . . . . . 16S - 23E 45. BL. 2
10. Good Hope . . . . . . . 12S - 8E 22. Lafitte . . . . . . . . 17S - 24E
12. Paradis . . . . . . . . 14S - 20E WEST DELTA AREA
16. Bayou dEsAllemands . . . 15S - 20E 47. BL. 30
17. Bayou Couba, . . . . . . 153 - 21E ST. &M PARISH
18. lake Salvador . . . . . 16S - 23E 20. Belle Isle . . . . . . 17S - 10E SOU711 PELM AREA
51. BL. 20

SOMI PASS AREA
52. ffL. 2-7

ECONOMIC AND MUCIURAL GEOLOGY

Economically, the Gulf Coast geosyncline is very important. Deposits

of natural gas, oil, sulphur and salt are numerous. 'Ihese natural re-

sources have been found in the Miocene Age or younger strata. The South

Central Region is one of the nation's leaders in oil and gas production.

These deposits, to a large degree, depend upon a phenomena in the area

known as salt dornes. Salt domes are intrusions of a Jurassic salt layer

which, due to the enormous pressure subjected on the salt by overlying

sediments and strata and to its ability to flow to areas of less pressure,

are slowly rising toward the surface. This movement toward the surface

includes breaking through the overlying strata or deforming it (Figure

2.4).

Some of these domes of salt have risen as much as 40,00.0 feet from

their original depth and several even have surface expressions of over

100 feet man sea level (m.s.l.). Db salt domes have reached the

surface in the South Central District however. Figure 2.5 shows the

locations of salt domes within the South Central Region.

Oil and gas deposits are trapped by the piercement of strata by the

salt dome. This allows the deposits to pool along the side of the salt.

The deformation of the overlying strata also allows for pooling and

trapping of oil and gas deposits (Figure 2.6).

Sulphur, basite, gypsum, calcite and anhydrite are formed in a

portion of the salt dome called the cap rock (Figure 2.6). Anhydrite
precipitates out of groundwaters which come into contact with the salt,

and the other minerals are formed by alteration of the anhydrite. The

salt and sulphur can be mined. Examples of this inlcude Avery Island

FIGURE 2.6

CR03S SECTION OF A SALT DOME

CALCITE DNE
CAS04 TRANSITION
ZONE

BAS04
A HYDRI E Z Nj@,

M; 11h
M

SULPHUR

SOURCE MORGAN (1977)

and Jefferson Island, Louisiana which are currently operating salt mines'

on salt domes that have pierced the surface.

Oil and gas are also trapped by pinchouts of sand layers and by

faults. Faults are a disruption of the strata that change the general

alignment of the strata. Salt domes usually have numerous faults above

them. Sometimes, however, faults are caused by other means. The South

Central Region is crossed by a series of fault systems which trend west

to east (Figure 2. 7). These faults were brought on by the nature of the
deposition of sediment causing weak sections of strata to give way or by
salt layers applying pressure from below. Geologists are not certain

what the origin of the fault system is. In most cases in the South

Central District, these faults are buried by newer sedinjent and thus

have no surface expression.

SLWAARY

The geology of the region is complex. Certain geologic processes

are still continuing. The Gulf Coast Geosyncline continues to subside
and salt domes are still rmving toward the surface. Surface expressions
of recent geology will be discussed in Chapter 3, entitled Geomorphology.

FIGURE 2.7
FAULT MAP
OF
SOUTH LOUISIANA t

LAKE
MAUREPAS

LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN
Y<9

PAX 14

BRETON
41
41

NOTATION OF ACCURACY' SOURCE: Compiled and Edited
This map is to be used for planning W. E. WALLACE. Base Map M.1171ed
Purposes only. Survey measurements am from La. G"ogical Survey.111959) -1-1
LAND FAULTS not to be made from this map. SCALE: MILES
PIMSH BOUNDARY
DISTINCT BOUNDARY- 5 3 1 0 10 15 20 25

BEELIOGRAPHY

Craig, N. J. et. al. (1979) "Land Loss in Coastal Louisiana (U.S.A.)",
EnviromTie7-n-ta:l-Managerrient, Volume 3, NLurber 2.

Halbouty, Michel T. (1967) Salt Dorries Gulf Region, United States and
Mexico. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas.

Morgan, Joel David (1977) Geoscience and Man, Volume XVI-The Mississippi
River Delta - Legal Geomrphologic Evaluation of Historic Shoreline
Changes. School of Geoscience, Louisiana State University,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Murray, Grover E. (1961) Geology of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal
Province of North America. Harper & Brothers, New York, New York.

Stokes, W. E. (1973) Essentials of Earth History. Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Texaco (1979) Diagramatic Geologic Cross-Section Louisiana Gulf of
Mexico Salt Dome Basin. Texaco, Inc.

CHAPTER 3 - CBOMORPHOLOGY

Edwin J. Durabb

INTRODUCTION

The land area of the South Central District sits astride one of the

most dynamic geomorphological systems in the United States, the Missis-

sippi River Deltaic Plain. Prior to 6,000 years ago, the land axea now

exposed in our district was part of the continental shelf of the Gulf

Coast and largely under water. From that point to the present, the

Mississippi River distributaxy system has created several delta lobes

extending far out into what once was the Gulf of Mexico (Gagliano & Van

Beek, 1970). Figure 3.1 illustrates the aerial extent of the main

deltas formed by the river as it shifted its course in the coastal

waters of Louisiana. As one can easily see, these deltaic land forms

extended much further into the Gulf than their current land expressions

indicate. Severe erosion has destroyed land areas no longer occupied by

the main river channel. The dynamic cycle of delta building and erosion

has thus created the unique landscape that has delineated the resource

base and settlement patterns existing today in the district. The follow-

ing sections explain the alluvial processes that have shaped our land-

scape and the results of natural interactions on the system.

FIGURE 3.1

DELTAS OF THE MISSISSIPPI

-4)
,:01
6- y
A-
T'C"'
_f'@_/IILTA Cllltll

ST. BIRNAND
DELTA COMPLIX..."

CA)

L mcl
@DIILTA COMI
Ft A OU IM IN it -MO D IRN -
-'DELTA COMPLEX
tit

MAXINGO qj%
u
DELTA COM
ILI,
y, , :@, 11

."Ice wtol

SOURCE: GAGLIANO a VAN BEEK (1970)

RECENT GEOLDGIC HISMRY

The physical expression of the geology of Southern Louisiana can be

classified into four areas; the Pleistocene terrace, the marginal del-

taic plain, the deltaic plain and the alluvial valley. Northwestern

Assunption Parish lies in the alluvial valley area, the remainder of the

region lies within the deltaic plain.

The alluvial valley area consists of sediment (alluvium) deposited

within the Mississippi River Valley as it cut through the tertiary

uplands and Pleistocene terraces (see Figure 2.1 for their relative

ages). The deltaic plain area was originally under water.

Approximately 18,000 to 20,000 years ago the sea level was lowered

about 390 feet below current sea level. This was in response to conti-

nental glaciation. `Ihe shoreline was relocated close to the outer

margin of the continental shelf (Figure 3.2). The Mississippi River cut

a trench into the resultant Pleistocene prairie terrace in an effort to

adjust to the new sea level. This trench occurred west of the present

course of the Mississippi, probably in the western portion of the South

Central Region.

'Ihe sea level started to rise about 18,000 years ago. Stream

began filling in their valleys in an attenpt to adjust to the rising sea

level. About 6,000 years ago the rise.in the sea level slowed, but

continued until it reached its current level. The Pleistocene prairie

was inundated and the coastline relocated to what is now far inshore

(Figure 3.3). It was at this point that the Mississippi River began to
shape the landscape that currently exists in the South Central Region.

FIGURE 3.2

APPROXIMATE POSITION OF THE SHORELINE DURING MAXIMUM
GULF OF MEXICO TRANSGRESSION

a Floodplain Deposits
................

- - - - - - . .....
Sand Beaches

Pleistocene Praire TerTace

NEW ORLEANS

HOUMA
GULF F M

Miles
3b

SOURCE: MORGAN (1977)

FI G*U RE 3.3

ICE AGE LOUISIANA SHORELINE
GREATEST SEAWARD ADVANCE

PRESENT,
C'OAST

ICE AGE
COAST

SOURCE: MORGAN (1977)
mmmmj

RECENT ALLUVIAL PROCESSES

During the last 6,000 years after sea level adjusted itself to near

its present level, the Mississippi River began discharging huge amounts

of sediment onto the continental shelf. In the process of deposition,

areas that were once sea bottom were elevated above the ocean as deltaic

deposits accumulated. The River continually shifted course, always

seeking a shorter path to the sea, thus abandoning one delta and creating

a new one. During these manderings over the last 7,500 years, six

delta complexes have been created by the River. These are:

1. Maringouin 7500-6200 years ago

2. Teche 5700-3900 years ago

3. St. Bernard 4700- 700 years ago

4. Lafourche 3500-Present

5. Plaquemines/modern 1000-Present

Figures 3.4 and 3.5 illustrate the shifting courses of the Missis-

sippi as it deposited sedimnt across the continental shelf in Louisiana.

Of the major delta systems only the earliest (Maringouin) has no

surface expression. Deltaic lobe systems that have created the land of

the South Central Region include the Teche, Lafourche and St. Berna-rd

systems. Because these deltas were formed at different times and loca-

tions, they axe in various stages of development a@s landforms.

The deltaic depositional distributory system created discrete land-

form systems in the South Central Region. These are:

1. Natural Levees (Depositional Landform)

2. Inter-Distributary Basins (Depositional-Subsidence Landform)

3. Barrier Island/Beach Ridges (Erosional Landfo:rm)

FIGURE 3.4

IDENTIFICATION MAP FOR DELTA LOBES OF THE
MISSISSIPPI

INVIX iAAP

L A

WINAS PLAIN

/Not:
TECHEs 1, 2. 4
Be-
ST. BERNARDe 3 5,7,8,9, 11
4LAFOURC"Es
6, 10, 12, 14, 15
PLAQUEMINES-MODEM4, 0-
Nt'
k)
so

4
.0 14
to

'16
.7
14 A 13
C

c 0 k
44RINCOIJ 14
I" DELTA COMPLEX

SOURCE GAGLIANO a VAN BEEK

FIGURE 3.5

TIME SEQUENCE"FOR MISSISSIPPI DELTA LOBES

THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE PRESENT

ol 14 tj c@

PLAQUEMINES-
MODERN
DELTA COMPLEX
MISSISSIPPI RIVER

BAYOU LAFOURCHE

BAYOUS LAFOURCIII,' ANI) 7'1;'I?RI71101vxt:

LAFOURCHE
BAYOU BLACK DELTA
COMPLEX

BAYOU BLUE

-'RRFnONNE
BAYOU T1.

BAYOU SAUVACh.'

co AfISSISSIIIIII-IA LOVTRF ST. BERNARD
DELTA
COMPLEX
-BAYOU DES FAMILIES

r-n BAYOU TERRE AUX DOEUFS

w MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND BAYOU LAFOURCIIE

CYPREMORT

TECHE
DELTA COMPLEX

BAYOU TECIIH

MARINGOUIN
DELTA COMPLEX

SOURCE, GAGLIANOSiVAN BEEK(1970)

The natural levees extant in our region include those of the Lafourche,

St. Bernard and Modern deltaic lobes. The inter-distributary basins are

the Pontchartrain, Barataria and Terrebonne Basins (see Chapter 6). The

processes leading to the fomation of these features are discussed in

the following sections.

Factors Affecting the Current Landscape

There are four main factors affecting the landscape that have

interacted to create the current landforms of our region. These are:

1. Sediment Deposition

2. Erosion

3. Subsidence

4. Man-Made Alterations

Sediment Deposition

The delta building process created the existing landfonns by deposi-

tion of sediment first under water, then on the surface on the delta's

own sediment base. After the delta floor reached the level of the sea,

a system of ridges and basins formed a part of the deltaic plain. The

alluvial ridges called "natural levees" were fomed when the river

flooded during the springtime. Heavy suspended sediment (silt) was

dropped as soon as the flow rate of water decreased as a result of

overbank flooding. Later, vegetation also helped to hold back sediment.

The mature resultant landform consisted of the river flanked by two
ridges of silt, gradually sloping away from the channel (reflecting the
decreased sediment deposition away from the main distributary). Deposi-

tion in the inter-distributaxy basins consisted mainly of fine clays and

thus deposition here proceeded at a slower rate. The historical settle-

ment patterns in the South Central Region reflect a linear pattern

coinciding with these higher-drier ridges of good alluvial silt deposits

(see Part II, Chapter 1).

Erosion and Subsidence

Wo processes that run concurrent with, and continue after delta

building in coastal Louisiana, are subsidence and erosion. Erosion of

the deltaic deposits com from the sea, mainly during intense stom

periods. After deltaic deposition slows or stops in reaction to a

shifting river channel, erosion rapidly reclaims much of the area that

was once land. As waves, especially during storms, erode the coastline

of an abandoned deltaic.plain, features known as barrier islands are

produced. Barrier Islands have been defined as:

Elongate, thin structures parallel to the shoreline
of unconsolidated sedini-ents (usually sand) . . . They are
separated from the marshland by estuarines and wetlands
* * . and are generally located in areas with low
sloping coastal plains and moderate tidal range.

Conservation Foundation (1976), page 1.

The main factors shaping the barrier islands of Louisiana and

other areas of the United States have been described thusly:

Barrier islands are dominated by energy stresses.
Exceptional wave force, wind and tidal energies,
and ocean flooding are the predominant factors
which shape and regulate the barrier island ecosystem.
As a result of these factors, barrier islands are
extremely dynamic system, constantly subject to
change. Seasonal and other regular cyclic fluctua
tions in wave patterns and intensity combine with
irregular ocean storms and hurricanes to form and
reform island profiles. The beaches and dunes
migrate in response to these fluctuations. Stom
overwash periodically carries sand onto the island,
leaving substantial deposits of new sediments. The
result is that morphologically, the islands are in
a continual state of influx. While we generally
recognize the great impact that hurricanes have on
barrier islands, I should errphasize that they play
an equally important role in shaping the islands.

Conservation Foundation (1976), page 1.

In Louisiana the barrier island off the coast of Terrebonne and

Lafourche Parish is derived from silt deposits from the current delta of

the Mississippi River, as well as erosional revurking of old silt

deposits.

The stranded barrier beaches of Lafourche Parish were developed in

a similar manner.

These features serve as unique ecosyste-ns in themelves. They also

protect the vulnerable maxshlands behind thErn from rapid erosion. Cur-

rently, the barrier island conplexes in the South Central District are

diminishing is size due to lack of sediment re plenishment and man-made

alterations in the ecosystem.

Natural subsidence originates frcm tvo factors; conpaction and geo-

logic subsidence.

Structural geologic subsidence (see Chapter 2) has occurred for

millions of years. The weight of overlying sediment contributes to this

process. Compaction occurs as sediments "settle" or consolidate over

time, thus lowering the surface level. The results of these bko pro-

cesses is the eventual destruction of the entire deltaic landform once

deprivation has ceased in the area.

Man-Made Alterations

Three man-made alterations to the natural system have served to

speed up the destruction of the deltaic land mass that is the South

Central Region. These are:

1. Levee-Building

2. Reclamation

3. Channelization of Wetlands

Although the levee ridges are dry axeas for most of the year,

artificial levees were built to prevent the occurrence of disastrous

river flooding that constantly plaqued early settlers in the area.

These levees also halted deposition of new sedimnt onto the deltas

where they were built, thus preventing further deltaic developnent.

Reclamation, which has occurred mainly in this century, attempted

to expand settlement into the low-lying water covered basins flanking

the natural levees. During the natural process of subsidence, peat
(partially decomposed organic matter) accuTiulating on top of old sediments

in the basins helped keep pace with subsidence and maintain a surface

level near to man sea level. Once the land was drained and leveed,

however, this peat oxidized and decomposed causing the level of the land

to drop below sea level. The land must be kept dry by artificial means

(punps). Should the levees break, the area would revert to a shallow

water body due to the artificial increase in subsidence brought about by

the reclamation process.

Channelization of wetlands in the inter-distributary basins for

navigation and mineral exploration has contributed to land loss by

several means. Erosion and salinity changes brought about by these

straight deep channels have destroyed the vegetation that holds together

the peat and clay deposits that make up the basins. Without this pro-

tection most of the land succumbs quickly to erosion and is lost. (The

man-made alterations to the landscape will be discussed further in later

chapters.) Total land loss (natural and man induced) is currently esti-

mated at 16-21 square miles per year in Louisiana. The Geologic Subsi-

dence Rate is calculated to be approximately one foot per century from

natural causes (Gagliano and Van Beek, 1970).

Figure 3.6 is an illustrative example of a natural levee/basin

structure of a deltaic lobe moving through the various stages of delta

building and decay. Most of the delta lobes in our region fall to

classes B and C. The upper more extensive ridge/basin structures are

still intact while the lower ends of the delta have suffered the ravages

of erosion and subsidence. Figure 3.7 illustrates the various landforms

extant in the South Central Region at present.

SUDMY

It is apparent from the previous discussion that the entire region

is a young dynamic geomorphological area, the features of which have

shaped the patterns of settlenwent and the economic activity in the past

and in the present. lbre details on human habitation and its effect on

this enviromnent, can be found in Section II of this report.

FIGURE'3.6

LIFE CYCLE CROSS SECTION OFA DELTAIC PLAIN

PRESH MARSH
ORGANIC MUCK

GULF FLOOR @511@TY LA y

INITIAL. DEVELOPMENT OF DISTRIBUTAR TARY TROUGH.

SLIGHTLY BRACKISH MARSH FRESH MARSH

INITIAL PEAT -------
NArU AL.
LEVEE
4 t'
T
@TE@. JST@Rlj U, A@Y,TROUGH F@LL] Of TERICRATINGI-
AN
C4 , NEL,FILL,
@N
ENLARGMEXT OF PRINCIPAL DISTRIBUTARY AND ITS NATURAL LEVEES - CREATION OF MARSHES IN TROdGH.

le,

SRAC!:ISH MARSH
7-
.5,A,
NATURAL LEVEE
4

C MAXIMUM OEYELOPMENT OF DISTRIBUTARY ANL) ITS NATURAL LEVEES -CREATION OF SWAMP AS LEVEE SUBSIDES.

SWAMP BRACKISH MARSH

NATURAL LEVEE

D. DETERIORATION OF DISTRIBUTARY -ADVANCE OF SWAMP OVER SUBSIDING LEVEES.

-BRACKISH MARSH SALINE MARSH---I'
lu -j

3AY OR SOVNO
7k
N _7_ 1@
T 11- E F-_ 51 T 5
NATURAL
oo
LEVEE

CONTINUED SUBSIDENCE WITH PARTIAL DESTRUCTION OF MARIMES.

SOURCE: GAGLIANO 8 VAN BEEK (1970)

FIGURE 3.7

GEOMORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES

..... ... ... . ...... ....... .

MA PREPA

LAKE PONICHARTRAIN

...........
...............

.. ........
........ ........
:.. .........
............ .

..........

--X
................ X: .... ...
................

NXI.
...........
A

............

............ ............
6-h

PLEISTOCENE TERRACE

FLATLANDS & BASINS

NATURAL LEVEE

1 0 10 20 30 4 MILES
COASTAL MARSH
ESTUARINE BASIN SIDURCEj U.S. Corps of Engineers (1973) and
NOTATION OF ACCURACY Drafting Section of South Central
BARRIER ISLANDS a BEACHES THIS MAP IS TO BE USED FOR PLANNING Planning Development Commission(1980)
PURPOSES ONLY. SURVEY MEASUREMENTS
DISTRICT BOUNDRY ARE WT TO BE MADE FROM THIS MAP.
N. @PA.
R

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gagliano, S. (1973) Hydrologic and Geologic Study of Coastal Louisiana
Report No. 14: Canals Dredging and Land Reclamation in the
Louisiana Coastal Zone. Center for Wetlands Resources, L.S.U.,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Gagliano and Van Beek (1970) Hydrologic and Geologic Studies
of Coastal Louisiana, Report No. 1: Geologic and Geomorphic Aspects
of Deltaic Processes, Mississippi Delta SystEM. Coastal Resources
Unit, Center for Wetlands Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Gagliano S. et al (1973) Hydrologic and Geologic Studies of Coastal
Louisiana, Report No. 18: Volune I, II: Envirowxental Atlas
and Multi-Use Management Plan for South-Central Louisiana. Center
for Wetlands Resources, L. S. U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Morgan, Joel David (1977) Geoscience and Man Volume XVI - The
Mississippi River Delta: Legal Geomorphological Evaluation of
Historic Shoreline Changes. School of Geoscience, L. S. U.,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

The Conservation Foundation (1976) Barrier Islands and Beaches:
Technical Proceedings of the 1976 Barrier Islands Workshop.
The Conservation Foundation, Washington, D. C.

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (1973) Inventory of Basic Enviromi-ental
Data: South Louisiana. Engineer Agency for Resource Inventories,
U. S. Army Engineer Topographic Laboratories, Washington, D. C.

CHAPrER 4 - SOILS

13Y

Jarms B. Edmonson

INIRODUCTION

In general, soil refers to the loose surface of the earth as dis-

tinguished from solid rock. The four components which make up all soils

include: mineral matter, organic matter, water, and air. For example,

an ideal soil for gardening purposes would be as follows: mineral

matter - 45 percent; organic matter - 5 percent; water - 25 percent; and

air - 25 percent.

Soils undergo continual change, which escapes a casual study of

soil. Each soil has a life cycle in terms of geologic time. This evo-

lutionary nature of soil is effected by climate and living matter (plants

and animals), acting upon parent niateria.1 as conditioned by relief

(slope) over periods of time. As soils develop, they stratify into

layers called horizons. Typically there are three,general horizons: A,

B, and C (Floth, 1972).

The nature of the parent material, slightly altered or weathered

material from which soil is formd, has a decisive effect on a soil's

properties. These properties of the soil include texture (sands, silts,

or clay), mineralogical composition, and degrees of stratification. In

South Central Louisiana, the parent material is derived from water-

deposited sediments, or alluvium.

Alluvial-deposits are scattered into narrow, irregular strips bor-

dering streams, rivers and bayous. A common characteristic of this

parent material is its stratification layers of different sized particles

overlying each other. Mineralogically, alluvium is related to the soils

which served as a source of material.

Most alluvium is carried and deposited during floods. It is at

this period that erosion is most active and the carrying capacity of

streams is at a maximum. When a flooding stream or bayou overflows its

banks, its carrying power is suddenly reduced as the flow area increases

and velocity decreases. This causes the coarse sands and gravels to

settle along the bank, where they form conspicuous ridges called natural

levees. As the water reaches the back swamp or bottomland, the rate of

flow is slow enough to permit the silt to settle. Finally, the water is
left in quiet pools or marsh areas, from which it depoits the fine clay.

Levees are characterized by good internal drainage during periods of

low water, whereas the back swamp and marsh exhibit poor internal

drainage (see Chapters on Drainage and Geomiorphology).

Two orders of soil occur in South Central Louisiana. These are the

Histosols (organic soils found in the wetlands) and the Inceptisols
(mist soils found along the drainage ways). The suborders most typi-
cally found in this region include: H2-Saprists, made up of decomposed
mucks; and 12-Aquepts, seasonally saturated with water. The Saprists

are generally good for truck crops if drained, but axe usually left idle
when undrained. The Aquepts are gently sloping and if drained, support

most raw crops including corn, soybeans, sugarcane and cotton. If left

undrained, Aquepts soils are most commonly used as pasture or woodlands

(Ibth, 1972).
52

GENERAL SOIL TYPES ,

The general soil types and associations found in South Central

Louisiana are distributed and controlled directly by the gecmorphic

features of the landscape. These natural features include: levees;

backswanp; bottornland; drained swamp; drained marsh; fresh marsh and

pond; old distributary bayous and natural levees; brackish marsh, lake,

bay or pond; beach ridge; and salt marsh. Table 4.1 displays each soil

association, its characteristics, suitability, degree of limitation,

engineering characteristics, management, drainage factors and existing

usage (Gagliano, 1973).

Figure 4.2 shows the distribution of these soil associations through-

out South Central Louisiana. However, if one desires a more detailed

study of the soils in our region, the U. S. Soil Conservation Service

has soil surveys for five of our parishes, excluding St. Charles.

In conclusion, much consideration must be given to the soils

located in South Central Louisiana, their distribution and properties,

when guiding future development. Characteristics such as bearing capa-

city, shrink/swell potential under modified ground water levels, and '

trafficability place distinct constraints on the expansion of urban type

development. When ignored, development may either fail as manifested in

a number of reclamation projects or result in unwanted maintenance and

flood protection requirements (Gagliano, 1972).

TABLE 4.1

OLD DISTRIBUTARY DRAINED BACKSWAMP LEVEE
BAYOU 8 SWAMP
BEACH BRACKISH MARSH NATURAL LEVEES 'S- D@@?
S01 LS @FR TOMLAND LI-1
SALT RIDGE LAKE,8AY,.
MARSH OR P. POND
@av 0:1611:11m UMW AUJJVIAL
GyprIE101117 onownt-elity
FIES"'ATER oDn-nt-towry
YAMI 111MOWD SIVJM SWAW (TVVENT
SWAW turtics alluvial
SOIL utoon poll- MAINED MAINIM bad-in st-
t.] sh.,key FFMMI/SMX SWASIP bwtmry baidin
ASSOCIATION UMMMM &U.71FAM HAM smo mvXXIS" timm lbld@l!' dundee VA" -I- lb_ia
Organic layer of various fine imuid edsd -table on. teri.3 milt loss ururtble: -9-1c organic wate- thin o@ic thin onmic clay anrfaCe silt I.- :-Itt=
thicknes underlain by with shell ot thic aurlace astertal newral ',a, sawrej su,j"' unmi, surface under- and ab8ot I
-I. by clay: derI.Ja below
w, spo
GENERAL suit dwp`rmed uillme clays lompreote underlain by R." feet thick. md- feet. thick. lain by clay. 1 25" by 1-: silt clay wry Its. to
'Ity clya wMI f"t thick o to ofI I- Ld. fine I-am
_k silt clay lain by silty CIO- underlain by with tb
.it 7 cl sys with with -,ti- when loodad o- &ub- Ith sep-ti- clay! son, f -Zled e7st
wpa,stim when fl..,hd: -11 at- flooded: this Iowny thick pal- mtert titanic
W.t - wuck underlain by t o',:T:
.Ilghtl -fluid his* .,x-ic fill mtertLl. flues, lonsf
SOI L c,.Y. v lim to send -is .1 2-9' thick it. t,ace 1.1
and I to yr
.-r -11 cl": wesural
,w,,rsonent, high water table pe,annently high water table fl.t.tl-. fast thick
it- a-d-
fluid cj.y..
CHARACTERISTICS Pernanontly high @ter table prumnent high water table

SUITABILITY
7m SDIL not amitab)e hot suitable hot suitable art, suitable not suitable not suitable not suitable not suitable %uM-f&lr fel
HIQIWAY SUPKMX not suitable fair hot suitable 1.1-ponr not suitable not -Itbl. not suitable not -liable not suitable fal,-poor good-fair
HIGIwAY SWFASE not atiltblo fair not wmlt@hle fair not suitable not suitable hot suitable not suitable not indt-bt. fair fair
FOSTIMITUIL rill, not suitable not suitable not suitable ftir-poo@ not sW table not suitable not suitable not _ltbl, not votgbl. ftir-poo, tlir
SAND OR SHEIL not -liable good not -liable not sud table not suitable not suitable not suitabis not -liable not suitable not suitable gwd-fiy
(Gut@faoe feat@)
DEGREE
OF LIMITATION wry k 't to --ts
II)WESIMS (1-2 wry) wry se,wre severe wry we - re alight to -tP "T7 ws-pu se - - slight to -wm to -1 .- -r" 21 &@
Ll!qM. UOLUM very movers Saw- wry anue's .&-is to @@ -" wwm - light to -_ ww"m to wry Se"re "Vep, .rxierw . to se-_
(with -Ity -M s)stes) 91101L to nodknate -7 -M ""ps :3 tttt to wwm mwl* to wry "-r`e -wm slight to aodumtO
LANWAT`F--GAfM,'&-tANE5 wry sew" awwre wry
PIAY(1ff)Uffr,-PIMC ARM wry _w wry se ve re -&rate to sawre wry as - - ft"m sligLt to sewpa mwm to wry severe vewpa noderate
fnM.1--AWT-AlRP0W FUMAYS wry iwrwpe --w wry severe noderat. wry -.- severe .1lidt to --.- sw-m to wry sa-m mwm noderate
CANISFUZ-OW FAIINAYS very @re ry se - - slight to vadente wry sewre sevepe 'milidit to severe wow. to SeVers se-pe alight to anlerate
ENGINEERING
CHARACTERISTICS
SIMITFIACY rOU241AL high low high las high wry'high wedlua
SIMINK-Swal, IMIMIAL I- to high high high Iow Id gh high high high wry - nodersts
BEARING Mmxmi low - wry Im high Iow - wry low Iow Icw _ry I- low Icw - nuderst.
(1-2 -ry boildl.g,)
CMIXIC111 POMITIAL high high hIF% hich .*-is

dewr d- hrb., facklitt-
ducks -tfldb dew, duck. duck, ducks duck. nartme-type installations
MANAGEMENT dear swashore birds doe, ducks de, craw(Ish turinry, ducks. PI-I.,
rabbits squirrels rabbits, hves. 1.uwIl
q..l I

=1mjd"d'
DRAINAGE fl,,oding foorly drained foorly drained ma, le-1 p-ly drained poorly drulned I.-I P_rly dmfn@ skiiihtly wt
ild-ters near saw le-I wet to intreT . t
FACTORS -derately wet f lod.

re.tilential. I iwatm*. m pastum/ranw urban wildlife cropland. rec-timal. p,,,IdentIal.
-tIdIIM hk,it.t bird santuary wildlife -it i-rod -bi. 1.1hi'tai h.,,It.t pautum. c-P, t_'
crops, niarrana. -,d)-d. urban. -t"tl-.
I j
EXISTING USEAGE re.-tion urban tpkhei- being cleared trubustrial -111,112. Irlidlife. torroa
Mdu trial fill

SOURCE: GAGLIAN08NAN BEEK (1973)

FIGURE 4.1

S01 LS
OF
SOUTH LOUISIANA

LAK

LAKE PONTC4ARTRA00

Y@y c@

"No

"7-

j"
-Z

y
J@

1-1b

ALLUVIAL SOILS (NOtUld Lev"s- River VdIleYsl
UM PLEISTOCENE -TERRACE (Older uplands)
BASIN SOILS: Swamp Forest/ Bottomldrd
Clay Base Soils
MARSH/ SWAMP ORGANIC SOILS NOTATION OF ACCURACY
THIS MAP IS TO BE USED FOR PLANNING
BEACH RIDGE I BARRIER ISLAND (Silts. a SOnds) PuRPOSCS ONLY. SURvEY MEASUREMENTS
ARE NOT TO BE TAKEN FROM THIS MAP, SOURCE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1973) and
DISTRICT BOUNDRY Drafting Section OfSouthCentral Planning and Developiwt
commission ((9801

FIGURE 4.1

S01 LS
OF
SOUTH LOUISIANA

nil pil

T@7
MIN

AKE
A, REANS-

LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN
. . . . . i i i . . . . . .

_k` &

- @ep'

010
4jk4

ALLUVIAL SOILS (Natural Levees-River Valleys)
PLEISTOCENE TERRACE (Older Uplands)

BASIN SOILS: Swamp Forest/ Botiomland
clay Base Soils 10 0 to 20
MARSH /SWAMP ORGANIC SOILS NOTATION OF ACCURACY
THIS MAP IS TO BE USED FOR PLANNING
BEACH RIDGE / BARRIER ISLAND (Silts 8 Sands) PURPOSES ONLY. SURVEY MEASUREMENTS
ARE-NOT TO BE TAKEN FROM THIS MAP.
DISTRICT BOUNDRY SOURCE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1973) and
Drafting Section of South Central Planning and Development
Commission (1980)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Foth, H. D. and Turk, L. M. (1972) Rmdamentals of Soil Science. New
York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Gagliano, S. M. and Van Beek, J. L. (1973) Environmental Atlas and
Multi-Use Management Plantor South Central Louisiana; Report 18.
Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana State University, Baton
Rouge, Louisiana.

CHAPFER 5 - NATURAL VEGEFATION

Edwin J. Durabb

INTRCDUCTICK

Vegetation in the South Central District, like elsewhere, is in-

fluenced by the factors of geomorphology, soil type, elevation, wetness

and climate. These processes, discussed in this report, have shaped the

location and type of natural flora in the region.

The vegetation zones in the South Central District can be broken

down into:

Forested - 1. Natural Levee Vegetation

- 2. Backsm@uT

Non- - 3. Fresh Water Marsh
Forested
- 4. Brackish Marsh

- 5. Saline Marsh

Itixed - 6. Beach Ridges/Barrier Islands

- 7. Spoil Banks

The following is a brief discussion of each general vegetation type

within the district.

FORESTED AREAS

Natural Levee Vegetation

The natural levee vegetation is that characteristic of the higher,

drier, alkaline, silty upland soils of the distributary system of the

Mississippi Delta. The natural vegetation originally consisted of

forest lands, usually hardwoods, mainly oak. The following were the

dominant form of vegetation on these surfaces (Detro and Davis, 1978):

1. Live Oak

2. Water Oak

3. Red Gun

4. American Elm

5. Honey Locust

6. Pecan

Due to the fertile nature of the soil, relatively good drainage,

and lack of flooding except during the spring, this area was rapidly

cleared and settled. Today, most of the population of the South Central

District resides in these areas. The land has been cleared and farrwd

for sugarcane, soybeans and truck crops. Almost no hardwood forest that

originally grew on the natural levees remain.

Backswamp

According to Bahr and Hebrard (1976), a swamp is:

a woody commmity occurring in an area
where the soil is usually saturated or covered with
water for one or more months of the growing season.
The vegetation in the swamp forest is characterized by tree growth,
the type of which is dependent on the slight differences in elevation

and soil type that govern the degree of standing water in the area.

The swairp forest flanks the natural levees and fills the inter-

distributary basins limited only by soil type and salinity levels. This

is largely an inundated fresh water region (see Chapter 7 for full dis-

cussions of the wetlands ecosystem).

Table 5.1 lists the dominant vegetation types and percentage of

cover of the two main types of swamp forest vegetation. Type one forest

occupies the wetter areas; type tvu the drier zones. This table is

based on a survey in the Barataria Basin and may differ somewhat from

other areas. However, the main species in the vegetation zone are mre

or less the same.

TABLE 5. 1

Percentage Of Tree Species In Cypress-Tupelo Gun Swanp

And Bottomland Hardwood Fbrest Of 'Ihe Barataria Basin

Cypress-Tupelo Gum Swamp

Taxodim distichum (Cypress) 33.33

Nyssa Aquatica (Tupelo gum) 32.41

Acer Drumnondii (Swamp maple) 19.44

Fraxinus; tomentosa, (Pumpkin ash) 8.33

Bottomland Hardwood Forest

Acer drumiondii (Swamp maple) 25.00

Nyssa, Aquatica (Tupelo gum) 11.43

Acer negundo (Boxelder) 7.86

Populus; heterophylla (Cottonivood) 2.86

Taxodium distichum (Cypress) 4.29

Cornus drum-nondii (Roughleaf dogwood) 8.57

Salix nigra (Black willow) 5.71

Ulmus americana (American elm) 5.00

Carya ovata (Shagbark hickory) 4.29

Fraxinus tomentosa (Pumpkin ash) 3.57

Quercus nigra (Water oak) 2.14

Celtis laevigata (Hackberry) 2.14

Diospyros; virginiana (Persim-non) 3.57

Ilex decidua (Deciduous holly) 2.86

Quercus shumardii (Shumard red oak) 2.14

Source: Bahr and Hebrard (1976): 16.

NON-FORESM AFEAS

Marsh Vegetation

Marshland has been defined as:

a periodically flood zone characterized
by primarily nonwoody vascular plants.

Bahr and Hebrard (1976): 23.

This vegetation type makes up the bulk of the land cover in Terre-

bonne and Lafourche Parishes and significant areas in St. Charles

(Louisiana State Planning Office, 1975). These wet grassland areas are

generally poorly defined and tend to merge into each other rather than

exhibit sharp contrasts between zones. Soil structure and salinity

define the marsh forest contact zone. Water salinity concentrations and

the resultant vegetation types are used to delineate the three classifi-

cations of Fresh, Brackish and Saline marsh. The following is a discus-

sion of each marsh type.

Fresh Water Marsh

Fresh marsh is characterized by the most diverse plant conrmities

of all, the marsh units. It is also the most ambiguously defined area.

Much of this zone is represented by a phenon-enon known as "flotant

marsh":

Flotant consists of a dense mat of vegetation
supported by detritus several feet thick, which
is held together by a matrix of living roots.
This floating marsh is indistinguishable from
true wetland until trod upon and extends from
the shoreline of a lake into the lake itself.
Eventually, as the bottom sediments and the
floting layer each accumulate more material,
they merge to form a new shoreline and the lake
shrinks in size.

Bahr and Hebra-rd (1976): 24.

Fresh marsh vegetation cover often occurs over huge areas of peaty

deposits. The soil mix is often sixty-five percent organic and thirty-

three percent clay.(see Chapter 4). Representative plant species are

listed in Table 5.2.

TAELE 5. 2

Percentage of Plant Species

In F'resh Maxsh Portions of Barataria Basin

Panicun hemitomon (Maidencane) 41.35

Sagittaria falcata (Bulltongue) 17.42

Eleocharis sp. (Spike rush) 12.31

Alternanthera philoxeroides (Aligator -weed) 3.43

Cyperus odoratus (Sedge) 3.21

Typha spp. (Cattail) 2.59

Echinochloa walteri (Water rrdllet) 2.15

Eichornia crassipes (Water hyacinth) 1.99

Bacopa monnieri (Water hyssop) 1.82

Polygonun sp. (Snwtweed) 1.60

Scirpus olneyi (Three-cornered grass) 1.48

Zizaniopsis miliacea (Giant cutgrass) 1.36

Source: Bahr and Hebrard (1976): 25.

Brackish Maxsh

Brackish marsh is the axea between the fresh and saline marshes in

the coastal estuarine system. This zone is extremly important ecologic-

ally, as it provides a vital link in the estuarine salinity, water flow

and flood chain systems. The brackish marsh system represents the first

marsh unit strongly influenced by tidal effects. This area also receives

freshwater runoff from other units as well. (Bahr and Hebrard 1976)

have stated that aquatic areas that are the most stable, i.e. unvarying

with respect to their physical characteristics, especially salinity and

temperature, are mre likely to show greater specie diversity than areas

of rapid change. Therefore, this 'area has somewhat less plant variety

than fresh marsh. Table 5.3 illustrates the typical plant commmity of

a brackish marsh.

This type of marsh is the first vegetation zone that meets conmnly

accepted definitions of estuary. Two of the definitions are:

An estuary is any confined coastal water body with
an open connection to the sea and a measurable
quantity of salt in.its waters.

Clark (1975): 1.

Estuaries are defined as inland bodies of water
intermdiate between fresh and saline system and
therefore mixing zones.

Bahr and Hebrard (1976): 34.

Since the brackish unit is covered with water with measurable

salinity content, it marks the beginning of the transition between

freshwater and marine environments (see Chapter 7 for a discussion of

the Wetlands Ecosystem).

Soils in this unit have as little as 16 - 30 percent clay content

and have the highest level of organic content of any maxsh unit (see

Chapter 4).

TABLE 5.3

Percentage of Plant Species

In Brackish Marsh Areas of Barataria Basin

Spartina patens (Wire grass) 45.84

Distichlis spicata (Salt grass) 28.96

Spartina alterniflora (Oyster grass) 9.03

Eleocharis parvula (Dwarf spikerush) 5.49

Juncus romerianus (Black rush) 3.26

Scirpus olneyi (Three-cornered grass) 1.26

Source: Bahr and Hebrard (1976): 36.

Saline Marsh

Saline marsh has been characterized by Bahr and Hebrard (1976) as

in a declining state, i.e. in transition between wetland and open water.

The area that is now saline marsh in the.South Central Region was at one

time brackish or possibly even fresh during the period when delta building

and large quantities of freshwater and sedilwnt were introduced into

this zone. The waters of this zone are almost marine with a diurnal tide

range. Hurricane stonn surges and waves affect this area hardest causing

considerable land loss by erosion. The only protection this area has is

the barrier islands and beach ridges that provide partial shelter from

wave energy.

As in the other marsh types, organic levels in the soil are high,

but not as high as brackish and fresh marsh. The remainder of the soil

is usually fine clay.

Species diversity is low and confined to those plants tolerant of

high salinity. Table 5.4 lists the primary vegetation types in this

zone.

TAME 5. 4

Percentage of Plant Species In The

Saline Marsh Region of Barataria, Basin

Spa.rtina alterniflora, (Oystergrass) 62.79

Juncus romerianus (Black rush) 14.90

Distichlis spicata, (Salt grass) 10.05

Spaxtina, patens (Wire grass) 7.77

Source: Bahr and Hebrard (1976):

MDCED AREAS

Beach Ridges/Barrier Islands

Barrier islands and beach ridges present a unique and varied habitat

ranging from marsh to upland forest vegetation zones. Plant species are

too numerous to mention here. The following is a brief listing of

habitat zones common on Louisiana barrier islands (Bahr and Hebrard

1976).

1. Salt marsh habitat (along leeward edge of island).

2. High marsh (transition marsh located on higher ground).

3. Forest (located on highest ground only on larger islands

with vegetation resembling that of the natural levee forest.

4. Meadow habitat (located toward the Gulf next to the wooded

area).

5. Dune habitat (located in the area close to the Gulf capable

of supporting rooted vegetation).

6. Mangrove - (tree vegetation in coastal Louisiana confined to a

Low Bush conmnly found only along the coast (limited by intol-

erance of cold weather.

Spoil Banks

Due to the numerous canals duo, for navigation and oil and gas ex-

ploration, there exists many long ridges parallel to these canal borders

of dredged sediment called "spoil banks". Soils on these banks can be

of any type and the vegetation is dependent on the age of the spoil
bank-, soil type and height of the ridge. The most commn vegetation,

woody and nonvoody, are listed in Table 5.5.

Table 5.5

Plant Species Composition Of Spoil Banks

And Natural Levees in Coastal Louisiana

Baccharis sp. (Groundsel tree)

Iva frutescens (Marsh elder)

Cynodon dactylon (Bermuda grass)

Spartina, patens (Marshhay cordgrass)

Distichlis spicata,

Phragmites commis (Roseau cane)

Rubus sp. (Blackberry)

Trees (when present)

Salix nigra, (Black willow)

Sapium sebiferm (Tallow tree)

Source: Bahr and Hebrard (1976): 63.

SUMMARY

The vegetation of the South Central Area has developed in response
to deltaic deposited sediment, subsidence, erosion, climate and estuary

development. Figure 5.1 illustrates the location of the main vegetation

zones in the'South Central Area. It should be noted that, for clarity

sake, all marsh units and spoil bank vegetation are not shown.

VEGETATION
OF
SOUTH LOUISIANA

. . . .......
ITTRI
TT

T1
PT
. .. . . . . . . . T, "'I

a
MAUREPA

,X.
LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN

!p@

\Z\ Z Z

\z N

\ZZ""

DISTRICT BOUNDARY

NATURAL LEVEES
(VEGETATION & CROPS)
URBAN a BUILT-UP AREAS
FRESH WATER'MARSH
SALT WATER MARSH
BRACKISH WATER MARSH
EVERGREEN FOREST
SWAMP FOREST AREA
MIXED FOREST AREA SOURCE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS NOTATION OF ACCURACY
(1973) AND DRAFTING SECTION OF THIS MAP IS TO BE USED FOR PLAN14ING
SOUTH CENTRAL PLANNING AND DEV- PURPOSES QhLLY. SURVEY MEASUREMENTS
ELOPMENT COMMISSION (1980). ARE NOT TO-BE MADE FROM THIS MAP.

BIELIOGRAPHY

Bahr, L. M. and Hebrar , J. J. (1976) Barataria Basin: Biological
Cbaracterization. Center for Wetland Resource, Louisiana State
University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Clark, John (1974) Coastal Ecosystem : Ecological Considerations for
the Management of the Coastal Zone. The Conservation Foundation,
Washington, D. C.

Detro, Randall and Davis, Donald (1978) "Bayou Lafourche", from Kesel,
R. and Sander, R (1978) A Field Guide Book for Louisiana. The
Association of American Geographer, Washington, D. C.

Louisiana State Planning Office (1975) Land Use Data Analysis Program.
U. S. Geological Survey and Louisiana State Planning Office,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

CHAPTER 6 - DRAINAGE AND GROUNDWArIER RESOURCES

Edwin J. Durabb

INTRODUCTICN

Water and water flow patterns are of prime concern in this area due

to the low land elevations and constant flood threat from rivers and the

Gulf of Mexico. The patterns of drainage and water distribution are

determined by five main factors:

1. Local Geomorphology
2. External Influx of Freshwater
3. Rainfall
4. Ocean Tidal Waters
5. Man-made Alterations.

Local Geomorphology shapes the flows of water in the basin. `Ihis topic

is discussed in detail in Chapter 3. External Influx of Freshwater

into the district occurs from the Mississippi River distributaxy system

and drainage off of the higher Pleistocene terraces to the north of the

district. Rainfall currently provides the majority of the freshwater

supply in the estuarine drainage basins since man-made levees have

limited Mississippi River water input (see Chapter 1). Ocean Tidal

Waters flow into all basin areas from the Gulf of Mexico causing the

,conditions in the basins to be labeled estuarine. Finally, Man-made

Alterations such as canals and levees have changed water flow patterns

in the area (see Paxt II, Chapter 5 for further discussion).

Groundwater in the district occurs mainly in shallow aquifers and

is not suitable for large scale use. Salt water is a problem for water

supplies as one approaches the coast. A full discussion of drainage
patterns and groundwater is presented in the basin descriptions that

follow.

DRAINAGE BASINS

Data collected by the Louisiana 208 Water Quality Program has

enabled the South Central District to be separated into four main

basins:

1. Terrebonne
2. Barataria
3. Pontchartrain
4. Lower Mississippi.

None of these basins lie entirely within the South Central District (see

Figure 6.1). The following is a discussion of each of the drainage and

groundwater chaxacteristics of these major drainage basins.

Lake Pontchartrain Basin

Physical Description

Basin Boundaries

The State of Louisiana has been divided into twelve major drainage

basins for the purpose of water quality management planning. The Lake

Pontchartrain Basin is located in southeastern Louisiana as shown in

Figure 6.1. The basin is bound by the Mississippi State Line on the

north, the Mississippi River east bank levee on the west, the drainage

divide on the Pearl River Basin on the east, and the Mississippi Sound

on the south.

FIGURE 6.1

M I S S I S S I P P

Iol
PONTCHAR+MN BASIN

cm-pan
Ron.
Picayune

LAKE

NIALPIE103

L4KE PONrCHAR
MAI.

. . .... . . . . . . . . . 4@
L

r
Pd&r.di.
41,v %

41?7q

.zs
TERREaMNE BASIN

%
io/
Ilk

SOL1111CE: LA. VALDLWE AND SCALE 1:500,000 NOTArION OF ACC
BASIN BOUNWY-miiiiiiiiiiiiiiii, FtMRIE3 COMOWK(Iftill) THIS MAP ISS TO BE USED
DISTRICT BOUNDARY-111111111111111111111111 DRAINAGE BASINS PURPOSES QW. SURVEY
ARE NOT TO BE MADE

Hydrology - Surface Water

The Lake Pontchartrain Basin consists of the tributaries and dis-

tributaries of Lake Pontchartrain. Lake Pontchartrain is a brackish

natural lake and has tributary drainage area of approximately 4,900

square miles. Most of this basin lies north and east of the South

Central District. Only the northern portion of St. James, St. John and

St. Charles Paxishes are within the basin boundaries.

Major tributaries draining into Lake Pontchartrain are the Tangipahoa

and Tchefuncte Rivers, Lake Maurepas, and Bayou Lacombe, Bonfouca, and

Castine. The Bonnet Carre Spillway serves as an intermittent source of

inflow when used for flood control on the Mississippi River. The drain-

age systems of Jefferson and Orleans Parishes discharge storm flows into

the lake on the south shore. Tributaries discharging into Lake Maurepas

include the Blind, Amite, and Tickfaw Rivers. Pass Manchac links Lake

Maurepas to Lake Pontchartrain.

The Rigolets and Chef Menteur Pass are natural distributaries on

Lake Pontchartrain which discharge to Lake Borgne. The Inner Harbor

Navigation Canal, the Intracoastal Waterway, and the Mississippi River

Gulf Outlet axe man--imde navigable waterways that inter-link the Missis-

sippi River, the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Pontchartrain for comercial

shipping operations.

Me Louisiana Stream Control Carrnission has divided the Lake

Pontchartrain Basin into sixteen stream segments. Each designated

segment represents the drainage area of a particulax watershed. Table

6.1 outlines the stream segments in the Lake Pontchartrain Basin.

TAELE 6. 1

Lake Pontchartrain Basin

Stream Segment Description

Comite River from Mississippi state line to the Amite River including
all tributaries.

Bayou Manchac to confluence with Amite River, including Dawson Creek,
Ward Creek, Bayou Braud and all other tributaries.

Amite River from Mississippi state line to Lake Maurepas including all
tributaries to Lake Maurepas.

Bayou Conway, Bayou Black, and Blind River and related tributaries to
Lake Maurepas.

Tickfaw River from Mississippi state line to Lake Maurepas including
Ponchatoula Creek, Natalbany River and all other tributaries.

Lake Maurepas and tributaries including Pass Manchac.

Tangipahoa River from the Mississippi state line to Lake Pontchartrain
including all tributaxies.

Tchefuncte River from headwaters to Lake Pontchaxtrain including Bogue
Falaya River and all other tributaries.

Bayou Lacorrbe from headwaters to Lake Pontchartrain including tributaries
and related watershed.

Bayou Bonfouca from headwaters to Lake Pontchartrain including tributaries
and related watershed.

Lake Pontchartrain including minor tributaries; Bayous Castine, Chinchuba,
and Cane.

Lake Catherine, Rigolets and Chef Menteur Pass and ancillary waterbodies
including Intracoastal Waterway from Chef Menteur to Rigolets Pass.

Inner Harbor Navigation Canal from Mississippi River to Lake Pontchartrain.

East/West Intracoastal Waterway from Inner Harbor Navigation Canal to
Chef Menteur Pass.

Mississippi River Gulf Outlet from Intracoastal Waterway to Breton Sound
and tributaries including Bayou Bienvenue and Bayou Dupre.
Coastal waters of Lake Pontchaxtrain Basin including Lake Borgne,
Mississippi Sound, and numerous lakes and enbayments in the control
marshes of St. Bernaxd Parish.

Source: Stanley Consultants (1979) page 2, 3.

Partly within South Central District.

Groundwater

Groundwater is confined within late Quaternary (Recent and Pleistocene),

early Quaternary (Pilocene), and Tertiary (Miocene) deposits to minus 2,000

feet MSL or more. Almost all groundwater wells north of Lake Pontchartrain

exhibit axtesian behavior because of the confining sand and clay subsur-

face strata. Water-bearing sands at various depths have been differentiated

and are denoted by aquifer depth, for exanple, "the 400 foot sands". Most

aquifers are connected hydraulically and movement of groundwater occurs

rapidly within aquifers and to some extent among aquifers. This movement

is primarily horizontal and down dip due to the inpermeable nature of

the intervening clay layers.

Miocene deposits axe recharged north of the study area where out-

crops occur. Some Pilocene aquifer recharge occurs in upland outcrops

within the study area, but this activity is limited to elevated upland

areas with moderately permeable soil and subsoil layers. The younger

alluvial aquifers axe recharged by rainfall, artesian discharge of under-

lying, older groundwater deposits, and to some extent by fluvial recharge

during high river stages. This activity is particularly evident with

the Mississippi River alluvial valley sha-1low aquifers. With increasing

inland elevation, fluvial recharge is the dominant recharge mechanism,

and groundwater flow is primarily towards stream beds where it provides

a portion of the base flow of the uplands rivers (Stanley Consultants,

1979).

Almost all of the productive groundwater areas in this basin are

located north of the South Central District. Only the northern portion

of St. John Parish has sufficient reserves of groundwater used for

municipal use at this time (see Table 6.7 for sources of water usage in

South Central Planning & Developnent Comission District.

Terrebonne Basin

Physical Description

Basin Boundaxies

The Terrebonne Basin (Figure 6.1) covers an area extending from New

Roads and Morganza in the north to the Gulf of Mexico in the south and

from Port Allen and Golden Meadow in the east to Morgan City in the

west. It is approximately 120 miles long and varies from about 16 to 72

miles in width. The Mississippi River is the northern boundary, Bayou

Lafourche and the Mississippi River are the eastern boundaries, the Gulf

of Mexico is the southern boundary, and the East Atchafalaya Basin

Protection Levee and the Intracoastal Waterway form the western boundary.

This encompasses over 1,750 square miles, including all of Terrebonne

Parish and portions of Pointe Coupee, West Baton Rouge, Iberville,

Assumption, Ascension, St. Martin, St. Mary, Iberia and Lafourche

Parishes.

Basin Hydrology - Surface Water

Surface water areas within the Terrebonne Basin conprise a complex

combination of interconnecting rivers, lakes, bayous and canals. Most

of this surface water is found in the southern half of the basin where

coastal marsh and estuarine regions prevail.

A table of stream seguients can be found in Table 6.2. Major rivers

and lakes are listed in Table 6.3 and Table 6.4, respectively. Navigable

canals throughout the basin are numerous, the largest of which include

the Intracoastal Waterway, the Port Allen to Morgan City Intracoastal

Waterway and the Houma Navigation Canal.

The Intracoastal Waterway has a project depth of 12 feet, is 125

feet wide and stretches 1,115 miles from Brownsville, Texas to Apalachicola,

Florida, of which approximately 65 miles lie within the Terrebonne Basin

between Morgan City and Larose.

The Port Allen to Morgan City Intracoastal Waterway connects the 2

cities and is 12 feet deep and 125 feet wide.

The Houma Navigation Canal runs 16 miles southward from the Intra-

coastal Waterway at Houma and then southeasterly for 10.5 miles to the

Terrebonne Bay. The canal has a project depth of 15 feet and extends to

a width of 150 feet.

Surface water flow over the basin is generally toward the Gulf.

The shallowness of most of the water, particularly in the southern and

coastal regions of the basin, creates flow conditions which are highly

susceptible to tidal and aeolian (wind) influences. A corrbination of

tidal factors and southerly winds, for example, may produce conditions

of no flow, and in sone instances even a northerly flow. Interconnections

between shallow bodies of water (bayous, canals, bays, marshland and

estuarine areas) result in a different flow pattern for each set of wind,

tide and rainfall conditions. During hurricanes, water can move inland

-in vast quantities, endangering both life and property.

TAELE 6. 2

Terrebonne Basin

Stream Segment Description

Lower Grand River watershed from headwaters to Bayou Sorrell Lock includ-
ing Bayou Grosse Tete and False River Lake and other tributaxies.

Terrebonne Basin above Bayou Black Ridge and Little Bayou Black Ridge
including Grand River, Belle River, Lake Verrett, Lake Palourde and Lake
Bayou Black and tributaries.

Terrebonne Basin above Bayou Blue Ridge including E/W Intracoastal
Waterway from Houma to Larose, Bayou Blue, Bayou Grand Coteau and tribu-
taries.

Bayou Lafourche from Donaldsonville to Larose.

West Terrebonne coastal zone south and west of Bayou Black Ridge and
Bayou du Large Ridge including E/W Intracoastal Waterway from Bayou
Boeuf to Houma, Lake De Cade, Lake Merchant, Bayou Junop and adjacent
coastal waters.

Middle Terrebonne coastal zone between Bayou du Large Ridge and Bayou
Terrebonne Ridge including Bayou Grand Caillou, Houma Navigational
Canal, Bayou Petit Caillou, Bayou Terrebonne and Lake Pelto and adjacent
coastal waters except Segment 1213.

Estuarine area south of Lake Boudreaux bounded by Houma Navigation
Canal, Bay Long, Bay Lucien and Bayou Terrebonne.

East Terrebonne coastal zone between Bayou Blue Ridge and Bayou Lafourche
Ridge including Bayou Barre, Lake Barre, Bayou Jean La Croix, Lake
Felicity and Bayou Blue, Lake Raccourei and Timbalier Bay and adjacent
coastal waters.

Source: URS/Forrest and Cotton, Inc. (1979) page 2.

TAELE 6.3

Terrebonne Basin Major Rivers

Nam Length in Miles
(approximate)

Bayou Grosse Tete 30
Choctaw Bayou 10
Grand River 25
Belle River 10
Bayou Blue 20
Bayou Grand Coteau N.D.A.
Bayou Lafourche 100
Bayou Carencro 25
Bayou du Large 25
Bayou Black 30
Bayou Grand Caillou 25
Bayou Petit Caillou 30
Bayou Terrebonne 45
Grand Bayou 20
Bayou Penchant 25

Source: URS/Forrest and Cotton, Inc. (1979) page 14.

TABLE 6.4

Terrebonne Basin Major Lakes

Name Surface Area
(Sq. Miles)

False River Lake 4.6
Lake Natchez -
Lake Verrett 22
Grassy Lake 1.6
Lake Palourde 18
Lake Bayou Black -
Lake Fields 3.3
Long Lake 1.3
Lake Cocodrie 0.7
Lake Hackberry 1.9
Lake Hatch 0.3
Lake Theriot 2.2
Lake de Cade 7.6
Carencro --
Lost Lake 6.5
Lake Mechant 13.4
Fourleague Bay --
Lake Penchant 1.3
Caillou Lake -
Lake Boudreaux 6.7
Lake Pelto ---
Carrion Crow Lake 1.3
Dog Lake 1.3
Fiddlers Lake 0.92
Lake Gero 0.8
Mud Lake 2.2
Lake Pagie 0.90
Lake Tanbour -
Catfish Lake 2.4
Lake Felicity --
Lake Barre --
Lake Raccourci 6.5
Little Lake -
Old Lady Lake -
Wonder Lake 0.92

Source: LM/Forrest and Cotton, Inc., (1979) page 15.

Salinities in the coastal region range from that of sea water,

through brackish, to fresh. 'Ihese conditions result from freshwater

flowing from the north, meting saltwater. Streams may or may not be

stratified and my vary with time from fresh to very salty at a single

location.

Groundwater

Freshwater aquifers within the Terrebonne Basin originate from

Quaternary, Pliocene and Miocene deposits. Of these water bearing

deposits, the Miocene a-re the deepest (up to 3,500 feet below sea level)

while the Quaternary are the shallowest (up to 1,000 feet below sea

level).

Deposits within the Miocene and Pliocene(MioPliocene) zones make up

the Mio-Pliocene aquifer. Sands within this aquifer are uniformly

graded with coefficients of permability generally within the range of

250 to 1,000 gallons per minute, per square foot. Variation in sand

thickness and continuity result in a wide range for coefficients of

transmissibility (usually between 100,000 to 300,000 gallons per minute,

per square foot). Well yeilds as high as 1,000 to 3,000 gallons per

minute are possible in most areas, with even higher well yields possible

where screening of all or nearly all available sands is implemented.

Water in the Mio-Pliocene aquifer is generally soft. Dissolved solids

content (associated with sodium chloride) increase southward where

saltwater intrusion becoms significant.

Aquifers associated with the Quaternary deposits include the Pleis-

tocene aquifer and the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer. The

Pleistocene aquifer overlies the Mio-Pliocene deposits and consists of

poorly sorted sands ranging from fine to coarse and graveliferous. Sand

thicknesses vary, permability is limited and coefficients of transmis-

sibility are generally less than 200,000 gallons per minute, per square

foot. Well yields are low to moderate. Water is generally soft and low

in dissolved solids content, except in the southern downdip where salt-

water intrusion may be significant.

The Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer is contiguous with

the Pleistocene aquifer and also in hydraulic contact with the Mississippi

River. The very fine sand to gravel deposits are highly variable in

thickness and range from less than 50 feet to more than 250 feet.

Coefficients of permeability range fran less than 500 to more than 3,000

gallons per minute per square foot, and coefficients of transmissibility

extend from 40,000 to about 600,000 gallons per minute per square foot.

The aquifer possesses the greatest potential for further developmnt

with well yields as high as 6,000 gallons per minute. Water is gener-

ally hard and high in iron content.

Large quantities of groundwater are available thmughout the basin

for both industrial and domestic use. The use of this groundwater, how-

ever, is significantly affected by its quality, which varies greatly

because of vast amunts of brackish and saline waters within the basin.

In general, aquifers frcm Quaternary, Pliocene and Miocene deposits
north of the 30o latitude have no major groundwater problen-s and conmnly

yield more than 1,000 gallons per minute of fresh water suitable for

domestic use. Heavy industrial withdrawals in the Baton Rouge area,

however, have resulted in a decline of water levels by 100 to 200 feet

or more in the West Baton Rouge and southeastern Pointe Coupee parishes

and have increased the potential of contamination from saltwater en-

croachment.
South of the 30P latitude, groundwater sources are found in

Quaternary deposits alone and range from brackish to saline. Much of

this water is suitable for little else but industrial cooling. Suffi-

cient quantities of fresh groundwater for domestic and industrial use

are difficult to obtain with the exception of isolated layers or lenses

from which pumping must ca-refully be controlled to prevent saltwater

encroachment. The portions of the Terrebonne Basin within the South

Central District fall into this category (see Table 6.7 for water usage

in the South Central District).

Basin Description Source: URS Forest and Cotton, Inc (1979).

Barataria Basin

Basin Description

Basin Boundaxies

The Barataria Bay Basin is bounded on the west by Bayou Lafourche,

on the north by the Lower Mississippi River Basin, on the east by the

Lower Mississippi River Basin and on the south by the Gulf of Mexico.

Figure 6.1 shows a statewide vicinity map as well as the basin map.

There are no parishes that lie entirely within the basin boundaries.

`Ihe basin is corrprised of land areas from Plaquemines, Jefferson, St.

Charles, Orleans, St. John the Baptist, St. James, Ascension, Assmption

and Lafourche Parishes.
In general, the basin extends from latitude 30o - 10' N to 28o
551 N and from longitude 910 - 00' W to 890 - 451 W.

Basin Hydrology

'Ihe dominant bodies of water in the basin are Lac Des Allemands,

Lakes Cataouatche and Salvador, and Barataria and Caminada Bays. A

majority of the basin is traversed by numerous bayous, canals and chan-

nels. The hydrology of the basin is greatly effected by the fact that

the elevation of most of the land in this basin is at, just below or

just above sea level. The tidal influence from the Gulf of Mexico is

evident as far north as Bayou Des Allemands at the town of Des Allemands.

Lac Des Allemands is a large lake about twenty-three square miles

of surface area located in the northern paxt of the basin. A large area

of swamp land is drained by several bayous including Grand Bayou and

Bayou Chevreuil that flow into this lake. Lac Des Allemands is drained

to the southeast by Bayou Des Allemands which runs to Lake Salvador.

Lac Des Allemands is shallow throughout, averaging about five feet.

Lakes Cataouatche and Salvador axe located about ten miles southwest

of New Orleans. The lakes are, for all practica1purposes, one body of

water being sepaxated only by Gouba Island. `Ihe lakes are fed by numrous

bayous, including the large Bayou Des Allemands which enter the northwest

corner of Lake Salvador, and drain into the Gulf of Mexico through Little

Lake and Barataria Bay. `Ihe surface axea of Lakes Cataouatche and

Salvador is 84.5 square miles. Both axe shallow, averaging about five

feet. Water quality is quite variable due to the influx of brackish

water frcin the Gulf of Mexico during high tides and fresh water during

periods of high runoff. Both lakes are brackish at times and the water

sometimes exceeds the chloride concentration reconmended for domstic

usage. Due to the shallowness and industrial boat traffic connected with

oil fields in Lake Salvador, the lakes are usually muddy...

`Ihe Intracoastal Waterway crosses Barataria Basin just south of

Lake Salvador. It is connected to the Mississippi River on the east by

Algiers and the Harvey locks and to Bayou Lafourche on the west by the

lock at Larose. A significant amunt of fresh water enters the basins

through these locks since both the Mississippi River and Bayou Lafourche

have higher water surface elevations than.the Intracoastal Canal.

The waters south of the Intracoastal Canal axe estuarine in nature.

Barataria Bay is connected to the Gulf of Mexico by Barataria Pass, Quatre

Bayoux Pass and Abel Pass, and Caminada Bay is connected to the Gulf of

Caminada Pass. These bays are connected to Little Lake and the Intra-

coastal Canal by several waterways including Bayou Perot and Bayou

Baxataria.

Groundwater

Groundwater in the Barataria Basin is generally derived in large

quantities from strata that is chiefly sand and gravel interbedded with

clay. Laxge groundwater supplies axe obtained from alluvial gravels.

Saltwater intrusion into the coastal aquifers can be a problem during

excessive pumping and/or high tides. Most of the water quality is such

that there is little or no potential use for nunicipal water supplies

(see Table 6.7 for groundwater usage in this basin).

Basin Description Source: Water Resource Engineers (1979).

Lower Mississippi Basin

Physical Description

Basin Boundary

The Lower Mississippi River Basin, below the Old River control

structure, is bound on the north by the Mississippi state line, on the

east by the Lake Pontchartrain Basin and the levee crest; and on the

west and south by the crest of the levee of the Mississippi River from

the Mississippi state line to Donaldsonville, Louisiana, as shown in

Figure 6.1. From Donaldsonville, Louisiana to the mouth of the river,

the basin is bound on the west and south by the levee crest and the

Barataxia Bay Basin. The boundary of the lower Mississippi River Basin

at its southern end is the Gulf of Mexico. Portions of the following

parishes are located within the basin as described in Table 6.5.

TAELE 6.5

Parishes In Lower Mississippi Basin

Pointe Coupee Iberville St. Charles
West Baton Rouge Ascension Jefferson
West Feliciana St. Janles Orleans
East Baton Rouge St. John the Baptist Plaquemines

The Mississippi River drains over forty (40) percent of the conti-

nental United States. The major tributaries are shown in Table 6.6.

TAELE 6.6

Mississippi River Drainage Basin: Major Tributaries

Tributary Drainage Area Average Discharge Unit Discharge
(square miles) (cfs) (cfs/sq. miles)

Missouri R 529,000 70,100 0.13
Ohio R 203,900 255,000 1.25
Arkansas R 160,500 45,200 0.28
Red R 91,400 57,300 0.63

Source: Stanley Consultants (1979) pages 21, 24.

A history of disastrous floods and the projection that the Lower

Mississippi River would change its course provided the impetus for con-

struction of an extensive canplex of levees, control structures, and

floodways which regulate the high and low flows. The structures limit

flow fran the Mississippi River entering Old River, a branch channel at

river mile 314.7, except under flood conditions and provide distributaries,

namely the Atchafalaya Basin I'loodway and Bonnet Carre Spillway, or

flood waters. Under normal river flow conditions the control structures

of the Morganza Floodway, the West Atchafalaya Floodway, and the Bonnet

Carre Spillway remain closed. The control structure at Old River, which

-is located between Vicksburg (RM 435) and Target Landing (RM 306.6),

diverts approximately twenty-five percent of the water frcxn the main

stem. The actual percentage diverted is dependent on discharges and

stages in both the Mississippi River and the Red River-Old River Corrplex.

Under design flood conditions of a dischaxge of 2,720,000 cubic

feet per second at Vicksburg and 350,000 cubic feet per second in the

Red River, the distributaries and main stEm of the river have the following

capacities (which effectively provide the upper limit for maximun flow

in the Lower Mississippi River):

Old River 620, 000 efs

West Atchafalaya Floodway 250,000 efs

Atchafa.laya River 680,000 efs

Morganza Floodway 600,000 cfs

Atchafalaya Basin Floodway 1,500,000 cfs

Mississippi River between the Nbrganza
Floodway and the Bonnet Carre Spillway 1,500,000 cfs

*Bonnet Carre Spillway 250,000 efs

Mississippi River below Bonnet Carre Spillway 1,250,000 efs

Located in SCP&DC District.

in the Lower Mississippi Basin, levees prevent flow fran entering

the river from both sides of the river except for an area of 855 square

miles drained by Tunica Bayou, Bayou Sara, 'Ihompson Creek, and Bayou
Baton Rouge. The streams in this area are of rather low flow contributing

less than 0.1 percent of the flow of the Mississippi River. The Bonnet

Carre Spill-way is one of only two sources of Mississippi River water
entering the district. The other is accomplished by artificial pumping
of Mississippi River water into Bayou Lafourche at Donaldsonville for

water supplies along the Bayou (see Table 6.7 for water usage in this

basin).

Groundwater

Water bearing soils axe located at various depths as deep as 2,000

feet below man sea level. Most aquifers axe connected hydraulically

and movement of ground water occurs rapidly within and to some extent

amng aquifers. This novement.is primarily horizontal and down dip due

to the impermeable nature of the intervening clay layers. Flushing of

saline groundwater.up to forty miles down dip of the normal inland

intrusion is one example of this novement.

Except for local recharge areas fed by the rising and falling of

the Mississipi River stages, all recharge and good groundwater areas

are located outside the South Central Planning and Development Comnission

District boundaries in this basin.

Basin Description Source: Stanley Consultants, Inc. (1979).

TABLE 6.7

PUMPAGE OF WATER IN SOUDI CEN71RAL LJOUISIANA BY PARISH, SOURCE, AND PRINCIPAL USE, 1975
(IN MILLIONS OF GALLONS PER DAY)

"LIC SUPPLY INDUSTRIAL, 711EMIOLLECTRIC RURA L IRRIGATION IWAL USE
PARISH D OMESTI LIVESTOCK RICE 0111ER
GROUND G SURFACE GROUND GROUND ISURFACE GnCUND SURFACE GROUND SURFACE GR( VVAL
SURFACE Gla-W-1

ASSUMPTION 0 1.55 8.26 10.1 0 0 .02 0 .01 0 0 0 1.34 8.28 13.00 21.28
IARXJlufpl 0 7.63 0 29.0 0 0 0 .04 .18 0 0 0 .03 .04 36.84 36.88
ST. alAlUT'S 0 5.00 11.0 604. 0 1,540 .06 .04 .04 0 0 0 .30 11.10 2,149.34 2,)60.44
sr. imu 0 1.66 5.15 275. 0 0 .04' .02 0 0 0 .11 7.91 5.32 284.57 289.99

ST. JOHN 'IIIE
BAPTIST 1.03 1.37 3.88 87.7 0 0 .05 .01 .01 0 0 0 .35 4.97 89.43 94.40
IETWU14NE' 0 17.0 .54 3.36 0 0 0 0 .05 0 0 0 .09 .54 20.50 21.04

SOURCE: Louisiana Lbpartrmnt of Transportation and Develolvient (1.979): 14-15

BIELIOGRAPHY

Cardwell, G. T., and Walter, W. H. (1979) Special Report No. 2:
PLvnpage of Water in Louisiana, 1975. Louisiana Departmnt of
T@ransportation and Development, Office of Public Works in Conjunction
with the United States Geological Survey, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Stanley Consultants (1979),Lake Pontchartrain Basin Water Quality.
Management Plan Draft Final Report. Louisiana Stream Control
Gonnission, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.

Stanley Consultants (1979),Upper and Lower Mississippi Basin Water
Quality Managemnt Plan Draft Final Report. Louisiana Stream
Control Comission, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton
Rouge, Louisiana.

URS/Forrest and Cotten (1979) Terrebonne Basin Water Quality
Managerwnt Plan Draft Final Report. Louisiana Stream Gontrol
Comnission, Departmnt of Wildife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.

Water Resource Engineers (1979) Barataria Basin Water Quality
Managemnt Plan Draft Final Report. Louisiana Marine Control
Corrmission, Departmnt of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton
Rouge, Louisiana.

CHAPTER 7 - THE WETLANDS ECOSY=

Edwin J. Durabb

INTRODUCTION

The South Central Planning and Developmnt District land area sits

astride one of the most dynamic and productive ecosystem in the world.

In its entirety, coastal Louisiana contains about 102-1, million acres of

land: 1-21 million acres axe dry land, and &12- million are coastal wetlands.

These 821 million acres represent roughly 25 percent of the entire

wetlands average in the United States (Louisiana State Planning Office,

1977). South Central Planning and Development Coninission contains nearly

31 percent (or 3'ff million acres) of the State Total Wetland Area

(Louisiana State Planning Office, 1975).

In previous chapters the geology, climate geomorphology, vegetation,

water drainage and soils of the South Central Region have been discussed.

These elements make up the parameters that enable the estuarine ecosystem

of wetlands to function as a productive system to man and nature. The

following is a discussion of the workings of this system and its value

to man and to nature.

The wetlands estuarine ecosystems of,coastal Louisiana are excellent

examples of a productive, circular biologic system. The primary elements

in this system are:

1. Sediinent
2. Wetlands
3. Detritus
4. Water
5. Living Organism
6. Other Properties of Ecosystem.

Each of these elements operate singly and in concert with the

others to produce the massive biologic productivity of the coastal areas

of our state. The following is a discussion of each element of this

system.

SEDIMENr

Sediment perform several functions in the wetlands ecosystem:

1. Provides the base material upon which the ecosystem exists.

2. Shapes the surrounding landforms to delineate the estuarine.

basins.

3. Provide nutrients necessary for plant growth.

Before the advent of man, yearly overflow of the Mississippi River

on its deltaic plain provided the sediment load responsible for deltaic

plain progradation. Deposition within estuarine basins was limited

to fine clays, heavier silty materials being deposited on the "natural

levees". Since the advent of man and artificial flood control structures

almost all sediment deposits have ceased within the South Central District

(see Part I, Chapter 2 for a discussion of natural levees and deposition).

WETLANDS

The wetlands areas, consisting of swamp forest, fresh, brackish,

and saline marsh, provide the floral vegetation component of the ecosys-

tem. This vegetation provides habitat and food for primary consu-ners

and provides I'detritus" to the estuarine system (see Chapter 5 for a

discussion of vegetation).

DEMITUS

"Detritus" or partially decomposed organic matter can be com@-

pared to the fuel that powers the living estuarine ecosystems in each

basin. This material, derived from plants and animal waste, forms the

food source for the organisms that make up the base of the wetlands

food chain.

WATER

Water is the integrating factor in the estuarine ecosystem of

the South Central District. Water performs the following functions:

1. Transports sediment from the River into wetlands areas pro-

viding nutrients to the basin.

2. Transports detritus throughout the system, providing the basic

food source for the food chain base.

3. Determines the vegetation type at any point in the basin by

its depth and salinity.

4. Provides the livingenvironment directly or indirectly for all

of the creatures of the ecosystem.

5. Provides the mans of travel for the interaction of the living

creatures of the system.

LIVING ORGANISMS

These are the creatures that use the natural resources of the

system in their life cycles and generate the plethora of life both

qualitatively and quantitatively, that exists in the ecosystem.

OTHER PRCPERTIES OF ESTUARIES

Table 7.1 lists other properties of estuaries that interact to

form the ecosystems extant in the South Centra.1 Region. These elements

involve water, landforms, vegetation and detritus. These driving forces

keep the system operating at a peak level of productivity.

TAELE 7. 1

Physical Properties Governing

Productivity of Estuarine Systems

1. Cc)nfinement

a. provides shelter that protects estuary from wave action
b. allows plants to root
C. permits retention of suspended life and nutrients

2. Depth

a. allows light to penetrate to plants on the bottom
b. fosters growth of marsh plants and tideflat biota
C. discourages oceanic predators which avoid shallow water

3. Salinity

a. freshwater flow may create a distinct surface layer over
saltier, heavier bottom layer, indicating beneficial strati-
fied flow:
b. fresh water dilution deters oceanic predators and encourages
estuarine form

4. Circulation

a. sets up beenficial system of transport for suspended life when
stratified such that the bottom layer flows in and the surface
layer flows out
b. enhances flushing
C. retains organisms in favorable habitats through behavioral
adaptations

5. Tide Driving Force

a. transports nutrients and suspended life
b. dilutes and flushes wastes
C. acts as an important regulator of feeding, breeding, etc.

6. Nutrient Storage

a. trapping mechanisms store nutrients within the estuary,
b. marsh and grass beds store nutrients for slow release as
detritus
C. richness induces high accunulation of available nutrients
in animal tissue

Source: Clark, 1974: 2.

100

A VIEW OF TBE ECOSYSM OF THE ESTUARINE BASIN

In this section we will travel down the estuarine system from the

upper portion of the basin to the sea to provide the reader with an

insight into the complex system at vurk in the wetlands axeas that com@-

prise the coastal areas. This section draws heavily from the-work of

Clark (1974), MmVhrey et al (1975), Day et al (1972), and Bahr and

Hebrard (1976) for information on the ecosystem function. Let us begin

our journey.

Upper Basin

Freshwater enters the system through river overflow and rainfall.

This water is fresh and laden with sediment and nutrients as it flows

off of the natural levee into the swan-p forest. Trees living here use

sunlight and these nutrients to grow. The shed organic matter into the

shallow water is used by the organi,@=zrs there as well as reused by the

aquatic and terrestrial plants growing in the area. Three primary

organi-cam operate here and throughout the rest of the system to form the

base of the food chain. Although the location within the estuary will

determine the species of animals present, their function in the system

is the same (Day et al, 1973, and Mamphrey et al, 1975) have determined

their function thusly:

Packagers organize organic material into fo=
available for convenient transfer to higher
tropic levels (life requiring higher forms of
nutrition).

These packagers may be autotrophs (they make
their own food) or heterotrophs (they consuDee
primaxy plant matter). Cord grass (Spartina)
and phytoplankton axe examples of the fomieer;
snails and zooplankton are examples of the
latter.

101

Regulators are organisms with generalized
feeding habits. They regulate populations
by feeding on the most abundant food sources.
Regulators have longer life spans and larger
individual sizes than packagers. They are
also highly mobile. Regulators axe sub
divided into two classes: subsystem regu
lators and whole system regulators. Subsystem
regulators feed on specific organism, thus
controlling specific populations. Catfish,
blue crabs, shore birds, drum, croaker, etc.
are considered subsystem regulators. This
level (subsystem regulators) is analogous to
mid-level carnivores. Whole system regulators
feed on system regulators, as well as what the
subsystem regulators feed on. Thus, they
regulate the other regulators. 'Ihis group
includes animals such as trout, coons, wst
birds, and man. There is little predation on
these organisms (also called top carnivores),
except by man who, of course, has assumed the
role of regulator of the entire system.

'Ihe Regenerators take waste from all sources
and regenerate these wastes into nutrients to
staxt the whole cycle over again. Bacteria,
yeasts, etc., are examples of this type of
organism.

Table 7.2 illustrates some exanples of each
type of organism. It is by no means implied
that these categories of life are rigid. There
are organisms that function in mre than one
capacity. What these categories attempt to do,
is point out the organism's primary function in
the estuary. This enables the larger scheme of
life to be assembled more siraply to give the
reader a more general, but fairly accurate view
of the circle of life.

Source: Mwphrey et al (1975), pages 45, 47.

102

TABLE 7.2

Ecological Roles of Some Estuarine Species

Packagers Regulators Regenerators

Spartina Mature Fish Bacteria

Benthic Algae Proposus Yeasts

Periphyton Pelicans Molds

Phytoplankton Herons Meiofouna

Killifish Egrets Protozoa

Shrirrp Gulls

Fiddler Crabs Carb-jellies

Juvenile Fish Raccoon

Marsh Snails Man

Modiolus

Oysters

Source: Day et al, 1973.

103

rilie Swamp Forest provides habitat for birds, fish, reptiles,

insects, etc. Water flowing by mans of pressure and a very slight

downhill grade moves detritus and organism out of the swamp forest

into the fresh marsh.

Presh Marsh

Fresh water continues its flow to the sea through the fresh marsh

zone. Two kinds of flow occur throughout the ecosystem sheetflow and

channel flow. Sheetflow is the general movement of surface water through

the wetlands towards the Gulf. This is important because this slow flow

allows nutrient exchange between the marsh and water. Detritus is used

and new detritus is produced and moved downstream. Channel flow is also

slow but here the water is slightly deeper and moves a bit faster. Ade-

quate nutrient exchange occurs here also.

The only effect the Gulf of Mexico has on freshwater areas is a very

slight tidal influence. Habitat is diverse here. A few mre species of

marine fish have been sighted near the lower end of the freshwater area,

but, for the most part, this zone is noted for the detritus and fresh

water it supplies to the lower part of the basin, as well as for habitat.

Brackish Ma-rsh

This zone may be the most important part of the estuary system.

It is here that inland fresh water and fresh water species met marine

waters and their associated organisms.

In this zone, tidal influence is more pronounced and the water tends

toward increasing salinity. Many species of sea animals use this zone

for nursery areas. Among them are menhaden, shrimp, crabs, and others.

104

Perret (1971) has estimated that the estuary is relied on directly,

(nursery and habital) or indirectly (food sources), by seventy-five

percent of all fish and ninety percent of the eight most abundant fish

and invertebrates that inhabit Louisiana's coastal waters. It is in the

brackish water zone that juvenile sea creatures feed and are protected

until they can fend for themselves in open water.

The prime reason for this brackish water zone is the shallow sinuous

channel flow to and from the Gulf, as well as sheetflow. In these

shallow, slow moving systems, water tends to mix rather than maintain

its saline or fresh integrity, thus modifying extremes to a great extent

(Clark, 1974). This single fact has enabled this zone to serve as the

nursery area of the estuarine system. It is also here that man-made

influences have upset the balance of the ecosystem the most (see Part

III, Chapter 4 for further discussion).

Salt Marsh

This zone is highly marine in character. Detritus and fresher

waters intrude occasionally, but saltwater is the norm for this a-rea.

Although not as productive as the brackish zone, this area serves similar

function. Daily tidal flushing is high here, and this area is subject

to rapid erosion during storm periods.

As this area erodes, each zone is pushed further inland. This is

a natural process that eventually results in the sea reclaiming the

entire deltaic plain. Here, as elsewhere, man-made influences have

altered the ecosystem significantly and increased the rate of erosion.

105

Resultant Estuarine Productivity

The result of this estuarine interaction within these coastal

basins (Pontchartrain, lower Mississippi, Terrebonne, and Barataria) is

tremendous productivity. It is no accident that the state with the most

wetland area also leads the nation in fisheries production. Tables

7.3 and 7.4 illustrate is productivity in the area of conmrcial fisheries.

These figures do not include the sport fishing catch in Louisiana waters.

The millions of birds, especially ducks that frequent the marsh and the

fur bearing creatures that are harvested yeaxly, also enhance the value

of this ecosystem to man. Table 7.5 lists some of the benefits that the

coastal wetlands provide to man and to nature. Later in this report, we

will investigate what man has done to this ecosystem and the effects of

these activities on the evolution of the wetlands.

106

TABLE 7.3

U. S. OOMMERCIAL LANDINGS*

U. S. Commercial Landings, By States'. 1975 and 1976 (1)(2)

(Six Leading States)

1975 1976 Record
STATE Landings

Thousand Thousand Thousand Thousand Year Thousand
Pounds Dollars Pounds Dollars Pounds

Louisiana 1,124,586 88,245 1,227,958 136,971 1971 1,401,252

California 850,000 129,366 896,858 185,647 193.6 1,760,183

Virginia 444,110 32,463 528,430 43,091 1972 666,180

Alaska 437,908 143,836 616,351 227,208 1936 932,341

Mississippi 308,502 15,520 291,904 22,006 1971 400,576

Massachusetts 269,952 78,470 288,518 97,605 1948 649,696

(1) Statistics on landings are shown in round (live) weight for all item except univalve
and bivalve mollusks such as clams, oysters, and scallops which are shown in weight of
mats excluding the shell.

(2) Landings in interior waters estimated.

* Ranked by weight of catch.

Source: U. S. Department of Cofffkerce (1977) page 4.

TAELE 7.4

U. S. COMMERCIAL LANDINGS

Quantity of Commercial Fishery Landings

at Certain U. S. Ports, 1976

Port Thousand Pounds

San Pedro, California 600,900

Cameron, Louisiana 385,300

*Dulac-Chauvin Louisiana 236,900

Pascagoula-Moss Point, Mississippi 218,600

Empire, Louisiana 214,000

Morgan City, Louisiana 163,800

Kodiak, Alaska 151,400

Gloucester, Massachusetts 144,200

San Diego, California 100,700

Dutch Harbor, Alaska 91,300

Located in SC2D&DC District

Source: U. S. Department of Conmerce (1977), page 5.

108

TA12LE 7. 5

Benefits of the Estuarine Ecosystem

A. Benefits to the Natural System

1. Habitat for birds, fish, mam-nals, reptiles and the vaxied
flora of the region.

2. Nursery area for birds, fish, mamnals, and reptiles.

3. Food Source for the creatures of the open Gulf of Mexico.

4. Nutrient source for luxurious plant growth of the basins.

B. Benefits to Man

1. High assimilative capacity to absorb pollutants.

2. High yield of birds, fish, maninals, reptiles to both
comnercial and sport interests.

3. Buffer zone against tropical storms.

4. Recreation area for coastal residents.

Source: Author

109

BIELIOGRAPHY

Bahr, L. M., and Hebrard, J. J. (1976) Barataria Basin: Biological
Characterization. Center for Wetlands Resources, Louisiana State
University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Clark, J. (1974) Coastal Ecosystem : Ecological Considerations for
Managemnt of the Coastal Zone. The Conservation Foundation,
Washington, D. C.

Day, J. et al (1973) Community Structure and Carbon Budget of a Salt
Mai:@-h- -@x-id Shallow Basin Estuarine System in Louisiana. Center
for Wetland Resource, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.

Louisiana State Planning Office (1977) Louisiana Coastal Resources.
Louisiana State Planning Office, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

M:umphrey, A. J. et al (1975) Louisiana Metropolitan Wetlands: A
Planning PJ-s@@tive. I an Studies Institute, University of New
Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana. (Unpublished)

Perret, W. S., et al (1971) Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Estuarine
Inventory @iTd-Study, Louisiana: Plause I and IV. Louisiana
Wildlife and Fisheries ConTnission, New Orleans, Louisiana.

National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U. S. Departmnt of Commerce (1977) Fisheries
of the United States 1976. U. S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D. C.

110

- -Y @

PART

LAND USE

CHAPTER I - PCPULATION AND SEME= PATTMNS

Dr. Paul Leslie

GENERAL HISTORY

At the end of the seventeenth century when initial European contacts

with Louisiana occurred, about 15,000 Indians lived in the state (Davis,

1965). There were numerous tribal groupings, but in the Lower Missis-

sippi Delta were about twelve different tribes, only five of which lived

permanently in the South Central Planning District. They included the

Chitmacha, on the upper portions of Bayou Lafourche; Washa/Chawasha, in
the middle portions of Bayou Lafourche; Quinipissa, near present-day

Hahnville; Bayougoula, on the Mississippi River south of Baton Rouge;

and Tangipahoa, along the north and south shores of Lake Pontchartrain

(Knipmeyer, 1956).

The tribes of the area belonged to the Eastern Maize Culture group,

hunters and fishermen who depended on agriculture for their foodstuffs.

For most Indians agriculture dominated their daily routines. The tribes
first cleared their fields by tree deadening or burning. Then, to break
the land, they used makeshift implements. Every so often these plots
lost their productivity and forced the tribes to shift their crop pro-
duction to adjacent lands. All of these tribes lived in rectangular
structures with wattledaubed walls and palmetto roofs, or houses made
entirely of palmetto; these structures were arranged adjacent to a cen-
tral area that the tribe used in common (Davis, 1965).

ill

The French were the first to make colonization efforts in Louisiana.

In 1718 they successfully founded a colony at what muld later becom

New Orleans, an inTporiant support facility for further colonization along

the Mississippi and inland waterways. Prior to 1718, the French govern-

ment had unsuccessfully tried to settle the Mississippi. Its frustra-

tions ran so deep that for many years governmient officials limited their

activities to the area along the Gulf coastal region (Taylor, 1976).

Under the French, the colony did not experience rapid growth. In

1721 there were 370 residents in New Orleans, and by 1770 only 3,190

(Davis, 1965). Colonists did not realize their initial expectations;

trade with the Indians and Canada never reached anticipated levels. The

settlers were disinterested in farming and frequently ccmplained about
the"sterility@'of the soil. They had come for quick riches, but colonizers

found swampy lowlands, disease, tropical storms, occasional Indian

hostilities - and no precious stones (Taylor, 1976).

For the most part, the French settlers stayed near New Orleans.

The first large-scale settlement movement beyond the boundaries of the

Crescent City cam during the 1720s when John Law took charge of French

colonization efforts; for the government now gave more attention to

increasing the numbers of settlements in Louisiana. Government agents

con-bed the European countryside trying to infect all who mould listen

with colonization fever. Their efforts attracted large numhers of Germans,

who eventually cam to Louisiana to establish farm and raise families

but not to make quick riches. 'Iheir decision to come to Louisiana,

according to one observer, "probably saved the colony," (Davis, 1965).

112

The Germans proved to be excellent pioneers. But even before

coming to the new world they faced tremendous hardships. Officials

forced thousands to wait in French ports before they could book passage.

When almost 6,000 left, they were forced to wait again in Gulf

coastal ports while administrators pondered their fate once again.

Detention took its toll, because one estimate is that only 2,000 out of

the 6,000 ever reached Louisiana. Still, once the Germans gained access

to their lands, they went to work and helped the colony lessen its

dependence on outside foodstuffs.

Interestingly, the German settlements were never large. For example,

the town of Hahnville, which had begun to show the early signs of settle-

ment activity, had 167 residents in 1724, but only 174 in 1731. Me

reason is that the French began discouraging German migration. A5eanwhile

Germans already in the colony were quickly gallicized by their neighbors.

The cultural uniqueness of the Germans disappeared and so did their

Teutonic names; Trisch became Triche and Foltz became Fol.se (Taylor,

1976).

Few Germans went into the marsh to trap and fish; instead, they

cultivated the lands above New Orleans where their settlements acquired

their own distinctiveness. This area became known as La Cote des

Allemands. Later these settlements were divided into Primera Costa

(St. Charles Parish) and Segunda Costa (St. John the Baptist Parish).

And west of New Orleans, such place names as Lake Des Allemands and

Bayou Des Allemands still provide evidence of these earlier settlers

(Knipmeyer, 1956).

113

The French were never successful in sustaining the growth of the

colony. Only after 1762 when Spain took control of the colony from

France as a settlement for the French and Indian War did Louisiana's

population begin to grow. In New Orleans, for instance, the population

increased from 3,190 in 1770 to 10,000 by 1803. The Spanish were very

interested in putting as many new colonists as they could between their

colony and the Anglo-Americans, and one of their chief inducements was

free land. Spanish authorities promised each settler five axpents of

land (192 feet per arpent) fronting a waterway and approximately forty

arpents deep Each family also received a spade, two hens, a cock, and

a two-month old pig to establish a household. The only government

Urposed conditions were that the imadgrants swear allegiance to Spain

and openly practice the Catholic religion (Davis, 1965).

The primary beneficiaries of the Spanish policy were the Acadians,

who arrived in Louisiana during the 1760s after having been driven out

of Nova Scotia (Acadia) by the British during King George's War.

Thousands fled to Canada and to the Atlantic seaboard. The largest

group (4,000 to 10,000) came to Louisiana where they were accepted by

the people who were culturally related. The Acadians first settled

near modern-day St. Martinville, but later groups went up the Mississippi

and down Bayou Lafourche to establish the Acadian coasts. For the most

part, these simple people, sometinies called petits habitants, were

excellent small farmers. They tended to isolate themselves from the

rest of the colony and asked others to respect their separate society.

Over the years, the Acadians multiplied so much so that in 1772, Spa-in

114

created the ecclesiastical Parish of Ascension. Six years later, in

1778, the district of Valenzuela was established in what today is

called Assumption Parish.

The Acadians followed a fairly routine existence on Bayou Lafourche.

Once on their lands, they unpacked their cultural baggage and tried to

reconstruct the familiar sights, smlls and sounds they had known in

Canada. They built simple cabins and cleared and tilled the soil with

the help of their families. Generally, there were no large landholders,

each family having only what it needed to survive. They relied on such

standby crops as corn and rice and learned to grow new ones, such as

cotton and possibly okra, and African vegetable. Cattle and other

domestic animals were left to roam unattended at the swamp's edge. And

for those needs beyond the farm, these petits habitants cut and marketed

swamp cypress and Spanish mss (Voorhies,.1978).. Some Acadians turned

away from subsistence agriculture and engaged instead in hunting, trap-

ping, fishing or lurbering. But, for the most part, they were small

faxmers who raised what they needed to maintain their families.

The influx of so many French Acadians caused concern amng Spanish

officials that their control of the new colony would be undermined. To

offset this they recruited Spaniards from the Canary Islands and the

Iberian Peninsula. Called Islenos, they established themelves on the

eastern bank of the Mississippi, below New Orleans, and at Valenzuela

in Assumption Parish. Ethnographically, however, the Islenos fared no

better than the Germans; only a few place names and family surnames

(Martinez) have survived (Knipneeyer, 1956).

115

One group that Spain did not have to spend time or money recruiting

to its colony was the Anglo-American who began to arrive in large

nuThers after the Revolution. They came by land and sea fran all the

states seeking the free land that Spain offered to new settlers. These

newcomers scattered all over the state, establishing commercial shops

in cities and establishing plantations along the waterways.

The arrival of the Anglo-Americans was felt especially along Bayou

Lafourche as the Acadians attempted to recreate their former Canadian

lifestyle. But with the crystallization of sugar by Etienne de Bore in
1974, cotton planters and mall farmers from the lower South beseiged

South Louisiana, hoping to get ahead. As the accompanying population

tables indicate, the boom and bust cycles of cotton caused many newcomers

to turn to suga-r as an alternative. With its fertile natural levees and

a waterway linking the Mississippi River with the Gulf of Mexico, Bayou

Lafourche and its adjacent waterways became the center of resettlement

activities. In 1827, no less than $50,000 mrth of its woodlands were

purchased by planters from the Natchez, Mississippi area (Sitterson,
1953). Each week, one New Orleans newspaper noted, saw the arrival on
the Bayou of prospective purchasers "to examine the country with the
view of purchasing and settling therein," (Sitterson, 1953). For the
Acadians the offers were indeed tempting. Many sold their lands. Thus

an area once densely settled by French-speaking white yeoman farmers was
soon transformed into plantations occupied by a few wealthy Americans
with mny black slaves (Comeaux, 1978).

116

From the beginning, African slaves had been imported into the

colony. Their numbers, however, were never large. They constituted

less than twenty percent of the colony's population and the rapid in-

crease in their numbers cam only after the invention of the cotton gin

and the crystallization of sugar. Along Louisiana's waterways planta-

tions developed, their vork force being black bondsmen. 'Ihe plantation

economy depended on African laborers so much that just before the Civil

War blacks in agricultural parishes represented more than fifty percent

of the total population. After the war, the black population began to

decline because of econcmic distress, labor-saving technology and such

disasters as floods.

By the time of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, the intermittent

waves of immigrants had produced a continuous line of settlement below

Donaldsonville. These included the German Coast (St. Charles and a

portion of St. John the Baptist Parishes) and the First and Second

Acadian Coasts (St. John the Baptist and St. Jams Parishes). In addi-
tion, the petits habitants had established Acadian settlements along

Bayou Lafourche between Donaldsonville and Thibodaux.

SETILEMENT PATDMS

Down through the twentieth century, the settlement patterns of the
South Central Planning District were dictated by its waterways, the
area's primary transportation arteries. Both the French and Spanish bad
found waterways a convenient reference point for dividing the land; both

governments employed the arpent (192 feet square) as their measuring

117

unit. Land grants were usually five by forty arpents. This system

insured that the grantees would receive the different qualities of land

evenly. This practice produced long continuous lines of closely spaced

buildings on the levees.

These structures fronting the waterways constitute what William

Knip-neyer called the linear settlEment mode, a pattern characterized by

long lines of buildings interrupted at irregular intervals by varying

lengths of empty spaces (Ehipmeyer, 1956). Today the linear settlements

are held together by roads on either side of the waterway, the automobile

having replaced the boat. Within the South Central Planning District,

the settlement along Bayou Lafourche represents possibly the clearest

example of the linear pattern. For almost one hundred miles below

Donaldsonville, there is an almost uninterrupted succession of buildings.

Exanples of this mde are the settlements of Bayou Point aux Chenes and

Bayou Dularge.

Within the linear settlEmnt, however, axe internal distinctions

that further set-off the.populations from each other and adjacent lands.

The most striking involve urban and agricultural areas.

Whether on the Mississippi or Bayou, urban settlEmnts are popula-

tion centers developed at the convergencies of waterways, crossings or

where early settlers saw fit to erect their church. The location of

churches was especially important. Because after them came the construc-

tion of commercial buildings and then schools. Some idea of the impor-

tance of this factor can be gained along the Mississippi "here churches

and urban com=ities appear every twenty or so miles and along Bayou

Lafourche where ten miles is the approximate distance of separation

(Kniprmyer, 1956).

118

The simple nucleus of a church, school, and commercial activities

became the springboard for more complex urban growth. According to

Knipmeyer, these linear settlements began to expand into more advanced

form, such as the "T" towns and the grid cities. The "T" town has a

population of 1,000 to 2,500 and includes at least one street perpendic-

ular to a waterway. Also there is an increase in the number of conrercial

establishments and services offered by professional (as in Labadieville

and Luling). As the "T" town grew, streets paxallel to the waterway

were built and generally became the first indication of its transforma-

tion into a grid city. In the grid city the population is more than

3,000 and the services provided residents are more varied and numerous.

Moreover, in grid cities, such factors as the confluence of roads or

waterways are more significant in triggering growth (as in Houma,

Napoleonville, and Thibodaux), (Knipmeyer, 1956).

Finally, there is the dispersed settlement which is neither urban

nor agricultural. It includes the swamp and marsh populations. The

swamp population is on the periphery of large swamps, similar to the

area between the Mississippi River and Bayou Lafourche, or around Lake

Maurepas and Lake Pontchartrain. The houses of these settlements are in

an unorganized pattern, generally along the roads or bayous leading into
the swamp. The marsh settlement is distinguished by its dependence on

trapping. The residents live on lake shores or banks of bayous and

canals. Their numbers axe never large since the occupations of the

ma.rsh people are seasonal. At present the marsh settlement is in decline

as more and more residents seek employment security. These settlements

are characterized by large numbers-of single family members and limited

inter-relationships with other settlements (as in Bayou Gauche and Isle

a Jean Charles near Point =x Chenes), (Knipmi-eyer, 1956).

119

Tables 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 illustrate the population growth patterns

in the South Central District from 1810 to 1970.

120

TABLE 1. 1

TOTAL POPULATION

1810 IRM im 1940 181.0 1960 1870 Mo 1" 1900 19104 IM0 IT"

A,3.-*mVtlon 2,472 3,M 5.6m 7,141 10,518 15,17D 13.2.M 17,005 19,616 21,620 24,128 17,012 15,9%.
I.M 3,750 5,425 4,425 9.5.12 14,IM4 14,719 19,088 22,0&q 29,882 33,111 10,344 32,419
St. Otarlea 3,291 3.9r,3 5,147 4,700 5,120 5,21YI 4,867 7,147 7,737 9,072 1 t,207 fl,w 12, 11 t
St. Jnffea 3, 9.5 7 5,GW 7.010 8,-As 11,0r)a 11,4M. 10.152 14,712 15,ma 20,107 23.OM 21,228 is, 3,V
St. NAM tfw- DaptInt 2'" 3,654 5,677 5,776 7,317 7'rm. 6,7M 9.W 11,317 12,330 14,338 11,8.90 14,078
lbrretxmim 2,121 4,410 7.724 11.9m 12,45t 17,72-1 20,111 24,4M 28,320 20,914 2q,816

IrmilsiviiR lbtRI.9 70,5m 153,407 215,739 352,411 517.762 70R,OM 726,915 939,94n 1, 118, 5M 1,381, M,5 1,&96,398 1, 798, RV 2,101,M
Distriet Totain (12,M) (18,803) (31,(;&13) (35,000) (51,329) (M. 137) (62. t85) (85,321) (M,518) (114,113) (116.IMO) . (119,7132

Source: U. S. Census Reports, 1810-1970.

TABLE 1.2

WHITE POPULATION

PARISH 1810 1820 im 1840 18.5 0 1860 1870 1880 1890 low 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970

A.&'31JMI.yl'ION 1,915 2.409 3,760 4,103 5,170 7,189 6,247 8,933 10,726 12,181 14,021 10,425 9,611 11.010 NIA N/A N/A
1,681 2,712 5,025 3,998 5.142 7,500 8, OGO 11,232 14,270 20,626 25. M .24,456 27,037 32,659 36,531 N/A N/A
ST. 01AMES 820 728 676 874 867 938 897 1,401 1,986 2,970 4.487 .4,239 7,932 8,412 9,002 N/A N/A
ST. JAMPS 1, 964 2,522 2,557 2,762 3.285 3,318 3,275 4,85) 5,691 8,839 9.844 91624 7,742 8. 368 7,626 NIA NIA
ST. JOHN 111E Mvrisi' 1, 4(f2 1,402 1.980 2,141 2,586 3.037 2,715 3,853 4,680 5,145 6,208 5,476 7,131 7.890 7,445 NIA N/A
NIA NIA 1,063 3,946 3,305 5,131 6,080 8,613 10,412 14,142 16, 0@ 1 17,586 20,431 25,997 32,658 N/A N/A

IMISIANA IUMB 34,311 73,383 89,441 158,457 255,491 351,556 N/A N/A 558,395 729,612 94t.086 1,095,611 L,318,160 1,511,739 NIA NIA 1v/A

Source: U. S. Census Reports, 1810-1970.

TABLE 1.3

BLACK POPULATION

rARM, 1 18106 la" 18306 1840* 19506 18690 19704 1980 IACV) 1900 1 q@ 0 lom lqao 1910 1950 Im I Wo
&-.-; i vp t t n n 557 1.161 1,9m 3,018 5,368 8,190 6,P91 8, om 8, SIX) fl, 4.% 10.105 7.4R7 6,319 ?. &,N) MIA 141A MIA
l'"f0tlrrlw. X" 1'(138 400(7) 427 4,3.w 6.5A4 6, r1ro 7,806 7, 8 19 It, 10 4 7,973 5.898 5,313 4.6,15 5, C178 MIA MIA
St. 2,471 3'lm 4.,Vn 3,826 4,253 4, X0 3'ma 5,746 5,751 0, 1 C12 6,720 4,347 4,19.9 1,9(0 4,36t "/A MIA
St. 3,1.18 5,089 5,7SA 7,R13 8,151 6,877 9, 862 9, fm i I., W)tj 13,161 it.602 7, @50 S. 228 7,708 MIA MIA
St. 30111 tllf- rliptlat i.rm 2,452 3,697 .3, C'15 4,731 4,M 4,044 5,792 6. C01 7,184 8, 12r, 6,415 6.9117 6.876 7,41 F; N/A MIA
Ter r(l"ne MIA MIA I'" 4CA 4,419 6,8557 6,172 0,111 U, ow) 10,312 11,191 8,742 8,349 8.8zl 10.070 MIA MIA

liwininna n)CnIs MIA MIA MIA MIA MIA (-m5,273) MIA MIA (!' X". IR] (050,")(713,874) (700.257) (770.326) MIA MIA MIA

Incitioks Onvo Fx4milation nnd f" HtMnyes.

Source: U. S. Census Reports, 1810-1970.

BIELIOGRAPHY

Comeaux, M. (1978) "Louisiana Acadians: The Environmental Impact"
from Voorhies, J. (1978) The Cajuns: Essays on -their History and
Culture. University of Southwestern Louisiana Press, Lafayette,
Louisiana.

Davis, E. A. (1965) Louisiana: A Narrative History. Claitor's Book
Store, Baton uge, Louisiana.

Knipmeyer, W. B. (1956) Settlement Succession in Eastern French
Louisiana. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Louisiana State University,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Rehder, J. B. (1978) "Diagnostic Landscape Traits of Sugar Planatations
In Southern Louisiana" in Geoscience and Man, Vol. XD@. Louisiana
State University, Baton uge, Louisiana.

Sitterson, J. C. (1954) Sugar Country: The Cane Sugar Industry in the
South; 1953-1950. TH University of Kentucky Press, Lexington,
Kentucky.

Taylor, J. G. (1976) Louisiana: A History. W. W. Norton, New York,
New York.

U. S. Department of Gonmrce,Bureau of the Census, Number of Inhabitants
Louisiana,(1810-1970 Reports). U. S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D. C.

Voorhies, J. (1978) "The Search for the Promised Land" fran The Cajuns:
Essays on Their History and Culture. University of Southwestern
Louisiana Press, Lafayette, Louisiana.

124

CHAPIER 2 - AGRICLUTURE

Dr. Paul Leslie

And

Edwin J. Durabb

HISTORY

The agricultural settlements of the South Central District have

been a part of the landscape for more than tvu hundred years. Originally,

the single family establishment dominated the area's physical environment.

But as the number of inhabitants increased and commercialism became a

part of agriculture, the large sugar plantations dominated the landscape.

Although the family-based agricultural units are easily recognized, the

plantation environment exhibits a trait of agglaneration, so that small

villages are apparent.

The most conmn plantation pattern that developed along the Missis-

sippi was the linear settlement. Owners constructed a centralized road

through the heart of their land and flanked it with dwellings for laborers.

The sugar rrdll and its outbuildings were located at the end of the road

and close to the back swamp. In this case, the owners sought to minimize

the distance cord mod would have to be hauled. The second pattern of

plantation development was that of the block shaped, used most often

along Bayou Lafourche. Clusters of what John Rehder called nodal blocks

were placed near the center of the land holdings. Connected to the

Bayou by a central road, the block surrounded the sugar house with a

125

grid-patterned workers' settlement. The reason for this arrangement is

that the front part of the natural levees were originally settled by the

Acadians, and the Anglo-Anjericans, upon reaching Bayou Lafourche, found

themselves limited to the backlands. At a later date, many American

settlers purchased parcels of frontage from the petits habitants (Rehder,

1978).

r1he remaining agricultural settlement form developed in Terrebonne

Parish. Unlike the buildings in the Mississippi and Bayou Lafourche

developments, plantation buildings were located closer to the waterways

of Terrebonne and on the crests of the natural levees of both banks.

With its western neighbors, Terrebonne Parish was the last of the

state's lands opened for settlement and consequentially the lands pur-

chased by Anglo-Americans included wide waterway frontage (Rehder, 1978).

SUGARCANE

After much trial and error the crop of sugarcane was selected as

the agricultural conundity best suited to the soil and climate of the

natural levee soils in the South Central District. This fact has held

true into the twentieth century. In recent years, hov&-ver, with the

fluctuating nature of the sugarcane market, the industry has fallen

upon hard times. Figure 2.1 illustrates the current status of the

industry as of 1979. As can be seen, there has been some economic

decline reflected in processing mill closings in the last few years.

This crop still, by fax, however, occupied the most available land and

employs the most people of any agricultural endeavor in the South Central

District.

126

Fact Sheet for Sugarcane Industry
within Boundaries of South
Central Planning & Development Cannission

I Mills

A) Number of Mills in area 10

B) Number of Mills in state 28

35.77o of the mills in the state are in this area.

Q Three (3) Mills closed in the last three (3) years

D) 100 workers (average) are employed by the mill@ during

grinding. With 100 workers (average) per mill and 10 mills

in the district approximately 1000 workers are r=mployed

during grinding.

E) Lmiediate Needs of Mills

1) Pollution devices (both water and air)

2) Changing boilers from natural gas as a fuel to baggass.

II Faxming of Cane

A) Cane Acreage for 1978 Production

PARISH ACREAGE

Assumption 38,187

Lafourche 34,472

St. Charles 1,638

St. James 23,358

St. John 14,472

Area Total 120,157

State Total 296,000

% 40.6%

127

B) Farms in the Area

PARISH NUMBER OF FARMS

Assumption 110

Lafourche 126

St. Charles 3

St. James 75

St. John 26

Terrebonne 47

Area Total 387

State Total 1007

% 38.47o

C) Average Acreage of Farms by Parish

PARISH SIZE OF FARM

Assumption 347

Lafourche 274

St. Charles 546

St. James 371

St. John 309

Terrebonne 308

15,000 field workers in the state. This area having 40.6% of the

state acreage has approximately 6,090 field workers.

2,500 direct service industry employees state wide for cane
industry. This area is the home of CANICO and Thomson Machinery
which are two of the largest cane equipment producers.

Source: Interview with American Sugarcane League Official (1979).

128

OTHER CROPS

Because of a fluctuating sugar market, other crops have been

recent
ly introduced into the South Central Region, notably soybeans.

Table 2.1 lists the major crops in the South Central District as of 1978.

As can be seen from this table, sugarcane is still the predominant crop.

Hmiever, soybeans occupy considerable acreage. Present indications are

that soybean acreage will continue to slowly increase at the expense of

sugarcane in the near future.

129

TABLE 2. 1

Major Crops in the South Central Region

1978

(in acres)

PARISH SUGARCANE 1 SOYBEANS OORN2 TRUCK CROPS3

Assumption 34,900 1,500 100 250

Lafourche 32,000 2,300 450 450

St. Charles 1,050 0 50 200

St. John 21)700 6,400 250 150

St. Jams 7,250 2,300 100 150

Terrebonne 13,330 6,000 200 150

Total 110,230 18,500 1,150 1,350

1. Figures indicated are acres harvested for sugar.. Multiply
this figure by approximately Wo for total sugarcane acreage.
estimate.

2. Corn used mainly for home consumption.

3. Fresh crops are usually consumed at home or used in
roadside stands. Sonia exceptions to this include St. Charles
Parish where crops are sold to New Orleans because of
proximity to the market.

Source: Louisiana Ci-ops and Livestock Reporting Service (1979)
and Richard Folse, County Agent U.S.A.S.C.S.

130

FAPdvff-AM LOSS

Perhaps the biggest future problem that will confront agricultural

interests in the South Central District is agricultural land loss to

urbanization and industry. Much land has and will continue to be gobbled

up by industry and urban spread. This land is usually taken from agri-

culture due to the differences in value between land use for agriculture,

urban or industrial activities. Table 2.2 illustrates the decrease in

crop acreages over a twenty-five year period in our district. It appears

that unless agricultural land is viewed as a resource instead of a

comnodity, this trend will continue in the innediate future (see Part

II, Chapter 4 for a further discussion of conflicts in the uses of land

in the South Central District).

131

TABLE 2.2

Total Cropland

(1950 - 1975)

(in acres minus pasture)

PARISH

Assumption 56,000 56,000 -0-

Lafourche 81,320 72,000 - 9,320

St. Charles 19,000 15,000 - 4POOO

St. John 29,000 19,000 -10,000

St. Jams 44,313 39,000 - 5,313

Terrebonne 41,727 38,366 - 3,361

Total 271,360 239,366 -31,994

Source: Louisiana Crops and Livestock Reporting Service
(1975) and Richard Folse, County Agent
U.S.A.S.C.S.

132

BIELIOGIAPHY

Interview with Amrican Sugarcane League Official. New Orleans, 1979.

Interview with Richaxd Folse of the Agricultural Stabilization and
Conservation Service of the United States Departmnt of Agriculture.
March 1980.

Rehder, John B. (1978) "Diagnostic Landscape Traits of Sugar Plantations
in Southern Louisiana" from Geoscience and Man, Vol. XIX. Louisiana
State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

133

CHAFrER 3 - INDUSTRIAL LAND USES

Edwin J. Durabb

INTRMUCTION

Industrial Land Use, like other land uses in the South Central

District is concentrated along the natural levees where the good drainage,

soils, and cheap water transportation are available. The following

sections will discuss general features of this type of development.

Following this, two examples will be selected to illustrate the types of

industrial and conn)ercial development prevalent in the South Central

Region.

E, 49USTRIAL LAM USE

There are basically five types of industrial developmnt in the

South Central Region.

1. Non oil and gas related industry dependent upon the Mississippi

River.

2. Oil refineries and related petrochemical industries dependent

on River Transportation.

3. Oil and gas production and support facilities.

4. Nodal development dependent on both transportation and

production - support oil and gas facilities.

5. The fishing industry.

Table 3.1 lists current values of industria-1 developmnt by parish

in the South Central District. Figure 3.1 illustrates the distribution

of this investment in the recent past, coapared with the 1978 year.

134

TABLE 3.1

RECENT HISTORY OF INDUSTRIAL. INVESTMENT BY PARISH
FOR EAST SO[TTR CENTRAL LOUISIANA

PARISH 1972-77 1978

Assumption .................... 9,614,001 $ 11,369,706
Lafourche ..................... 1,191,202 7,435,304
St. Charles ................... 1,454,540,3015 840,657,203
St. James ..................... 163,273,759 282,643,901
St. John the Baptist .......... 363,271,928 46,611,211

Terrebonne .................... 1,548,975 12,800,000

TOTAL $1,993,440,170 $1,201,517,325

Source: Louisiana Dept. of Commerce (1976) page 1.

135

FIGURE 3.1

MANUFACTURING SHIPMENTS AND PLANTS IN
EAST SOUTH CENTRAL LOUISIANA, 1977

ST.- Mmm
526.1
11 plants ST. JCEIT ?APTIST
ASSUMMON 316.5 =
136. 4 = 8 plants
7 plants
ST. CV-RT-ES
987. 6 =
11 plants

LAF=HE
235.3 =n
208.7 mm 32 plants
28 plants

source: Louisiana Department of carmerce (1979) page 1.

136

THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER PARISHES

The South Central Planning and Development Commission parishes of

St. James, St. John the Baptist and St. Charles offer excellent sites

for the large industrial concerns that have and are continuing to

locate there. The following factors have influenced the location and

type industries that now cover large areas near the Mississippi River.

1. Availability of cheap transportation for raw materials

(Mississippi River).

2. Availability of large tracts of land along the transportation

artery (Mississippi River).

3. Cheap, voluminous source of fresh water for industrial

processes.

4. Proximity to sources of raw materials (oil and gas).

5. Proximity to a large port (New Orleans).

6. Favorable local governmental attitude in the form of

relatively few restrictions and favorable tax status.

The predominant industries along the River are oil refineries,

related petro-chemical plants and bulk storage facilities for grain and

raw materials. An example of this type of industrial development is

illustrated in St. John the Baptist Parish. Although each of the three

river parishes is somewhat different, this parish can serve as an example

of the kinds of industrial facilities that exist along the river.

(Figure 3.2 illustrates the types of industries prevalent in all three

parishes.

137

FIGURE 3.2

MANUFACTURING LOCATIONS AND EMPLOYMENT LEVELS
IN EAST SOUTH CENTRAL LOUISIANA

ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST
Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastics Products
ST.'JAMES Chemicals and Allied Products
Sugar Refining Sugar Refining
Petroleum Refining
Primary Metal Industries

ASSUMPTION ST. CHARLES
Food Processing Chemicals & Allied Products
Chemicals & Allied Products Petroleum Products

LAKURCHE
Transportation Equipmnt
Food Processing
TERREBCINTNE :Z= Machinery, except Electrical
Transportation Equiprrent
Food Processing Manufacturing Employment Legend
Machinery, except Electrical 40 10,000-30,000 40 1,000-2,500
5,000-10,000 0 500-1,000

2,500-5,000 .9 Less than -000

Source: Louisiana Department of ConTwrce (1979) page 1.

138

ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST PARISH

Genera.1

St. John Parish sits astride the Mississippi River in the north-

eastern portion of the South Central District (see Figure 3.2). In

1980, the population of the parish was 23,813 with the 1980 estimate

being 35,941. The parish is currently experiencing growth from existing
Ld new industry, as well as suburban spillover from the New Orleans

area, which is located 25 miles avay. As in other parishes in the South

Central Planning & Development Coninission region, this area is predomi-

nantly wetland with the two portions of the Mississippi River natural

levee, providing the only high developable ground in the area (SCP&DC,

1979). Of the total parish area, of 238,108 areas, only 36,556 areas

are not wetland or about 15 percent of the total (Louisiana State

Planning Office, 1975).

Goverrm)-antal

The parish is currently governed under the Police Jury form of

government. Due to the splitting of the Parish by the Mississippi River

and the lack of a bridge to cross it, parish services must be duplicated

on the east and west bank.

There are no incorporated municipalities in this parish. 'Ihere are

no zoning ordinances or housing codes. There are, however, subdivisions

and floodplain regulations. Within a year, a comprehensive Coastal Zone

Management Ordinance will be in place to manage and regulate wetlands

areas of the parish.

139

Industries

Table 3.2 illustrates existing industries in the parish. The major

employers are petro-chemical related or plants requiring cheap transpor-

tation of raw materials.

Table 3.3 illustrates the proposed new industries within the parish

as of early 1979.

Table 3.4 lists the employment categories in the Labor force in St.

John Parish as of 1978. As can be seen, the largest single employer is

manufacturing.

With the Kaiser Aluminum. plant, and the projected steel mill, there

appears to be some trend away from petro-chemical -industries, at least

in St. John the Baptist Parish.

140

TABLE 3. 2

Existing Industry

Following are the names of most of the manufacturing firms in St. John
the Baptist Parish with the size of their work force and their end
products.

Edgard

Caire and Granyard raw sugar 100

Garyville

Marathon Oil Company energy products 195
NALOO Chemicals chemicals and
chemical preparation so

Laplace

Castro, Inc. wood pallets and sheds 8
F & M Concrete Compan, Inc. ready-mix concrete 10
Riverlands Publishing Company printing 15
E. I. Dupont de Nemours chemicals 525

Reserve

Cargill, Inc. grain elevators 60
The Ceco Company
Continental Elevator Company grain elevators 60
Datalog, Inc. oil field service 35
The Dorsey Corporation
Filter Media, Inc. perlite products 20
Jones Chemicals, Inc. chemicals 20
St. John Shipping Company
Shelter Industries construction materials 40

Nit. Airy

Mt. Airy Refining Coapany energy products 50

St. John - St. James Parish Line

Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Company primary aluminum 1,030

Source: South Central Planning & Develop-a-ent GonTnission, 1979.

141

TABLE 3.3

St. John The Baptist Parish

Proposed Industry

Garyville

Liquechemica of America chemical products .100

LaPlace

Bayou Steel steel bi-Ilets 625

Wallace

Shell Cherrdcal chemical products 100

Reserve

Browning-Farris Industries truck repair facility ?
Continental Plastics manufacturing warehouse
Mississippi Valley Equipnie-nt heavy equipmnt yard

Source: South Central Planning & Development ConTnission, 1979.

142

TABLE 3.4

St. John `Ihe Baptist Parish

Employmnt By Industry, 1978

Occupation Nurrber of 1hployees

Agriculture, Forestry, Fi�hing 312

Mining 94

Construction 660

Manufacturing 2,293

Transportation, Communication,
and Utilities 513

Wholesale and Retail Trade itill

Finance, Insurance and Real Estate 196

Services 992

Goverment 150

TOTAL 6, 321

Source: South Central Planning & Developmnt Comission (1979).

143

OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION AND SUPPORT FACILITIES:

UM CDASTAL PARISBES

The other main type of industrial development prevalent in the

South Central Region is that of direct and indirect exploration and

support facilities associated with the locating, drilling and storage of

oil and gas. This includes such activities as ship building (mainly

barges and crewboats) catering, welding, machine shops, oil rig fabri-

cation, etc.

The predominant factors that have in the past, and still do provide

the stimulus for industrial location are:

1. Source of cheap transportation (water).

2. Location neax the source of resources (oil, gas, sulphur,

fish, shrimp, etc.).

3. Availability of land to build industries.

4. Lack (especially in the past) of goverrmiental controls that

would restrict development.

Of. the total land/water acreage of 1,338,387 acres, 231,192 acres

or about 17 percent of the total area is natural levee or drained wet-

land area (Louisiana State Planning Office: 1975).

'Ihe estimated 1980 population for Lafourche Parish is 76,537.

Development here, as elsewhere in the district, is st#p, development,

mainly along Bayou Lafourche. There are three incorporated comamities

in the parish. These are `Ihibodaux, Lockport and Golden Meadow. Of

these, only Thibodaux is of substantial size (14,925 with an estimated

area population of 20,000) (Munphrey et al 1976: 2-3 and Author).

144

Governmental

'Ihe parish is currently governed by the Police Jury system of gov-

ernn-ent. After mid 1980, however, Lafourche will switch to a more

sophisticated President-4Council system of government. Each unincorpor-

ated comnunity within the parish is under a variety of the Mayor-Council

f orm of government.

Land use controls in the parish consist of Subdivision and Mobile

Home Regulations, Flood Plain Regulations and, within a year, canprehen-

sive Coastal Zone Management regulations. 'Ihe cities of 'Ihibodaux and

Golden NLeadow currently also have Zoning Ordinances in force.

Industrial Development

The parish can be broken down into these areas:

1. The northern agricultural area from the northern parish line

to Raceland

2. `Ihe central transition zone from Raceland to Larose, north of

the Intracoastal Waterway

3. The southern zone from Larose, south of the Intracoastal

Waterway to the Gulf of Mexico

In the northern zone, agriculture and farm processing are the pre-

dominant industries. In the transition zone, both agriculture and

related oil and gas industries exist. In the southern zone, industries

related to oil and gas, and the fishing industry predominate.

Table 3.5 illustrates the main industries in Lafourche Parish. Note

the concentration of fishing and oil and gas related industries in the

southern portion of the parish.

145

Table 3. 5

MANUFAC=RS IN LAFOURCHE PARISH (1972)

sic Number of
Code Location Product Description Employees
2036 Leeville fresh and frozen shrimp 20-49
2036 Golden Meadow fresh and frozen shrimp 90-197
2042 Golden Meadow animal foods 40-98
2051 Golden Meadow bread and pastries 20-49
2499 Golden Meadow travel boats 1-7
3599 Golden -Meadow mchine shop, jobbing 20-49
and repair
3732 Golden Meadow boat repair 8-19
3711 Cut Off amphibious tractors 20-49
3731 Larose steel tugs, barges,push 40-98
boats, shrimp boat
building and repair
2061 Lockport sugar and molasses 50-99
2086 Lockport soft drinks 8-19
2621 Lockport plup and paper 250-499
3731 Lockport tugs, push boats, barges, 200-498
offshore support
vessels, marine repair
2061, 2 Matthews & raw sugar, refined sugar 200-498
Raceland. black strap mlasses
2329 Matthews & sports clothing 50-99
Raceland
2013 Thibodaux slaughtering plant, 50-99
sausages
2026 Thibodaux milk products 20-49
2061 Thibodaux raw sugar, molasses 200-447
2071 Thibodaux candy 50-99
2086 Thibodaux soft drinks 50-99
2751 Thibodaux ccmercial printing 20-49
3443 Thibodaux pressure vessels, storage 100-249
tank
3522 Thibodaux tractors, side hoe 200-498
ditches
3599 Thibodaux mchine shop service for 50-99
oil and sugar industries
3711 Thibodaux draglines, personnel 50-99
carriers, drill rigs
3732 Thibodaux small boats 20-49

Source: Gulf South Research Institute, 1974: 32.

146

Tables 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8 illustrate the historical development of

the oil, gas and sulphur industry in Lafourche Parish (MuTrphrey et al

1976: p. 913).

Table 3.9 illustrates employment in related oil and gas activities

in Lafourche Parish in the yeaxs 1964-1973.

Table 3.10 illustrates the trends in oil and gas production toward

offshore Louisiana in recent years, as onshore resources have dwindled.

Fishing industry statistics for employment are listed in Table

3.11. Seafood landings are listed in Table 3.12 (see Chapter 7, Paxt I

and Chapter 4, Part II of this report for more information on the

fishing industry).

The preceding two examples are illustrative of the various kinds

of industrial development in the SCP&DC region. Although difficult to

predict, future trends appear to be:

1. Tightening of governmental restrictions at the local, state,

and federal level regarding:

a) air pollution
b) water pollution
c) solid waste disposal
d) land use interaction

2. Slow decline in oil and gas related exploration activities

in the lower parishes.

1It must be noted here that the author has noticed that many small asso-
ciated industries in lower La-fourche Parish have not reported, or axe
not listed in the available surveys, thus resulting in an undercount of
employees and industries.

147

TABLE 3.6

LANDMARKS OF RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

IN LAFOURCHE PARISH

OIL

1902 First oil field in Louisiana began production at Jennings salt dcme
in Acadia Parishl.

1922 First permit for exploratory drilling in Lafourche Parish issued by
Minerals Division, Louisiana Department of Conservation2.
1928 Leeville Dcme discovered by seismograph3.

1931 First commercial production of oil in Lafourche Parish at Leeville
Dome began in February when Texas Company completed their first
producing well. It produced 157, 675 barrels for the year3.

1932 A second well (by Pop Oil Company) began producing 90 barrels daily,
for a total production by the Leeville field of 267, 962 barrels
for the year4.

1933 Eight producing wells were completed at Leeville for a total pro-
duction of 361,000 barrels4.
1934 Fifty-two (52) producing wells were coVeted at Leeville Field.
Total production was 4,329,572 barrels

1935 Nine (9) new prodicing wells were completed at Le-eville, increasing
yearly production to 4,820,093 barrels4.

5
1936 Oil production declined somewhat to 4,596,027 barrels

1937 Producing wells were established at Harang Field and Lake Lond
Field. Total production:
Harang 977,862 barrels
Lake Long 83,231 barrels
Leeville 2,651,187 barrels
TOTAL 3,712,280 barrels

1940 Lafourche Parish produced a total of 7,926,467 barrels (including
condensate)6.

1941 Lafourche: Parish produced 8,958,960 barrels6.

148

TABLE 3.6 CONTINUED

1947 First offshore well in Louisiana started and completed by Kerr-McGee
Oil Ccmpany in Ship Shoal Area off Terrebonne Parish7.

1949 First oofshore well off Lafourche Parish, discovered by the Califor-
nia Ccimpany in Bay Marchand Field, was completed on March 3rd7.

1970 Production of oil in Lafourche and offshore Lafourche was 117,674,244
barrels8.

1971* Production in Lafourche and smaller offshore area was 89,676,024
barrelO.

1972* Production in Lafourche and still smaller offshroe area was
58,548,420 barrels8.

8
1973* Production decreased in same area as 1972 to 53,022,060 barrels

*Offshore area decreased because of increasing Federal jurisdiction off-
shore. These statistics were collected by the Louisiana Department of
Conservaiton in its jurisdictional area.

Source: Muaphrey et al (1976) pages 10-11.

149

TABLE 3.7

IANDMARKS OF RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

]IN LAFOURCHE PARISH

NATURAL GAS

1909 Gas was discovered at the Monroe Gas Field in Ouachita, Morehouse,
and Union Parishes, but the first ccmTbercial gas was not produced
until 19163.

1916 The 1914-1916 Report of the Depaxtment of Conservation states that,
"The total production of gas for the year 1915, as nearly as can be
estimated, is 27,261,260,000 cubic feet . . . Formerely, no accurate
records have been kept on the gas production and it is impossible
to obtain positive information, except frcm the producers who have
kept records of their production." In light of this, the earliest
record of gas production in Louisiana that could be found was in
1912 from the Bull Bayou Field in DeSoto Parish9.

1938 First natural gas to be produced in Lafourche Parish was at
LeevillelO.

1939 Gas was alsp produced frcm fields at Raceland and Valentine (Harang)
for a total production as follows:

Leeville 131,290 M.C.F.
Raceland 351,022 M.C.F.
Valentine 92,794 M.C.F.

TOTAL 575,105 M.C.F.

1940- Production fluctuated, averaging approximately 16,600,000 M.C.F.
1950 for the periodll.

1948 First offshore gas discovered in the Grand Isle area.

1951- Production increased steadilyl2.
1968

1969 Production of natural gas reached its peaks of 318,800,130 M.C.F.
for the year8.

1970- Production dropped to 275,434,479 M.C.F. as offshore area for which
1973 data was provided gradually decreased*.

Source: Munphrey et al (1976) pages 11-12.

TABLE 3.8

IANDMARKS OF RESOURCE DEVELOPM=

IN 1AFOURCHE PARISH

SUPHUR

14
1927 Sulphur discovered at Chacahoula Salt Dcme by Gulf Refining Ccmpany

1955 First ccmercial sulphur production in Lafourche began on March 10
by the Freeport Sulpi= Company.

1960 The world's first offshore sulphur mine began production in the
Grand Isle area.

1962 Ccmercial production at Chacahoula ended in Septenber.

1967 Sulphur production began again in Chacahoula.

1968 Production began at Bully Camp Dome by Texas Gulf Sulphur Company.

1970 Production stopped at Chacahoula, but continues at Bully Camp.

1973 Natural gas shortage and oversupply of sulphur results in reduced
production at Bully Camp.

Source: Mzrphrey et al (1976) pages 11-12.

151

TABLE 3.9

EMPLOYMENT. IN OIL AND GAS RELATED

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY-INDUSTRIES IN LAFOURCHE PARISH

sic
Code Industry 1953 1956 1959 1964 1965 1966 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

PRIMARY INDUSTRIES

Mining (total)

Errployees 1602 1206 784 2149 1916 2207 1630 1146 1183 1070 1302 1245
Payroll ($1000) 1664 1672 '1277 3208 3128 3505 3384 2314 2600 2709 2455 3169
Establishments 36 34 18 51 41 50 44 37 38 35 38 38

13 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas

2
Employees 1206 D 2149 1916 2207 D D 1183 1070 1302 1245
Payroll ($1000) 1672 D 3208 3128 3505 D D 2600 2709 2455 3169
Establishments 34 16 51 41 50 43 36 38 35 38 38

131 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas

Employees 467 447 D D D D D D D 501 483
Payroll ($1000) 713 806 D D D D D D D 1417 1456
Establishments 10 10 16 12 20 10 8 11 10 9 9

132 Natural Gas Liquid

Employees D D D D D -- -- -- --
Payroll ($1000) D D D D D
Establishments 2 1 1 2 2

TABLE 3.9 CONTINUED

sic
Code Industry 1953 1956 1959 1964 1965 1966 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

138 Oil and Gas Field Services
Errployees 739 D 1545 1354 1635 1116 621 678 562 801 755
Payroll ($1000) 959 'D 1990 2035 2311 2211 1068 1346 1315 1538 1702
Establishments 24 6 33 28 29 31 26 26 24 29 28

1381 Dtilling Oil and Gas Wells
En-ployees D 765 D 871 750 312 307 228 321 299
Payroll ($1000) D 1346 D 1354 1618 559 566 522 528 665
Establishments 5 16 12 14 11 9 7 7 8 7

1382 Oil and Gas Exploration Services

E@Tployees D
Payroll ($1000) D
Establishmehts 2

1389 Oil and Gas Field Services, n.e.c.
(not elsewhere covered)
Effployees D 647 D 290 264 297 307 408 378
Payroll 0@1000) D 861 D 522 461 708 775 954 954
Establishments 15 14 13 15 13 14 14 18 17

44 Water Transportation
ErTployees 672 655 933 1100 1455 1557 1585 1869 1871 2076 2401
Payroll ($1000) 507 587 971 1175 1707 2155 2271 2759 2893 3234 3746
Establishments 98 123 130 132 152 146 141 157 166- 181 192

TABLE 3.9 CONTINUED

sic
Code Industry 1953 1956 1959 1964 1965 1966 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

445 Local Water Transportation

Employees 524 844 992 1335 1395 1412 1707 1764 1916 2137
Payroll ($1000) 484 871 1049 1556 1935 2060 2528 2703 3001 3393
Establishments -117 112 115 113 130 126 140 151 163 165

446 Water Transportation Services

Employees 74 D D D D D D 148 202
Payroll ($1000) 84 D D D D D D 211 272
Establishments 14 14 17 14 14 16 14 15 18

4469 Water Transportation Services, n.e.c.
(not elsewhere covered)

Employees 74 D D D D D 148 202
Payroll ($1000) 84 D D D D D 211 272
Establishments 14 14 14 14 16 14 15 18

SECONDARY INDUSTRIES

162 Heavy Construction, n.e.c.
(not elsewhere covered)

Employees D D 221 226 463 108 199 171 212 ill
Payroll ($1000) D D 248 290 688 158 306 320 441 211
Establishments 9 14 13 12 18 11 10 12 10 9

TABLE 3.9 CONTINUED

sic
Code Industry 1953 1956 1959 1964 1965 1966 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

35 Machinery, Except Electrical
(Manufacturing)

Employees 137 154 D D D 259 231 209 213 238
Payroll ($1000) 135 150 D D D 399 366 359 376 444
Establishments 3 5 2 4 4 5 6 '6 7 8

37 Transportation Equipment

Employees 254 311 268 258 233 220 221 241 328
Payroll ($1000) 273 338 403 402 399 367 428 518 617
Establishments 14 12 10 11 12 9 10 10 11

373 Ships and Boats

Employees D D D D D D D@ D 160
Payroll ($1000) D D D D D D D D 506
Establishments 13 11 9 10 11 8 9 9 9

3731 Ship Building and Repairing

Employees 108 169 D 142 D D
Payroll ($1000) 136 298 D 306 D D
Establishments 4 5 3 3 3 4

TABLE 3.9 coNTiNuED

DIC
@ode Industry 1953 1956 1959 1964 1965 1966 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

3732 Boat Building and Repairing

Employees 156 193 191 D
Payroll ($1000) 177 218 262 D
Establishments 10 8 7 6

308 Machinery, Equirment and Supplies
Mhe)lesale Trade)

Employees 133 121
Payroll ($1000) 203 244
Establishments 11 11

OTE: 'These date are taken from County Business Patterns for the years indicated. The en-ployment data from this publication
does not include government employees, self-employed persons, farm workers, and domestic service workers. Also, rail-
road employment subject to the Railroad Retirement Act and employment on oceanborne vessels are not included (Bureau of
the Census, 1973: 1). While these exclusions are not considered to seriously affect the figures for the industries, the
exclusion of self-employed persons my cause these figures to be slight understatement of the actual exrployment. Also,
the exclusion of government employees has resulted in a failure to note the effect of OCS development on relevant
government agencies, such as the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
2Figures withheld to avoid disclosure of operations of individual units.

;ource: Mmphrey et al (1976) p. 15-19

TABLE 3.10
PERCERr OF OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION IN THE HOUMA DIsmicrl

1958 1959 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970

Crude Oil and (bndensate 21.0% 18.67o 37.6% 39.1% 42.9% 44.1% 48.0% 52.3% 54.4c/'O'

Casinghead and Natural Gas 10.0% 13.1% 12.67o 14.1% 17.3% 18.87o 21.6% 24.67o 30.57o

This table indicates the increasing importance of offshore production. The percentages were computed from the'
production statistics of the Louisiana Department of Conservation. The 1958 and 1959 figures refer to offshore
production in the South Louisiana area, while the 1964-1970 figures are for the offshore production in the Houma
district, which includes the parishes of Terrebonne, Lafourche, Assumption, St. Charles, St. John the Baptist,
St. James, and parts of St. Martin, Iberia, Iberville, and Ascension parishes. It also includes the offshore
areas of Ship Shoal, South Pelto, South Timbalier, Bay Marchand, and Grand Isle.

After 1970, the federal government assumed jurisdiction for a portion of the Houma District. The
Department of Conservation figures for offshore production after 1970 include only a portion of the total
offshore production and it was decided not to include them in this table.

Source: Murphey et al (1970) page 75.

TABLE 3.11

BTLDYMENr IN SEMMD INDUSTRIES IN LAFOURCME PARISH FOR 1975-1976 BY QUARTER*

SIC Number Description 1975-1 1975-2 1975-3 1975-4 1976-1

0910 CaTmercial fisheries 86 109 120 118 79

0912 Finfish 5 5 10 7 10

0913 Shellfish 90 129 154 139 126

0989 Fish hatcheries, farm, and 8 13 15 18 10
preserves

Cn
Go TOFAL 189 256 299 282 225

*Because of disclosure problem relating to.single-fim industries, Table 3.11 should not be further repro-
duced without the permission of its source.

Source: Murphrey et al (1976) page 166.

TABLE 3.12

OOMMERCIAL.SEAFOOD LANDINGS

FOR GOLDEN MEADOW-LEEVILLE PORT

Size Value
Year (1000 lbs.) ($)

1972 37,900 9,100,000

1973 32,565 8,626,000

1974 26,819 8,000,000

1975 23,395 11,260,000

Source: Aka*phrey et al (1976) page 167.

159

3. Continuing industrial expansion in the "River Parishes".

4. Relative stability in the fishing industry.

5. Increasing land use conflicts as industry competes for space

with other development (especially in the "River Parishes").

Conflicts in land use between Industry, Population and Agriculture

are discussed in the next chapter.

.160

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Louisiana Department of Comwrce, Office of Camierce and Industry, (1979)
"Louisiana Business, Volume 2 - Number 5". Baton Rouge, Louisiana,
Louisiana Departmnt of Com-nerce and Industry.

Louisiana State Planning Office (1978) Land Use and Data Analysis.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, State Planning Office.

Mumphrey, et al (1976) The In-pacts-of Outer Continental Shelf Development
on LaYo-tEc-he Paxish. New Orleans, Urban Studies Institute, Univer-
sity of New Orleans.

South Central Planning and Development Commission (1979) St. John the
Baptist Parish: The Center of Louisiana's Industrial Growth.
Thibodaux, Louisiana, South Central Planning and Development
Commission.

South Central Planning and Development Commission (1980) unpublished
High Altitude Infrared Photographs taken by the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, December, 1978.

161

CHAFM 4 - CaNULICTS IN LAND USE

Edwin J. Durabb

INTRODUCTION

In the South Central District there are many conflicts between the

land uses of man and the natural system. There are also conflicts be-

tween the resource uses to which the land has been put in our district.

`Ihis is not an unusual situation in that every area of the country has

conflicts in utilizing the land and its resources without destroying the

integrity of the natural order. What is unique here is the dynamic and

fragile ecological and geomorphic system that exists in the landscape.

The very fact that we inhabit and modify this area has profoundly changed

the evolution of this landscape. Conversely, the local environment has

largely shaped what we do and how we do it in response to the natural

constraints of the land.

This chapter attempts to identify conflicts, explain them and

investigate what is currently being done to resolve competing land uses.

The main areas of conflicting uses involve the following:

A. Uses of the Land Versus The Environment

1. Utilizing the Natural Levees

a. flood protection costs to man
b. flood protection costs to the environment

2. Utilizing the Wetlands Area

a. reclamation
b. harvesting natural renewable resources
C. recreation
d. transportation.

162

B. Conflicts Between the Uses of Man

1. The Natural Levee

a. agriculture versus urban expansion
b. agriculture versus industrial and comwrcial
development
C. residential versus industrial development
d. waste disposal, pollution.

2. Wetlands

a. oil and gas exploration versus the fishing industry
b. reclamation
C. mitigation

These conflicts will be examined and discussed in the following

sections of this chapter. 'Ihe conflict descriptions related here are

primarily verbal non-quantitative discussions of the problems in land

utilization between man and nature and various uses of man. In the next

phase of this report, statistical land use camarisons and change

assessment will be made to document the problems identified in this

chapter.

USES OF - THE LAND VERSUS TEE ENVIRCNMENT

Utilizing the Natural Levee

Flood Protection Costs To Man

As mentioned in Part I of this report eighty-one percent of our

district is classified as wetlands or water. The other nineteen percent

is either reclaimed or "natural levee" lands that are normally dry. In

either case, extreme methods must be taken to keep our land dry and

protect the residents who live here.

163

History

As soon as settlers began to carve out the local wi-Iderness, it

became apparent that coexistence with the natural order would be diffi-

cult at best. The saw river that built the fertile land of the area

flooded almost yearly, depositing lifegiving silt, but in the process

destroying lives and property. Efforts to modify the natural system for

flood protection began quite early in the recorded history of the area:

French settlers were the first recorded builders of
flood control works in the Lower Mississippi Valley.
It was in 1717 that the founder of New Orleans, Sieur
Jean de Bienville, had his engineer, Sieur de la
Tour, construct a series of protective levees to hold
back the floodwater from the town.

By 1735, the levee lines on both sides of the river
extended frcm about 30 miles above New Orleans to
about 12 miles below the city. Floods alternated
with progress on the system, but, by 1812, levees
extended upriver to Baton Rouge on the east bank
and about 40 miles beyond Baton Rouge on the west
bank. By 1849, the west bank levees reached almst
as far up as the Arkansas River in an almost continuous
line, and isolated levees had been built along the
east bank to protect land in the Yazoo Basin of
Mississippi.

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, (1970).

These levees helped protect the people who lived on the delta, but
could not contain severe floods along the river. Levee building continued
off and on into the twentieth century, but this was still not enough to

protect the residents from flooding. The disastrous river flood of 1927

covered 26,000 square miles of the Mississippi Valley and spurred
Congress to pass the Flood Control Act of 1928 mandating Federal involve-

ment. From that date to the present, billions of federal dollars have
been spent to protect the Mississippi Valley and Delta area from flooding.

164

Protective measures include levees along the Mississippi that top twenty-

five feet in height and flood control structures to divert Mississippi

River water during periods of severe flooding. In Louisiana, Flood

control structures at the "Old River", "Morganza!' and "Bonnet Carre"

divert millions of cubic feet of river water during floods. Figure 4.1

illustrates the intricate system of revetments, dikes, spillways, levees

and artificial cutoffs that have been executed to prevent major flooding

here as well as in the Upper Mississippi Valley.

Local flooding from rainfall and the local share of levee construc-

tion must be borne by the local taxpayer. In addition to the river,

lower portions of the natural levees are vulnerable to flooding from

hurricane storm surges. Thus, "back levees" must be built to protect

the rear areas from this danger, and pLunps must be utilized to secure

water trapped inside the system.

Flood Protection Costs to the Environment

Man has largely protected the natural levees from flooding by the

Mississippi River overflow and storms from the Gulf of Mexico. This

protection, however, has had disastrous impact on the ecosystem. Preven-

tion of flooding by the Mississippi system has had the following nega-

tive effects:

1. Loss of freshwater to the estuary system

a. lack of flushing of the system
b. reduced capacity to assimulate pollutants
C. increased salinities in the lower basins
d. loss of natural source for the estuary

165

FIGURE 4.1

Q.
MISSOURI R 100,000-

ST. LOUIS

4
IV Ft
CAIRO

0
0
NEW MADRID FLOODWAK",' z --,
6

0
PADUCAH
NEW MADRID

C;
MEMPHIS NOTE
HELENA
ARKANSAS R Decredse in stream flow i3
400,000 - 540,000 occdsianed by chdnnel dnd
bdckwcitcr itora5re.
ARKANSAS CITY

OIL Qz
Cm
A GREENVILLE
Ivep
p
YAZ 0 0
-A
Z5,
VICKSBURG
Q
cAL
C> LO
5, CJ

2NATCHEZ
WEST
A T CHA FA L AJvA
FLOODWAK 620,000 CQ.

C> RED RIVER LANDING
ICp 600,000 BATON BONNET CARRE
ROUGE
CD Qz MORGANZA SPIL. L WAY
Cr
CD FLOODWAY
50.00 -
WAX LAKE OUTLET LAKE
I N P0,VrCHARrR,4ljV
-4 IM NEW
CD MORGAN ORLEANS
CITY

PROJECT DESIGN FLOOD
vr

WA r

0 p (58 A - EN)
CuBiC FEET PER SECONO
SEPT. 1958
t
Source: U. S. Army Gorps of Engineers, (1973) p. 11.

166

2. Loss of Silt and Clay Deposition

a. cessation of land building
b. loss of needed nutrients in the estuary
C. contributing factor to rate of land loss in the coastal
zone

In Chapters 5 and 7 of Part I of this report, the vegetation and

ecosystem function of the estuary system was discussed. Freshwater and

silt are needed components to maintain the system. As the river shifts

its course, there is always land loss on the old delta and land gain in

the new deposition area. Without new silt, however, there is little or

no land gain (since the River currently has been channeled to the point

of dumping its silt load off of the continental shelf and not across its

deltaic plain.

The only freshwater input into the system is gotten from rainfall,

natural levee runoff, urban runoff and canal leakage (mainly navigation

canals on the Mississippi River). This water amount is miniscule when

compared to what cam before levee construction. This freshwater is

also polluted with urban and agricultural wastes causing eutrophication

(choking of a body of water by the natural or artificial introduction of

nutrients) of the lakes near urban or agricultural areas. Craig and Day

(1973), have documented the detrimntal effect this has had on the

Barataria Basin, an area responsible for forty-five percent of the

State's total commercial fish harvest.

Utilizing the Wetlands Area

This section will deal with the effects of man's use of the vast

areas of wetlands within the South Central District on the natural

167

system on our region. Habitation of wetland areas and resource use

conflicts will be the tv)o topics of discussion since they constitute the

largest irrpacts on the natural system in our area.

Reclamation

It is impossible to build waters, cities or accomplish any other

intensive activity in a wetland area in its natural state. Therefore,

very early in the history of settlement of the region, efforts were made

to "reclajlV' land areas from their natural wet condition, drain them and

utilize the axea for an intensive activity usually farming or urban type

development. Such land once drained was called "first land". It was

protected from frequent flooding and therefore suitable to use for man's

activities.

When land is reclaimed, several negative effects occur on wetlands.
These are all :@elated to the loss of land to the estuary. These are:

1. irreversible loss of land to the estuary

2. loss of habitat for birds, fish, etc.

3. Loss of nursery area for birds and fish

4. loss of "detritus" providing area to the estuary

5. eventual drop in estuarine productivity in the absence of

any compensating factors.

The function of the wetlands ecosystem has been discussed in Part I

of this report. Draining of these wetlands cause subsidence because of

the withdrawal of water from the soil and oxidation of peat deposits
(accumulations of partially decomposed vegetable matter). Thus, even if
artificial levees were eventually torn down and the pumps turned off,

168

the area would revert to open water, not wetland, thus causing the

effects listed above on the ecosysten.

Reclamation Projects in the South Central. District

Most of the reclamation in the South Central District has been for

agricultural purposes (see Table 4.1). Very little wetland has been

a1tered for urban use in our district. This contrasts sharply with the

adjacent New Orleans Area, where roughly 102 square miles of wetland in

Orleans and Jefferson parishes have been converted to mainly urban areas

(Mumphrey, et al, 1975).

Harvesting Natural. Resources: Channelization

Much damage has been done to the wetlands of the South Central

District for the sake of harvesting our natural resources. This includes

the mining of sulphur, salt, oil and natural.gas, gen eral navigation,

fishing, and drainage. Table 4.2'lists the amount of land that has been

taken up in our wetlands of Louisiana by channelization.

Canals cause several problems to the Wetlands through which they

axe dug. Some of the problem are:

1. interfering with sheetwater flow through the marsh

2. a1lowing rapid salinity change with resultant death of

vegetation and erosion (widening of the channel) of the

marsh

3. allowing destruction of the marsh by wave action

4. decreased productivity by the presence of straight versus

sinuous channels that accelerate removal of freshwater and

also confine water movement (and detritus)

169

TAELE 4. 1

"Major Reclamation Projects

in the South Central District to 1961"

1. St. Charles Municipal Drainage District No. 1, also known as Sunset
Drainage District; about 10,000 acres. (Several projects started
in this area in early 19001s; only one remains.) Flood overflowed
district in 1912. Drainage local and inadequate. Only 25 to 30
percent of land in agriculture, used mainly for pasture and forage
crops. Land now owned by corporation, and oil deposits being
developed. Once settled by Corn Belt famiers; all of them now
displaced. (See Allemands Quadrangle, U. S. Geological Survey.)

2. St. Charles Drainage District No. 1 (1910); 2,800 acres. Drowned
fields now used by duck hunting club.

3. Lafourche Drainage District No. 6 (1910); 1,800 acres. Drowned
fields not used by duck hunting club. (See Allemands Quadrangle,
U. S. Geological Survey.)

4. Lafourche Drainage District No. 12; 8,265 acres, conposed of sub-
districts listed below. Part of project is above local water level
and has loamy soil favorable for corn. Lower areas never suitable
for small farmrs. Corn Belt farmrs failed. No intensive use of
land developed and corn remains principal crop, although some grass
seeds have been produced. (See Houna Quadrangle, U. S. Geological
Survey.)

5. Subdistricts 1, 2, 3 of Lafourche Drainage District No. 12 (1907);
835, 940, and 2,250 acres respectively. Small fanns at first sold
to Corn Belt faxmrs who failed. &nall faxms in area took over but
have not made success of fanning. No high-value crops produced, and
high drainage taxes mt with difficulty. Now extensive repairs and
renovations necessary and no money for this work is in sight.

6. Subdistrict 4 of Lafourche Drainage District No. 12 (1913); 41,240
acres. Became the property of engineering company which developed
Nos. 7 and 8 above. Operated as private holding along plantation
lines, specializing in beef cattle. Serves a@ kind of luxury farm
on which expenses have been heavy, profits fran agriculture rare
ano subsidies have been conmn. Oil now helps sustain operations.

7. Smithport Plantation (1907); 947 acres. Original drainage reservoir
capacity inadequate and so was enlarged. For a time land was well
drained, although tropical sto= did serious damage and hindered
purrping operations. Serious condition of soil acidity developed
after several years of fanning. Project now abandoned. (See
Houma Quadrangle, U. S. Geological Survey.)

170

8. Lafourche Drainage District No. 13, Subdistrict No. 1 (1914); 2,000
acres. Development cost underestimated and project abandoned after
spending funds frord $60,000 bond issue. (See Houma Quadrangle,
U. S. Geological Survey.)

9. Delta Farms (4 units) (1910-1913); acres range from 600 to 3,000
acres. nu-\--e smallest units abandoned, one of them now serving
duck hunting club. Large unit of 3,000 acres survived with heavy
losses and subsidies. Changed ownership several times and is now
owned by corporation. Owners interested in oil prospects.
Operated as stock farm; corn main cultivated crop. Levees and
drains in deteriorated state. One of two major pump projects
that survives.

10. Clovelly Farms, Subdistrict No. 1 of Lafourche Drainage District
No. 20 (1916); 2,500 acres. Private reclamation developed by
Northern man as demonstration project. At first operated under
tenant system, which failed; now operated under central management.
Problem similar to those of other projects but efforts to succeed
more persistent. Newly drained land was difficult to cultivate.
Bogshoes on horses and special plowing equipment were used. Seven
to eight years elapsed before soil was sufficiently dry to be plowed
readily and by that time soil was so acid that crop production
seemed impossible. Sulphates left by sea water turned acid as they
decomposed. Application of lime offered only partial relief. 12
to 16 tops of calcareous sand applied per acre and mixed with peat
soil to improve its structure. Now potatoes, corn, cane, cotton
and several vegetable crops are grown. Pasture and livestock
programs are small. It is still difficult to keep the project out
of the red and much investment must be charged to experimentation.

11. Avoca Drainage District (1912); 13,200 acres. Project seriously
damaged by flood of 1927. Over one-half million dollars spent on
project. Fields aa-e now flooded and serve duck hunting club.

12. Upper Terrebonne Drainage District (1912); 4,240 acres. Storms
and seepage proved major problem as dis disagreements between
settlers and land development company. Project abandoned.

Source: Gagliano (1973) p. 14-17.

171

5. destruction of Barrier Islands with resultant increased

destruction of marsh

6. introduction of urban and agricultural pollutants to retard

life processes and cause deterioration in the vegetation.

One of the prim requiremnts for our estuarine basin is slow water

"sheetflow" that allows gradual mixing of salt and fresh water, good

nutrient exchange between wetlands and water, and pern-kment water cover

to protect wetland soils from oxidation and subsidence. Canals short

circuit all of these functions by their straightness, depth, and spoil

banks. Canals through barrier islands interrupt sand transport flows,

causing erosion of the islands that protect the fragile wetlands behind

them. Death of vegetation near canals makes the loose organic soil-

highly vulnerable to erosion. The result of this process is accelerated

land loss in the wetlands areas.

Gagliano and Van Beek (1970) have calculated land loss in coastal

Louisiana to be about 16.5 square miles per year and accelerating.

Gagliano (1973) has also estimated that roughly 45 percent of this land

loss was due to man-made features. Table 4.2 sum-arized land loss from

natural and man-made sources. Figure 4.2 graphically illustrates areas

of land loss in coastal. Louisiana. From this and other studies, it is

evident that land loss is high and increasing in rate over tim. The

man-produced features that cause land loss will eventually hasten the

deterioration of ecosystenis at a rmch faster rate than the natural

system operating alone and unincu-nbered (i.e. natural deterioration of

abandoned delta's). Although the fishing industry and other irdneral

activities (salt and sulphur) have contributed to man-made land loss,

172

TABLE 4. 2

Surface Area of Natural and Manmade Water Bodies, 1931-1942, 1948-1967, and 1970

Date-or Interval Total Natural Manmade
Water Area Water Bodies Wqer Bodies Canals Po
Mi2 Mi2 @ti Aji2

1948-1967 maps 6608.17 6381.12 227.05 189.13 37.93

1931-1942 maps 6231.82 6175.25 56.57 40.28 16.29

376.35 205.87 170.48 148.85 21.64

1970 (Projected) 6797.98 6505.31 292.67 245.87 46.80

Elapsed period between the average date of the tm series of maps from which the measurements were
taken equals 22. 8 years. Using the f igures above and this elapsed time the following rates can be
calculated:
Total rate of land loss 16. 51 rrd2/year
"Natural" land loss 9.03 mi2/year
Manmade land loss 7.48 mi2/year
Land loss attributed to canals 6.53 mi2/year
Land loss attributed to ponds .95 mi2/year

Source: Gagliano (1973) p. 9.

Pi gure 4. 2

LAND LOSS
ACRES PER YEAR

0-50 Q-
T 50-100
IBM 100-200
VlZO 200-300
[7@77 300-oboVe

0 10 20 :110 40 50 MILES
F

Source: Gagliano and Van Beck (1970)

the oil and gas industry and general navigation canals have been the

major cause of this deterioration.

Recreation

This activity has been of relatively minor impact on wetlands

areas. This chief negative effect is that of pollution of waters near

large nunbers of camps from sewerage and solid wastes.

Transportation

Much damage has been done to wetlands by transportation systems,

especially highways, both directly and indirectly. Table 4.3 lists

highways in the South Central District that cross wetlands areas.

The construction of these highways through wetlands areas directly

destroy wetlands and blocks drainage. Indirect effects are the stimula-

tion of reclamation development. Access is an important factor in any

reclamation project. The roadway provides such access.

Railroads have also spurred reclamation efforts but to a far less

extensive degree.

CaNFLICTS BEIVEEN THE USES OF MAN

The Natural Levee

Agriculture Versus Urban Expansion

Since the population of our region is growing, and only eighteen

percent of our land area is not wetland or water; and since conuiercial

and industrial land uses have expanded; and since the entire land area

of the natural force has been utilized; and since the natura.1 levees are

not getting any larger, it is logical to assume that some of the uses of

175

TABLE 4. 3

Highways CrossingWetlands Areas

In The South Central District

U. S. Interstate 10

U. S. Interstate 55

U. S. Highway 90

LA Highway 1

LA Highway 20

LA Highway 307

IA Highway 309

LA Highway 398

LA Highway 24

LA Highway 70

I-A Highway 315

LA Highway 57

LA Highway 56

ILA Highway 55

LA Highway 665

LA Highway 401

LA Highway 402

Source: Louisiana Departmnt of Public Works (1974).

176

man will suffer in relation to others given these parameters. Agricul-

ture has been that land use. The soaring value of land in the South

Central District and the econcmic woes of sugarcane farming (see Part

II, Chapter 2) have made it quite attractive to sell good farmland for

other uses.

Agriculture Versus Urban Expansion

Although expanding cities and non-urban residential expansion is a

problem everywhere, the previous, limited levee soils with their good

drainage and high elevation are prime candidates for residential devel-

opment. Tremendous expansion has taken place in the unincorporated

areas of LaPlace, as well as near Houna and 'Ihibodaux in the South

Central District.

St. Charles Parish is beginning to feel the same pressure as urban

expansion from the New Orleans Metropolitan Area spills over into the

parish. It is expected that when the new Luling bridge across the

Mississippi River connecting up with I-10, U. S. 61, and the soon to be

widened Highway 90 is completed, New Orleans and Jefferson Parish resi-

dents wishing to relocate in St. Charles Parish will have easy access

and hasten the demise of the agricultural area of St. Charles Parish.

Agriculture Versus Industrial and Comwrcial Land Uses

Another pressure on agriculture land uses is that of industrial

development. Chapter 3 of Part II of this report outlined the tremendous

expansion of the oil and gas exploration, stripping, refining and storage
areas within the South Central District since World War II. Ancillary

177

to that development have been the new petrochemical industries located

among what has been called the "Ruhr Valley of the South". All of these

industries are interested in cheap water for industrial use and trans-

portation. Therefore, they locate near the river on the crests of the

natural levees where the good agricultural land used to be.

The main concentrations of industry in the South Central District

are located along the Mississippi Rver in the parishes of St. Charles,

St. John, and St. James. Industry is also concentrated around Houma,

Louisiana and along Bayou Lafourche, especially south of the Intracoastal

Waterway (see Chapter 3, Part II).

Residential Versus Industrial Development

Due to the tremendous growth of the region, limited "natural

levee" development area, expanding heavy industrial base, and lack of

adequate land use controls, conflicts have arisen between residential

development and industrial uses in the South Central region. This

conflict situation has occurred primarily in the Mississippi River

parishes where, often heavy industries such as bulk terminals or chemical

plants exist side by side with residential development.

Some of the problem listed by residents living near to heavy

industry include:

1. Dust, other particulates settling over residential areas from

plants, especially bulk storage facilities.

2. Excessive noise from transportation and processing activities

at all hours of the day and night.

3. Destruction of residential through streets due to heavy

machinery in or near residential areas.

178

4. Regular transportation of dangerous materials in or near

residential areas.

5. Air pollution from plants and pollution of waterways with

toxic or hazardous wastes.

Several accidents with hazardous wastes have been reported and

evacuations of residents have been necessary at times during these

emergencies.

Uneven enforcement of air pollution regulations and occasional dis-

regard of these regulations regarding dumping and air emissions have

caused numerous complaints.

Unfortunately, lack of land use controls such as good zoning laws

at the local level have allowed plants to build near or right next to

residential areas in the past. Likewise, developers have built subdivi-

sions adjacent to existing industries without regard to the consequences.

Parishes have recently recognized this problem and are attempting

to regulate future industrial and residential growth through the standard

methods of land use control available to them. They have also enlisted

the State to enforce air quality regulations, and dumping and water

pollution programs in the area. The State is developing hazardous waste

and solid waste management plans to regulate the transportation and

disposal of waste or hazardous substances. These activities and aware-

ness of problems should eliminate, or at least minimize future problem

in this area.

Waste Disposal and Pollution

There are currently twenty-three solid waste disposal sites in the

South Central District. Table 4.4 lists these sites by Parish.

179

TABLE 4.4

Parish Number of Nuirber of Open Dumps Number with
Land Disposal Sanitary Burning
Sites Landfills

Assumption 2 0 2 0

Lafourche 6 3 3 2

St. Charles 6 4 2 2

St. James 3 0 3 3

St. John 2 1 1 1

Terrebonne 4 0 4 2

Source: Office of Science, Technology and Environmental Policy (1979)
page 6.

Note: No sanitary landfill within the SCP&DC district met state require-
ments as of July 11, 1979.

180

Due to the Federal regulations such as the Federal- Water Pollution

Control Act, the Coastal Zone Managemmt Act, and the Resource Conserva-

tion and Recovery Act, disposal in wetlands areas (formerly used inten-

sively for landfills) is prohibited. As in other uses of man, the

natural levee provides the soils and cover necessary to operate a waste

disposal site. Thus, there is another competing land use on the natural

levee.

The State of Louisiana is a1so cracking down on the many illegal

open dumps in the region under solid waste management plan, developed in

response to the Federal Legislation. Parishes are now being forced to

operate stringently controlled waste sites on good natural levee soils.

Some problems in disposal of waste in the South Central District

are:

1. high cost of land

2. high cost of operating a waste disposal site that meets

regulations

3. location of sites away frcm human habitation

4. water pollution from leakout fran improper sites

5. destruction of agricultural land

Resource recovery has been investigated as an alternate to land-

fills but the population density of the region is not yet high enough to

make this method cost effective throughout the region.

Hazardous waste is a real problem in an area rich as ours with many

petrochemical plants moving highly dangerous chemicals. These too are

stored in sites, legal and illegal, across the district. Currently the

181

state, regional planning corrmissions, and paxishes are studying the
problem of what to do with the transportation and storage of these

wastes, so as not to pollute the environment and/or endanger the health

of the general population.

Water Pollution

This area like others across the country, has had to grapple with
the problem of degradation of water quality due to water pollution.
Water pollution in our district results from the following sources:
1. out of district sources, principally the Mississippi River
2. pollution from municipal sewerage and drainage water

3. industrial pollution

4. agricultural runoff

5. septic tank effluent

6. pollution from crop

The Mississippi River, draining two-thirds of the continental
United States, is a major source of water pollution. Most of the dis-
trict derives their drinking water from the river either directly or
indirectly via pumpage down. Bayou Lafourche industries also use the
water in their processes, where it is then discharged back into the

system after use.

There is currently no parish that has a "parish-wide" sewerage
disposal system. Table 4.5 lists the commmities within the south
Central District and their current methods of sewerage disposal.
Although many areas are served by at least primary sewerage treat-
ment, the facilities are often inadequate, outdated and violate Federal
or State pollution guidelines. Many areas are still on private

182

TAELE 4. 5

Sewerage Disposal Methods

SCP&DC District

Public Entity SeweE@@ System

Assumption Paxish Septic tanks

Gramercy (St. James) Sewerage System

Golden Meadow (Lafourche) Septic Tanks

Lafourche Parish Septic Tanks

Lutcher (St. Jams) Sewerage System

Houmia (Terrebonne) Sewerage System

Lockport (Lafourche) Sewerage System

St. Chaxles Parish Sewerage/Septic Tanks

St. John Parish Sewerage/Septic Tanks

St. James Parish Sewerage/Septic Tanks

Thibodaux (Lafourche) Sewerage System

Source: South Central Planning & Development Conmission, (1977)
pages 128-142.

*Note: Parish data excludes unincorporated miunicipalities. They
are treated separately.

183

septic tank disposal system on soils that have a limited capacity to

accoamodate them. Some subdivisions have small "package" plants that

deal with sewerage with varying degrees of success

Currently drainge water from urban (or rural) areas is not being

treated. These waters carry septic tank leakage effluent plus all kinds

of pollutants washed off of city streets.

Industrial and agricultural pollution are an inportant, but dirrdn-

ishing problem. Industries discharge mainly into the Mississippi River

and are now being regulated. Agricultural pollution is caused by ferti-

lizer and pesticide residues in runoff into wetlands. This too is now

under regulation and a diminishing problem.

Concentration of camps in wetlands areas cause a local health

hazard because water flows are low and incapable of handling large
volumes of sewerage. Camps often have no sewerage and pollute these

areas.

The water pollution problems have cleared up considerably with
public awareness and money available from the Federal government to help
address problem. Sewerage plants have been built and refurbished,
industrial effluent has been curtailed on quantity and concentration and
regulations have limited "non-point" source discharges such as ferti-

lizer or pesticide runoff.

WEIIANDS

Oil and Gas Exploration/Navigation Activities

Negative Effects

As mentioned in the section of this Chapter on channelization, oil
and gas exploration and development have bad a profound effect on wet-

184

lands. Besides doing ecological damage by causing erosion, loss of wet-

lands, destruction of vegetation, etc., to the natural systen, several

negative aspects of this activity have hurt man. Channelization of

wetlands causes:

1. vegetation destruction causing loss of habitat, nursery area

and decreased productivity of ccmmercial and recreational

species of animals

2. saltwater intrusion that poisons municipal water supplies

3. water pollution decreasing productivity of commercial and

recreational species, and hurting the fishing industry

4. land loss causing increased flood hazards to coastal communi-

ties

5. the flooding of waters from hurricanes to reach inland

communities quicker and with greater height

6. loss of wetlands causing loss of part of a system that assim

ilates pollutants from and can serve as effective sewerage

treatment

Economic Value of Wetlands

If these effects go, they eventually will adversely affect the
carmercial fish harvest offshore. Tables 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, and
4.11 list some of the tremendous productivity of the wetlands for fish

and trapping activities. Tables 4.1-2, 4.13 and 4.14 list the total
estimated value of wetlands in one Louisiana estuarine basin, to nm.
As can easily be seen, wetlands provide tremendous amount of benefits,
directly and indirectly to man. 'Iherefore, loss of these lands through
channelization adversely affects the econcimic well being of our entire

region.

185

TABLE 4.6

Fish And Shellfish Landings And Value For Louisiana

1966-19176

Average Price
Total Total Value Per Pound
Year Landings (Lbs.) (1977 Dollars) (1977 Dollars)

1966 647,416,500 $ 73,481,772 $ .1135

1967 620,427,500 $ 68,065,284 $ .1097

1968 763,968,600 $ 75,174,510 .0984

1969 1,013,484,600 64,761,666 .0639

1970 1,115,331,700 97,368,457 .0873

1971 1,377,013,051 76,424,224 .0555

1972 1,081,269,660 104,234,395 .0964

1973 1,040,769,832 130,203,683 .1251

1974 1,233,415,909 108,047,234 .0876

1975 1,128,274,979 99,513,853 .0882

1976 1,232,328,343 147,016,771 .1193

Source: National Marine Fisheries Service, 1967-77.

186

TABLE 4. 7

Percentage of Trapping Harvest

From Louisiana Wetlands

(By Species)

Species Percentage

Muskrat 99.8

Nutria 99.1

Mink 70.4

Raccoon 71.3

Otter 92.0

Opossun 88.0

Bobcat 42.9

Source: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1977.
Mumphrey, et al. (1978).

187

TABLE 4.8

Average Annual Harvest Of Pelts

From Louisiana Wetlands

(By Species)

1970-1971 Through 1974-1975

Species Average Annual Harvest

Muskrat 406,696

Nutria 1,462,075

Mink 22,707

Raccoon 90,007

Otter 5,525

Opossun 16,379

Bobcat 206

Total 2,003,995

Source: U. S. Anny Corps of Engineers, 1977.
Mumphrey, et al (1978).

188

TABLE 4.9

Annual Harvest Of Pelts In Louisiana

(All Species)

1967-1968 Through 1975-1976

Average Price Estimated
Number Per Pelt Total Value
Year Of Pelts (1977 Dollars) (1977 Dollars)

1967-68 2,130,473 $ 2.4152 $ 5,145,518.39

1968-69 3,469,040 3.0112 10,445,973.25

1969-70 3,002,043 3.2597 9,785,759.57

1970-71 2,090,761 3.3609 7,026,838.65

1971-72 1,732,682 4.8662 8,431,577.15

1972-73 2,180,332 6.2821 13,697,063.66

1973-74 2,304,916 6.9605 16,043,367.82

1974-75 2,038,379 5.7881 11,798,341.49

1975-76 2,533,500 5.4533 13,815,935.55

Average 2,386,903 $4.5997 10,979,037.73

'Derived by multiplying the average nunber of pelts (2,386,903) by the
average price per pelt ($4.59997).

Source: Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Comnission, 1977.
Munphrey, et al, 1978.

189

TAEU 4. 10

Average Annual pounds of Meats

Frorn Louisiana Wetlands

(By Species)

1970-1971 Through 1974-1975

Species Average

Muskrat 279,440

Nutria 9,116,750

Raccoon 376,464

Opossm 146,080

Total 9,918,734

Source: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1977.
Mumphrey, et al (1978).

190

TABLE 4. 11

Annual Harvest Of Meats

Fran Furbearing Animals In Louisiana

(All Species)

1967-1968 Through 1976-1977

Average Price Estimated
Number Per Pound Total Value
Year Of Pounds (1977 Dollars) (1977 Dollars)

1967-68 91220,000 $ .1667 $ 1,536.974.00

1968-69 11,660,000 .1625 1,894,750.00

1969-70 10,480,000 .1393 1,459,864.00

1970-71 8,770,000 .1324 1,187,628.00

1971-72 8,970,000 .1288 1,155,336.00

1972-73 11,300,000 .1310 1,480,300.00

1973-74 12,550,000 .1486 1,864,930.00

1974-75 10,430,000 .1375 1,434,125.00

1975-76 11,136,000 .1369 1@524,518.40

1976-77 3,635,000 .1883 684,470.50

Average 9,815,100 .1472 1,444,782.72 1

'Derived by multiplying the average nunber of pounds of meats (9,815,100)
by the average price per pound (.1472).

Source: Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Cam-iission, 1977.
Mumphrey, et al (1978).

191

TABLE 4.12

Estirmted Gross Economic Contribution

Of A Wetland Acre In The Barataria Basin

Annual Return Present Value
Activity Category Per Acre Per Acre

Conmercial Fishing $ 286.36 $ 5,540.42

Non-Conmercial Fishing $ 3.19 46.40

Coamercial Trapping (Pelts & Meats) 11.69 170.05

Recreation:
Economic Inpact of Recreation
Expenditures 60.08 873.89

Economic Value of User-
Benefits from Recreation 104.33 2,428.17

Totals $ 465.65 $ 9,058.93

Source: Mumphrey, et al (1978).

192

TABLE 4.13

Estimated Net Economic Contribution

.Of A Wetland Acre In The Barataria Basin

Annual Return Present Value
Activity Category Per Acre Per Acre

Comneercial Fishing $ 26.45 $ 384.73

Camiercial Trapping 1.91 27.84
(Pelts & Meats)

Recreation
Economic Value of User-Benefits 104.33 2,428.17

Totals $ 132.69 $ 2,840.74

Source: Wurphrey, et al (1978).

193

TABLE 4. 14

Revised Estimate Of Gross Economic Contribution Of A Wetland Acre

In The Barataria Basin Based On U. S. Army Corps Of Engineers Regulations

Annual Return Present Value
Activity Category Per Acre Per Acre

Comercial Fishing $ 93.13 $ 1,801.76

Non-Comnercial Fishing 3.19 46.40

Coffne-rcial Trapping 3.80 55.30
(Pelts & Meats)

Recreation
Economic In-pact of
Recreation Expenditures 20.58 299.28

Economic Value of User Benefits
from Recreation 76.95 1,790.54

Tbtals 197.65 3,993.28

Source: MLwphrey, et al (1978).

194

Mitigation Efforts

As mentioned previously much of the environmental damage has been

done in the past. Currently, the technology exists to minimize damage

to the wetlands. The State of Louisiana has an approved Coastal Zone

Management Program which fosters local supervision of many wetland

activities. This marks the first time that local governments in our

area have participated in, or planned for managing the wetlands resources

within their borders. These efforts, combined with U. S. Amy Corps of

Engineers 404 dredge and fill permit system and the Federal 208 and 201

water pollution control plans of the State should help mitigate future

damage to these areas.

Economic factors and regulations also make reclamation a dubious if

not impossible proposition. This will help slow down wetland deter-

ioration.

One economic loss to the parish often overlooked is that of the

severance tax from wetland oil and gas extraction. Once an area erodes

away, the water bottom becomes state owned so that the parish loses its

allotment of tax revenues from that former tract of wetlands. By,con-

trolling reclamation and channelization of wetlands, the parishes and

State can slow down land loss and help preserve a vital source of local

revenue.

195

Stopping Land Loss

Several methods have been proposed for pursuing active policies

aimed at slowing or actually stopping land loss. Such methods include

the following:

1. allowing the river to resume its natural patterns of flooding

and silt deposition

2. controlled introduction of freshwater to combat saltwater

intrusion and reintroduce nutrients into the system

3. controlled introduction of water and silt to rebuild subsiding,

eroding areas (Gagliano, et al, 1973)

Of course the first alternative is unacceptable, due to the fact

that human habitation could not exist here as we know it under these

circumstances.

Alternative t@m is currently being used in St. Bernard Paxish and

contemplated in Jefferson Parish to reintroduce significant quantities

of freshwater back into the ecosystem.

Alternative three is the best, but costliest of the tV.Q feasible

alternatives. Maintaining a channel depth and flow to more large amounts

of silt vould be expensive and dangerous to the flood protection system

that such a distribution system would have to break.

ODNCLUSIONI

An attempt has been made here in this chapter to condense and

present some of the most iffiportant,conflicts and land use problems in

our region. Much has been written about these problem and many have no

viable solution at the present time. In Phase II of our Land Use report,

196

we will statistically assess these and other conflicts through a study

of land use pattern changes over time. It is hopeful that the reader

will gain a better understanding of the issues that confront this area

regarding the utilization of our mst previous resource, the land we

live on.

197

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Craig, N. and Day, J. (1976) Cumulative Irrpact: Effects of Eutrophication
and Salinity Changes in the Nursery Zone of Barataria Basin.
Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana State University, Baton
Rouge, Louisiana.

Gagliano, S. M. ((1973) Hydrologic and Geologic Studies of Coastal
Louisiana: Report No. 14, Canals, Dredging and Land Reclamation
in the Louisiana Coastal Zone. Center for Wetland Resources,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Gagliano, S. M. et al (1973) Hydrologic and Geologic Studies of Coastal
Louisiana: R6@@rt No. 18 Volune I: Environmental Atlas and
Multi-Use Management Plan for South Central Louisiana. Center for
Wetland Resources, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.

Louisiana Department of Public Works (1974) Official Map of Louisiana.
Louisiana Department of Public Works, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission (1976) Comparative Lakes of
F'ur Animals in Louisiana. Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries
Cannission, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Amphrey, A. J. et al (1975) Louisiana Metropolitan Wetlands: A Planning
Perspective. Urban Studies Institute, University of New Orleans,
New Orleans, Louisiana. (Unpublished).

Nhunphrey, A. J. et al (1978) The Value of Wetlands in the Barataria
Basin. Ur6aiT Tt-udies Institute, University of New Orleans.
New Orleans, Louisiana.

National Marine Fisheries Service, Natural Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U. S. Department of ConTa-erce (1977) Fisheries of
the United States: 1976. Washington, D. C., U. S. Government
Printing Office.

Natural Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atnospheric
Administration, U. S. Department of Connxerce (1967-77) Louisiana
Landings. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington', D. C.

Office of Science, Technology and Environmental Policy (1979) Preliminary
List of Open Dumps. Office of Science, Technology and Environmental
Policy, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

South Central Planning and Development Commission (1977) Overall Economic
Development Program. South Central Planning and Developn-ent
Comnission, 'Ihibo Louisiana.

198

U. S. Army Cc)rps of Engineers (1970) Levees on the Lower Mississippi.
Department of the AnW, Mississippi River Conmission, Corps of
Engineers, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

U. S. Amy Corps of Engineers (1973) Flood Central: Lower Mississippi
River Valley. U. S. A:rmy Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.

U. S. Army Cc)rps of Engineers (1977) Value of Wetlands and Bottcmland
Hardwoods. New Orleans, Louisiana, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.

199

DATE DUE

GAYLORDINo. 2333

@ Tkil