Lafourche Parish Coastal Zone Management Program

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

LAFOURCHE PARISH
Coastal Zone Management'

M7777
A@N

HT
393
L82
L34
1983
V. I
VOLUME I
An Overview of Lafourche Pari,,@O.-@�

LAFOURCHE PARISH

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

VOLUME I AN OVERVIEW OF LAFOURCHE PARISH

REPORT OF THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND
LAFOURCHE PARISH PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO THE LAFOURCHE PARISH
COUNCIL

PREPARED BY EDWIN J. DURABB, PLANNING DIRECTOR, IN CONJUNCTION
WITH THE LAFOURCHE PARISH CZM ADVISORY COMMITTEE

US Department Of Commerce
NOAA& Coastal Service Center Library"
2234 South Hobson Avenue
Charleston SC 29405-2413

The preparation of this report was financed in part through a
grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce under the provisions
of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.

NOTICE
"This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources in the interest of
information exchange. The State of Louisiana assumes no
liability for its contents or the use there of."

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . ii

List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . iii

Lafourche Parish CZTJ Advisory Committee Members . . . v

Chapter 1: The Environmental Setting . . . . . . . . 1
Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Geomorphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 24
Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
The Wetlands Ecosystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Chapter II: Demography and Settlement Patterns . . . 60
General History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Settlement Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Demography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Chapter III: The Economy of the Lafourche Parish
Coastal Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Employment and Wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Economic Sectors . . * * * * ' * * * ' * * * * * 83
Federal, State, and Local Projects in the Coastal
Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

Appendix i: Land Cover: Lafourche Parish 1980 116

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE
1.1 Gulf Coast Geosyncline . . . . .. . . . . . 2

1.2 Louisiana Physiographic Regions . . . . . 3

1.3 Salt Dome Geologic Structure . . . . . . . 5
1.4 Cross Section of a Salt Dome . ... . . . . 6
1.5 Deltas of the Mississippi . . .. . . . . . 9
1.6 Ice Age Louisiana Shoreline Greatest
Seaward Advance . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

1.7 Approximate Position of the Shoreline
During Maximum Gulf of Mexico Trans-
gression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

1.8 Identification Map for Delta Lobes of
the Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

1.8 Time Sequence for Mississippi Delta
Lobes . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . I. . . 15

1.9 Life Cycle Cross Section of a Deltaic
Plain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 21

1.10 Geomorphological Features 22

1.11 General Soil Map -Lafourche Parish . . . 25

1.12 Soils of South Louisiana . . . . .. . . . 26

1.13 Average Yearly Temperature . . . . . . . 34

1.14 Average Yearly Precipitation . . . . . . 39

3.1 Parish Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

LIST'OF TABLES

Table 'Page

1.1 Temperature and Precipitation Totals . . . . 35

1.2 Average Relative Humidity . . . . . . . . . 40

1.3 Air Quality Monitoring Sites . . . . . . . . 42

1.3 Monitoring Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . 43

1.4 Ambient Air Quality Standards . . . . . . . 44

1.5 Physical Pr@operties Governing Productivity
of Estuarine Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

1.6 Ecological Roles of Some Estuarine Species . 52

1.7 Benefits of the Estuarine Ecosystem . . . . 56

2.1 Lafourche Parish Population by Wards . . . . 65

2. 2 Population, Births, and Deaths by Race and
by Birth and Death Rates . . . . . . . . . . 67

2.3 Ward 10 Population . . . . . . . . . . 70

2.4 Population Projections - Lafourche Parish 72

2.55, Ward 10 Population Projections . . . . . . . 73

3.1 Average Employment and Average Wage by
Industry in Lafourche Parish Covered by
the Louisiana Employment Security Law 76

3.2 Per Capita Personal Income, By Parish . . . . 81

3.3 Unemployment Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

3.4 Manufacturers in Lafourche Parish
in 1981 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

3.5 Oil and Gas Fields in Lafourche Parish
Coastal Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

3.6 'Oil Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

3.7 Gas Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

LIST OF TABLES (cont.)

Table Pagge

3.8 Oil and Gas Wells in Lafourche Parish . . . 92

3.9 Property Assessments 1978 - 1979 94

3.10 Property Assessments 1980 - 1981 . . . . . . 96

3.11 Louisiana Landings 1981 - All Fish . . . . . 99

3.12 Louisiana Landings 1981 - Finfish . . . . . 100

3.13 Louisiana Landings 1981 - Shellfish . . . . 101

3.14 Louisiana Department of Wildlife and
Fisheries Seafood Division - Survey Section
Leased Water Bottom Acreage . . . . . . . 102

3.15 Wholesale and Retail Fish and Seafood Out-
lets - Lafourche Parish . . . . . . ... . 103

3.16 Changes in Number of Farms . . . . . . . . . 105

3.17 Lafourche Parish Farm Statistics - Crops . .106

3.18 Cattle and Calves on Farms, Milk Cows on
Farms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

3.19 Change in Total Cropland, Change in Sugar
Cane Acres Harvested . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

3.20 Port Fourchon Multi-Port . . . . . . . . . . 111

3.21 Louisiana Offshore Oil Port Facts . . . . . 110"

3.22 South Lafourche Levee District Hurricane
Protection Project . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 113

LAFOURCHE PARISH COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS

AS OF DECEMBER 20, 1982

Caroll Adams Horace Thibodaux

Gerald Bordelon Mark Daire

Windell Curole Vince GuillorY

Ted Falgout Gerald Louviere.

Perry Gisclair

LAFOURCHE PARISH CZM, STAFF

CZM Coordinator - Ed Durabb, Planning Director

Typing - Connie Doran, Secretary

Drafting - Sandi Aymond, Student Draftsperson

Printing - Susan Burleigh, Public Services Coordinator

The author also wishes to gratefully acknowledge the logistical
and financial support provided to the roastal Zone Management
project by Parish President, Dick Egle', without whose committ-
ment the program would not have been possible.

INTRODUCTION

This report is the culmination of several vears of

dedicated effort at the state and parish level to develop

a workable plan to manage the valuable wetland areas in

Lafourche Parish. From the earliest reports outlining the

alarming problems in our coastal areas in 1970, to the

passage of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act in 1972,
to the numerous efforts at developing a S't,-.te Coastal Plan

to the passage of the Louisiana State and Local Coastal Re-

sources Management Act of 1978 (Act 361), there has been

an increasing realization of the critical problems con-

fronting our state and the need to establish a plan to

deal with these problems in a coordinated fashion.

Lafourche Parish has participated since 1977 in several

management efforts, lst to provide input into the state pro-

gram development and, later, to develop a local plan as Dart

of the developing state program. After several efforts, changes

in direction, and necessary alterations to management proposa ls,

the state program was established and allowance was made for

parish participation in the coastal management process on a

voluntary basis. This report is a summary of a Proposed local

Coastal Zone Management Plan for Lafourche Darish. Consider-

ing the fact that the parish is over 84q- wetlands and water,

and that 4000 acres of wetlands are being lost per year to

erosion and saltwater intrusion and that, until recently, the

parish had no control of activities occurring in the wetlands,

(control rested with Federal agencies@ mainly the U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers) and considering the renewable resources

and mineral production of these areas and the large population

residing in the coastal zone, it became imperative that the

parish government participate in a program such as CZM and

thus reassert control over this area of vital parish interest.

The new parish governmental structure (Council - President

system) with its division of responsiblilities and expansion of

services made it feasible for perhaps the lst time for the

parish to develop and administer a management plan that best

protects parish interests while recognizing the statewide and

national importance of our state's productive wetland areas,

lands that compose over.40% of the total wetland area of the

entire United States!

The program outlined in this report provides the guidance,

framework, and specific management techniques for wetlands

management in our parish coastal zone. Although tailored to

meet the needs of Lafourche Parish, the program fits within

the guidelines set for the overall state program. Acceptance

of these plans puts Lafourche Parish into a partnership with

the State of Louisiana in the management of parish wetland

resources. This is a far cry from the exclusive federal con-

trol that, up until recently was the only management attempt

over an area that is.so important to Lafourche Parish.

The Coastal Zone Management report is divided into two

volumes:

Volume I - An Overview of Lafourche Parish

Chapter I The Environmental Setting

Chapter II Demography and Settlement Patterns

Chapter III The Economy of the Lafourche
Parish Coastal Zone

Appendix i Land Cover - Lafourche Parish

Volume II - Coastal Zone Management in Lafourche
Parish

Chapter I An Overview of the Federal and
State Crd7j-7v' Program

Chapter II An Overview of the local CZM
Program

Chapter III Permitting and Permit Monitoring
the CZM Management Tool

Chapter IV Environmental Management Units

Chapter V The CZM Ordinance

Appendix i Information Base for the Local
Program

Appendix ii Minutes of the CZM Advisory
Committee

The Lafourche CZM plan outlined in these two reports, when

combined with the information and resources of the state pro-

gram will, when accepted and implemented, provide the basis for

sound local and state management of a vital and endangered

parish resource in the best interest of the citizens of Lafourche

Parish and the State of Louisiana.

CHAPTER I

THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

GEOLOGY

Geologic History

Lafourche Parish lies within a geologic basin which has

been collecting sediment since the Mesozoic Period. 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 limestone, during their sequential deposit-ion. A

layer of salt was deposit ed 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

downwarped, partially from the weight of the sediment load it

has collected and partially from the compaction of the sediment

itself. This process has gone on for over 200,000,000 years.

Recently, the downwarping has led to subsidence of surface

features and to upliftinz of the Pleistocene terraces to the

north (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). These features are currently ex-

tant today in the Florida Parishes of Louisiana.

Economic and Structural Geology

Economically, the Gulf Coast geosyncline is very important.

IMRO"I. I"

GULF COAST GEOSYNCLINE

--Zone of Subsidence toq -Zone of Uplift

a
Uplifted To
it
011toic Plain
Sea Leg

Flood Plain

Recent Deltaic
Deposits
Earlier Deltaic
Sequences @Y

-X

Subcrustal Flow

SOURCE: MORK"3AN (1977)

FIGURE 1.2

LOUISIANA PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Plei ....... Terraces

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alluvial
. . . . . . . . . . . . ....
...... . . . . . . . . . .
Val
ley

...........
............. .
Marginal
)eltaic 'Plain Deltaic
Plain

SOURCE: MORGAN (1977)

Deposits of natural gas, oil, sulphur, and salt are nurfierous.

These natural resources have been found in the Miocene Age or

younger strata. Lafourche Parish is%a very large producer of

oil and gas. These deposits, to a large degree, depend upon

a Phenomenon in the area known as salt domes. 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 slow-

ly rising toward the surface. This movement toward the surface

includes breaking through the overlying strata or deforming it

(Figure 1.3).

Some of these domes of salt have risen as much as 40,000

feet from their original depth and several even have surface

expressions of over 100 feet mean sea level (m.s.l.). No salt

domes have reached the surface in Lafourche Parish, however.

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 1.4). Some of the largest oil and gas fields

have been developed over these domes.

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

in a portion of the salt dome called the cap rock (Figure 1.4).

Anhydrite precipitates out of groundwaters, which come into con-

tact with the salt, and the other minerals are formed by alter-

atioz2 of the anhydrite. The salt and sulphur can be mined.

FI GURE 1. 3

SALT DOME GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE

GAS-

..........

R LLOVER CAP ROCK r-WATER
ANTICLINE
SALT DOME
... .......
(OVERHANG)

GOUGE

SOURCE: TEXACO (1979)

FIGURE 1. 4

CROSS SECTION OF A SALT DOME

CALCITE ZONE
CAS04 AV' TRANSITIO
ZONE
BAS04 'ANH

SULPHUR

SOURCE: MORGAN (1977)

Examples of this include Avery Island 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. Lafourche Parish is crossed

by a series of fault systems which trend west to east. These

faults were brought on by the nature of the deposition of sedi-

ment causing weak sections of strata to give way or by salt

layers applying pressure from below. Geologists are not cer-

tain what the origin of the fault system is. In Lafourche

Parish, these faults are buried by newer sediment and thus

have no surface expression.

GEOMORPHOLOGY

Introduction

The land area of Lafourche Parish, sits astride one of the

most dynamic geomorphological systems in the United States, the

Mississippi River Deltaic Plain. Prior to 6,000 years ago, the

land area now exposed in our parish was part of the continental

shelf of the Gulf Coast and largely under water. From that

point to the present, the Mississippi River distribu tary system

has created several delta lobes extending far into what once was

the Gulf of Mexico (Gagliano and Van Beek, 1970). Figure 1.5

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 in-

dicate. 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 exist-

ing today in the parish. The following sections explain the

alluvial processes that have shaped our landscape and the re-

sults of-natural interactions on the system.

FIGURE 1.5

DELTAS OF THE MISSISSIPPI

LAKE

PONTCHARTRAI

TECHE
DELTA COMPLEX
bT BERNARD

DELTA COMPLEX

LAFOURCHE
'VELTA COMPLEX

P QUEMINES

MARINGOUIN
DELTA COMPLEX
/Ico @0-
OF M V MTLES

SOURCE'- GAGLIANO & VAN BEEK (1970)

Recent Geologic History

The physical expression of the geology of southern

Louisiana can be classified into four areas: the Pleistocene

terrace, the marginal deltaic plain, the deltaic plain, and

the alluvial valley. The parish lies wholly within the del-

taic 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. The deltaic

plain 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 continental glaciation. The shoreline was relocated

close to the outer margin of the continental shelf (Figure-1.6).

The Mississippi River cut a trench into the resultant Pleisto-

cene prairie terrace in an effort to adjust to the new sea level.

This trench occurred west of the oresent course of the Missis-

sippi, probably in the western portion of south central

Louisiana.

The sea level starte.d to rise about 18,000 years ago.

Streams began filling in their valleys in an attempt 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 coast-

line relocated to what is now far inshore (Figure 1.7). It

was at this point that the Mississippi River began to shape the

landscape that currently exists in Lafourche Parish.

FIGURE 1.6

I'CE AGE LOUISIANA SHORELINE
GREATEST SEAWARD ADVANCE

PRESENT
COAST

ICE AGE
COAST

SOURCE: MORGAN (1977)

FIGURE 1.7

APPROXIMATE POSITION OF THE SHORELINE DURING MAXIMUM
GULF OF MEXICO TRANSGRESSION

--------------------------------
.............. 1% ......
. ..............
...... ..
........... Marsh Floodplain Deposits

.........
Sand Beaches
....... .. ..

.............. .. ... ... Pleistocene Prairie Terrace

ilk
47
NEW ORLEANS

HOUMA
J
F m
GULF

Miles
0 15 30

SOURCE: MORGAN (1977)

Recent Alluvial Processes

During the last 6,000 years after sea level adjusted it-

self 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 meanderings over the

last 7,500 years, five 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

Figure 1.8 illustrates the shifting courses of the Missis-

sippi as it deposited sediment across the continental shelf in

Louisiana.

Of the major delta systems only the earliest (Maringouin)

has no surface exDression. The Deltaic lobe system that has

created the land of Lafourche Parish was the Lafourche system.

Because these deltas were formed at different times and loca-

tions, they are in various stages of development as landforms.

The deltaic depositional distributary system created

FIGURE 1.8

IDENTIFICATION MAP FOR DELTA LOBES OF THE

WSSISSIPPI

INDEX MAP

ALLUVIAL

PLAIN
LAKE

PONTCHARTRAIN

TECHE, 1, 2, 4
@T BERNARD,3,5,78911
LAFOURCHE
PLAQUEMINES -MODERN: 13,16

G U

OF
AfLrxJCO
*44

miles -'LTA COMPLEX

SOURCE GAGLIANO a VAN BEEK (1970)

FIGURE 1.8 (cont.)
TIME SEQUENCE OR MISSISSIPPI DELTA LOWES

THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE PRESENT

00 -j Cn W C)

Cn PLAQUEMINES-
MODERN
Mississippi River DELTA COMPLE)

Bayou Lafourche @_n

@ -3
Bayou LEfourche and Terrebonne LAFOURCHE
DELTA
Bayou Black COMPLEX

Bayou Blue
M Bayou Terreb nne

Ba5ou Sauvage

00 Miysissippi La Loutre
I ST. BERNARD
Bayou Des F milies DELTA
Bayou Terre Aux Boeufs COMPLEX

Mississippi River and Bayou Lafourche

Bayou Cypr mort
rr F, (I H r
Ba[ou Sale' DELTA COMPLE,'
Bayou Teche

MARINGOUIN
DELTA COMPLE:

SOURCE GAGLIANo aVAN SEEK (1970)

landform systems in Lafourc@e Parish. These are:

(1) Natural Levees (Depositional Landform)

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

(3) Barrier Island/Beach Ridges (Erosional Landform)

The natural levees extant in the parish are those of the

Lafourche deltaic lobes. The inter-distributary basins are

the Barataria and Terrebonne Basins. The processes leading to

the formation 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 landforms

by deposition 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 formed when the river flooded during the spring time.

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). Deposition in the inter-distributary

basins consisted mainly of fine clays and thus deposition here

proceeded at a slower rate. The historical settlement pat-

terns in Lafourche Parish reflect a linear Dattern coinciding

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

Erosion and Subsidence

Two processes-that run concurrent with, and continue after

delta building in coastal Louisiana; are subsidence and erosion.

Erosion of the deltaic deposits come from the sea, mainly

during intense storm periods. After deltaic deposition slows

or stops in reaction to a shifting river channel, erosion rapid-

ly reclaims much of the area that was once land. As wdves,

especially during storms, erode the coastline of an abandoned

deltaic plain, features known as barrier islands are produced.

Barrier Island have been def ined as:

Elongate, thin structures parallel to the shore-
line of unconsolidated sediments (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 enerFies,
and ocean flooding are the predominant factors
which shape and regulate the bar-rier island eco-
system. As a result of these factors, barrier
islands are extremely dynamic systems, constantly
subject to change. Seasonal and other regular
cyclic fluctuations in wave patterns and inten-
sity combine with irregular ocean storms and
hurricanes to form and reform island profiles.
The beaches and dunes migrate in response to
these fluctuations. Storm 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
island, I should emphasize 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 Lafourche

Parish (East Timbalier) is derived from silt deposits from the

current delta of the Mississippi River, as well as erosional

reworking of old silt deposits.

The stranded barrier beaches of the parish were developed

in a similar manner.

These features serve as unique ecosystems in themselves.

They also protect the vulnerable marshlands behind them from

rapid erosion. Currently, the barrier island complex is dimin-

ishing in size due to lack of sediment replenishment and man-

made alterations in the ecosystems.

Natural subsidence originates from two factors: compaction

and geologic subsidence.

Structural geologic subsidence 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 two processes 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 areas for most of the

year, artificial levees were built to prevent the occurrence of

disastrous river flooding that constantly plagued early settlers

in the area. These levees also halted deposition of new sediment

onto the deltas where they were built, thus preventing further

deltaic development.

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) accu-

mulating on top of old sediments in the basins helped keep pace

with subsidence and maintain a surface level near to mean 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 (pumps). Should the levees break, the area would revert

to a shallow water body due to the artificial increase in sub-

sidence 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"vege-

tation that holds together the Deat and clay deposits that make

up the basins. Without this protection most of the land

succumbs quickly to erosion and is lost (the man-made'al-

terations to the landscape will be discussed further in later

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

rently estimated at over 40 square miles per year in Louisiana.

The Geologic Subsidence Rate is calculated to be approximately

one foot per century from natural causes (Gagliano et. al. 1981)

Figure 1.9 is an illustrative example of a natural levee/

basin structure of a deltaic lobe moving through the various
stages of delta building and decay. The Lafourche delta lobe

falls 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 1.10 illustrates the various landforms extant in.south-

central Louisiana at present.

Summary

It is apparent from the previous discussion that the entire

region is a young dynamic geomorphological area, the features of

FIGURE 1.9

LIFE CYCLE CROSS SECTION OF A DELTAIC PLAIN

FRresh Marsh
MUck

tf 0-0or �itty 5-0y

A- initial Development of Distributaries and Interdistributary Trough.

Fresh 4- Sightly Brackish Marsh Marsh
Marsh

-Lem

InilardistributwY Trough Fill
ating

,rgm.md of Vvi@ DlshrlbufarY and He Natural Lwasi-Creation of Mwom in

-9 M IF i Brackish Marsh

Lem

Q Mwimurn Deirdaptnent of DistributirY and It's Natural Lanes,-creafian of SiAomp as Levee
Subskies,

Swamp --+-Brackish Marsh

Ilatural Le'm

D, ioration of Distributary -Advance of Swamp Over Subsiding Levees.

Brackish Marsh Saline Marsh
Ani d4

Natura I Levee

E. Canftued Subsidence VAth Partial Destruction of Morshm.
Fresh aMarsh

SOURCE: GAGLIANO VAN BEEK (1970)

GEOMORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES

fli
kill:

jo-

...... .. ...

In.

RIM PLEISTOCENE TERRACE
FLATILANDS a BASINS

NATURAL LEVEE

o 'a
COASTAL MARSH a lo
ESTUARINE BASIN SOURCE US Corps of EngiflseflI U9731 and
BARRIER ISLANDS a BEACHES ..,,NOlATlON,*ACC.RACY Drafting Section of South Central
To bE USEU FOR fl ANNiNG Planning& Development Commi6won(
PURPOSES ONLY SuRVEY MEASuREMENTS
........ PARISH EO)NDARY ARE NOT TO BE MADE FROM THIS MAP

which have shaped the patterns of settlement and the-economic

activity in the past and in the present.

SOILS

The soils of Lafourche Parish are those developed as a

result of the alluvial processes that created the parish.

In the coastal zone of Lafourche, the major alluvial soil

types are represented. (See Figure 1.11)

General Categories

The only truly stable soils are the mineral ones assoc-

i-ated with the Bayou Lafourche distributary system. Although

elevations are generally below +5 feet m.s.l. in the coastal

zone, the mineral base of the soil reduces subsidence and

provides a firm base on which to construct homes, businesses,

etc. Fortunately, there are several ridges of this alluvium.

either at the surface or buried slightly beneath it within

the area covered by the South Lafourche levee system, the only

area suitable for human habitation due to adequate flood protec-

tion, These soils are expressed Commerce and Sharkev soil types.

The latter soil has limitations due to the shrinking and swell-

ing of the largely clay base of the soil and its poor drainage

characteristics. The clay base soils include Sharkey and Bar-

bary Fausse soils. The other soils of the south Lafourche area

are mainly saturated marsh soils with. variable organic content.

These soils are constantly flooded, very unstable, and subject

to subsidence if drained. They include Allemands - Kenner -

Larose soils, Lafitte Clovelly and Timbalier, Belle Pass soils.

A major percentage of the soils underlyinq the area with the

new South Lafourche levee system are reclaimed swamp or marsh

soils (See Figure 1.11). Figure 1.12 shows the location and

Figure 1. 11

GENERAL SOIL MAP

LAFOURCHE PARISH, LOUISIANA

Soils of the natural levees.that are never flooded and

occasionally flooded are called:

1. Commerce: Level, somewhat poorly drained soils
that are loamy throughout

2. Sharkey: Level, poorly drained soils that have
a loamy and clayey surface laver and a clayey
subsoil and underlying material

Soils of the swamps and marshes that are ponded and frequent-

ly flooded include:

3. Barbary-Fausse: Level, very poorly drained soils
that have a mucky and clayey surface layer and a
clayey subsoil and underlying material; in swamps

4. Allemands-Kenner-Larose: Level, very poorly drained
soils that have a mucky surface layer and a mucky
and clayey underlying material; in freshwater
marshes.

5. Lafitte-Clovelly: Level, very poorly drained soils
that have a mucky surface layer and a mucky and
clayey underlying material: in brackish marshes

6. 2:imbalier-Bellpass: Level, very Doorly drained soils
that have a mucky surface layer and mucky and clayey
underlying material; in saline marshes

7. Scatlake- Level, very poorly drained soils that have'
a clayey surface layer and a clayev, loamy, and sandy
underlving material; in saline marshes

Soils of former marshes that are drained and protected from

flooding include:

8. Rita-Allpmn-nds; drained: Level, poorly drained soils
that have a mucky surface laver and a mucky loamy,
and clayey subsoil and underlying material; in former
freshwater marshes

Source: U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1982

S01 LS
OF
SOUTH LOUISIANA
Fill

LAKA "ICkAIJIMANN

4- 4-A dF
jg"

I@Jv %L%

2A-

ALLUVIAL SOILS INQUOIL611ses-R.GrValleVol
PLEISTOCENE TERRACE 101du UPIGA")
04

MSIN SOILS: Swamp Fares$ baffomowW
Day SON Seib

MARSH/ SWAMP QRGANIC SOILS NDTATION Of ACCUWV
KACH RIDGE I NARRIER ISLAND (Silts& SONUI THIS MAP IS TO KSUSEO FOR PLANNING
PURPONG Qk.V URV91 1101ASUMMENTS
ARE NOT TO K Thais Flt0d THIS MAP Sot.JCE@ U Army Carps of Enoincars
Be lion of Soulb Cooral Pto

general types of soils in south central Louisiana. Drainage of

these soils for agricultural, industrial, commercial, and resi-

dential purposes has resulted in subsidence of some areas to

slightly below sea,level. The development of land in south

Lafourche has created similar problems to those encountered by

New Orleans. In south Lafourche there is a narrow central

spine of high land with reclaimed wetland on either side. Thus,

drainage water moves in two directions away from the high cen-

tral land. Forced pumpa ge must be utilized to keep the area dry

since portions of the drainage area. are now below sea level,

as in the New Orleans area. Although the reclamation of the area

is completed and the levee is necessary for the safety of the

residents of south Lafourche, there are some negative impacts

caused by subsidence. The following is a brief discussion of a

major problem in the reclaimed wetlands of the Lafourche Coastal

Zone.

Subsidence

Subsidence is a negative land change caused by geological

lowering of the surface elevation or other factors. In coastal

Louisiana, the primary cause of subsidence is the shrinkage and

oxidation of organic materials in soils. The problem is com-

pounded by geological lowering of the surface elevation through-

out the coastal areas of the Gulf of Mexico.

The reason for shrinkage. of wetland soils is their organic

nature. Organic materials in the soil are generally decomposed

or.partially decomposed Plant remains. Soils shrink as.the

organic matter dries, shrinks and oxidates (disintegrates on

exposure to oxygen).

Subsidence of soils takes place in two phases:

(1) Initial Soil Subsidence. This is the result of
drainage of the soils and lowering of the water
table. Overall, initial subsidence causes a 50%
immediate volume reduction in organic wetland
soils.

(2) Cont*inued soil subsidence. Continued, gradual
decomposition of the organic material. This
phase may produce up to 2 inches per year re-
duction in surface elevation.

It should be noted that farming speeds up the oxidation

process by allowing more oxygen into the soil during tilling.

Subsidence in an already developed area may be slowed by

adding a layer of good mineral soil, which helps to inhibit

oxygen penetration in-to the organic matter.

Cost of Subsidence

Four basic areas of concern arise over subsidence in areas

that have been reclaimed and developed.

(1) Landscape elements such as drives, walkways, and walks
may crack, warp, sink, or suffer structural failure.
Plant growth may be inhibited by poor drainage or soil
conditions.

(2) Sinking of the ground level and actual crackine of the
land surface may result in unsightly gaps around
foundation edges, etc.

(3) Building elements such as walls, foundations and roofs
may crack or break with the settling, tilting, and un-
even stress related to land movement.

(4) Utilities systems providing water, sewerage, electric-
ity, gas, and telephone services may be interrupted by
leakage or breakage of service lines.

Homeowners assume all costs for repair or replacement of

damaged structures on their property.

Major structural repairs may cost-between $1,200 to $6,000

per home.

Yearly maintenance costs may be computed by the number of

loads of fill needed to shore up around a house at about $25

per load (in 1976).

A real fear related to subsidence is the breakage of gas

lines connecting homes with the main utility line along street

right-of-ways. Gas lines that are unsupported sag and crack

as surface elevations drop. Leaking gas becomes trapped under-

neath the house foundation and is highly combustible.

Developers face added costs in wetlands which are passed

on to the consumer.

(1) The ground surface, buildings, roads, and utilities
must be stabilized.

(2) Buildings and sometimes roads must be elevated on
fill.

(3) Excavations for utilities, drainage, and foundations
must cope with on-site soil problems.

It is estimated by New Orleans contractors that the cost

of developing a subdivision (exclusive of homes) in recently

reclaimed wetlands is 50 per cent greater than in natural dry

lands.

The average cost of raising a conventional slab house

with fill to meet flood insurance elevation standards in re-

claimed wetlands was estimated to cost between $400 for a 1

foot rise to $3000 for an 8 foot rise above the base elevation.

Government expenditures for subsidence problems are as

f ollows:

(1) Installation and maintenance of drainage and flood
protection facilities comprises a major budget item.

(2) Public facilities such as schools and parks require
continual maintenance.

(3) Services such as street repairs and protection from
the fire hazards of underground organic soil com-
bustion must be provided.

(4) Property values in neighborhoods must be retained to
prevent the creation of tax burdens if serious deter-
ioration is allowed.

These governmental expenditures to remedy subsidence

based problems ultimately result in an increased burden on the

taxpayers.

Flooding

Problems in coastal areas due to flooding are listed

below in six general categories. Each problem tends to be-

come a government responsibility. Local governments cannot

afford all the aid necessary to homeowners and businessmen

after floods. Disaster assistance must be sought from the

state and federal government. Again, the ultimate burden is on

the taxpayer.

(1) Contamination of the water supply by toxic, flammable
or bacterial matter creating a community health hazard;

(2) Reverse flow of sewerage effluent into buildings from
septic tanks and other sewage disposal systems;

(3) Structural damage by high velocity flood waters and/
or water-borne debris;.

(4) Danger from inundated electric lines, circuits, equip-
ment and appliances;

(5) Property damage to building contents by flood waters;

(6) Injury to community residents

While no set figure is available, sewerage costs are ex-

pected to be twice as much in reclaimed wetlands as in more

stable areas. Special techniques are necessary to install

both sewer and water lines.

Conclusion

While there are severe problems associated with the re-

clamation process, reclamation in the south Lafourche area

within the coastal zone is an accomplished feat. There are

27,000 people and millions of dollars of industrial and

commercial development to serve the fishing and oil and gas

industry. It is necessary, therefore, to do what is necessary

in the area of levee building, pump construction for drainage

and flood protection in this area of human habitation in the

coastal zone. Due to cost prohibitions and environmental

restrictions it is unlikely that any major new projects to

reclaim wetlands will occur in Lafourche Parish. There is

ample land for expansion of population and industry in the

area already reclaimed in the forseeable future.

CLIMATE

Introduction

The climate of Lafourche has been catep,*orized by the

Koppen-Geiger system of climatic classification as a 1fCfa"

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 Dortions of

the year. The land area of the parish sits immediately ad-

jacent to this moisture source. Water temperatures in the

07 '
Gulf, off the Louisiana coast, range from a low of 64 in
February to 840F 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 summer.

Another main factor in our climate is our subtropical

latitude. Although the geonorphology and climatic patterns

of the United States and Canada allow colder continental air

to intrude into the region on occasion, our subtropical lati-

tude 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. Thus, the main COMDonents that shape

our climate are latitude and proximity to the Grulf of Mexico.

The following is a brief summary description of the parameters

that make up the climate of the south central region.

Temperature

Yearly average temperatures for the region reflect the

subtropical latitude of the area (See Figure 1.13). 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 dominated by tropical

Gulf air, broken occasionall y by Pacific or Polar continental

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

often in the winter and can bring largd sudden drops in tem-

perature. In-the winter , as in the summer, the coldest local

temperatures occur inland and away from wetlands and water

bodies. Extreme temperatures for Houma (the closest station
for which such records are available) range from 12 0F to 100 0F
in August (See Table 1.1). 1

The growing season in Lafourche Parish is extremely long

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

parish and nearly three-hundred sixty five davs near the coast.

Occasionally, an early frost or freeze can damage the
agricultural interests in the parish since the main crop of

sugar cane is a tropical plant susceptible to freeze damage.

However, the average number of days when the minimum temperature

1 Note that there are no recording weather stations in the
parish. Therefore, we have chosen the closest station
available outside of the district boundary which is Houma,
Louisiana.

MiGURM

p p I

67
/ ----------
<
414' 67.4*

..06

sic

AVERAGE YEARLY TEMPERATURE

1 $00.000 Oduadl 0".. &
"Lwk.9
WTI t
pav-Z@

KE V . 6
HOUMA
0
LAT 29 35' N 1951-1973
LONG 96* 44! W Elevation 15 feet

TEMPERATURE(OF) PRECIPITATION TOTALS (inches)
Means Extremes Mean lGreatest Monthly Year Snow, Sleet
Month Min. Monthly Record Year ay Record Year Day Mean Max. Monthly Year
High LOW

Jan. 65.0 44.5 54.8 83 1952 Znd 12 1962 lith 4.58 12.36 1966 .0 .0
Feb. 67.3 46.3 56.8 85 1957 4th 13 1951 3rd 4.86 10.28 1966 .1 2.5 1958
March 72.7 52.0 62.4 88 1965 25th 281, 1968 Ist 4.13 9.50 1973 .0 .0
April 79.8 59.6 69.7 90f 1965 13th 34 1971 Sth 4.3T 14.06 1973 .0 .0
May 85.3 65.1 75.3 96 1953 28th 44 1952 12th 4.78 15.44 1959 .0 .0
June 90.1 70.3 60.2 99 1954 30th 55 11966 2nd 6.45 14.08 1963 .0 .0
July 90.9 72.5 81.7 99 1960 22nd 59 1967 16th 6.09 18.85 1954 .0 .0
Aug. 90.7 72.2 81.5 100 1951 15111 60 1967 12th 6.51 10.55 1960 .0 .0
Sept. 8.7.7 69.2 78.5 98 1964 Ist 44 1967 50th 8.05 19.41 1973 .0 .0
Oct 81.5 58.6 70.0 94 1962 9th 31 1952 30th 3.10 11.60 1959 .0 .0
NOW. .72.0- 50.5 61.7 874 1956 2nd 25 1951 10th 3.20 13.26 1963 .0 .0
Dec. 67.5 46.2 56.9 8* 1956 7th 15 1962 13th 5.17 11.56 1967 .0 .0
YEAR 79.3 58.9 69.1 100 Aug. 12th 12 Jan. 111th 63.59 19.41 Sept. .1 .0
1951 1962 1973

t Also on earlier dates SOURCE: U. S. Department of Commerce, 1975.

Houma Supplemental Data

Mean Number of days Maximum 90P and abovet 83 days
Mean Number of days Minimum 32 and below: 15 day
Greatest Daily Preelpliallon,11.35" - May 31, 1959

0
drops below 32 F is fifteen at Houma and thirteen at New
Orleans. Rarely do temperatures drop below 20 0F anvwhere

in the parish.

There are two main 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

Proximity to the Gulf of Mexico

Proximity to the Gulf of Mexico accounts for a signifi-

cant increase in yearly temperature. More importantly, 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 re-

leases 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 tem-

perature 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 immediately

along the coast. Although there are no reporting weather sta-

tions on the coast in our parish, the existence of black

mangrove suggests a more moderate climate than in the interior
where temperatures occasionally drop 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 temneratures along

the coast. Louisi ana, with its vast inland marshes, swamps,

bays, and lakes allows this moderating 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 over 80% of the parish has water cover

for most of the year, the influence in climate is signifi-

cant (South Central Planning and Development Commission:

1976:1).

Precipitation

"Precipitation in the parish is heavy throughout the year.

There are, however, two wet periods and one drier season. The

two wet seasons occur in July - August, and December, respec-

tively.

The drier period extends from late September to mid

November (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1979). Rainfall in the

summer 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 wide-'

spread in nature. Sometimes heavy ra. ins are associated with

tropical waves or storms in the late summer and fall.

From 1954 - 1976, nine tropical storms or hurricanes

passed through or near enough to the parish to affect local

precipitation (U. S. Department of the Interior, 1977).

Snow and sleet are extremely rare inland and almost non-

existent along the coast. For example, measureable snow has

occurred only once in Houma during the period of 1951 - 1973.

Figure 1.14 illustrates that maximum yearly precipitation

occurs somewhat inland from the coast line. This is probably

due to the warming effect of the land as moist ocean air passes

over it. The large expanse of coastal marsh make the transition

from a water to land base extremely slow'.

Relative humidity, the component of the local climate that

makes our weather most uncomfortable, is high throughout the

year. Table 1.2 illustrates the yearly means of Relative Humid-

ity for New Orleans. The driest and wettest monthly averages

are also included.

Winds

Prevailing winds generally blow from a southerly direction

for about half the year. In the late fall, winter and early

spring, intrusions of continental air into the region cause the

resulting direction to shift primarily to a northeast or north-

erly component.

Winds are generally light in the summer with maximum speeds

associated with the brief localized down drafts of afternoon

thunderstorms, Winds can occasionally be much stronger in the

late summer and fall due to troPicalstorms 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 systems and high pressure centers flow for brief periods.

"L('
WNU 631v

u p

SM44*

Vow

64 ALI-

.63,

last mralrowo

LNG

64*

AVERAGE YEARLY PRECIPITATION

D..m .. 00.090 tow oft"
4-0

TABLE 1. 2

AVERAGE RELATIVE HUMIDITY

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

Midnight 6:00 a.m. Noon 6:00 p.m.

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

(Dry) November 84% 86% 60% 7417,

(Wet) July 89TO 91% 66010 735r

YEARLY AVERAGE 85% 88% 63% 7117,

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1979.

Wind velocities are generally h-igher in the winter. At New
Orleans2-, 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 Commerce, 1979).

Air Quality

Due to the recently developed heavy industries associated

with the petro-chemical industry north of Lafourche Parish

along the river,land in response to the Clean Air Act, Louisiana

has established an air quality monitoring and control program.

"Table 1.3 lists the air quality monitoring stations near

Lafourche Parish. Table 1.4 lists the air quality standards

currently being used in Louisiana to monitor pollutants.

For the most part, air quality is good in Lafourche

Parish; however, as the petro-chemical industry continues to

expand along the Mississippi River, increased levels of pollu-

tants are to be expected, especially on days with inversions

and light northetly winds.

2New Orleans was the closest available station with wind data.
There are no stations within Lafourche Parish that keep this
type of record.

TABLE 1. 3

AIR OUALITV MONITORING SITES

CITY SITE NAME ADDRESS PARISI]

Carville USPHA Hospital Highway 75 Iberville

Donaldsonville Riverdate 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 Street Jefferson

Metairie Borden Company 1751 Airline Hwy. Jefferson

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

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

TA13LE 1.3 (cont).

MONITORING PARAMETERS

Continuous Non-Continuous

so2 TSP SO2 NO2

Carville X X -7 X

Garyville X Y X X

Geismar X X X

Harvey X X X

Metairie

Donaldsonville

03 Ozone
so2 Sulphur Dioxide
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
TSP Total Suspended Particulates

Source: Louis iana Air Control Commission, 1978: p. 3, 4.

TABLE 1. 4

AFIBIENT'AIR OUALITY STANDARDS

(Non-continuous Data)

Annual Annual
Maximum Geometric Arithmetic Conversion Factors
Parameter 24 hour average Mean Mean (250C, 760 mm fig)
Total Prim. - 260 uglm 3 75 ug/m .3
Suspended
Particulate See. 150 ug/m 3 60 uglm 3
365 ug/m3 80 ug/m3
Sulphur Prim. 0.14 ppm (0.03 ppm) ppm x 2620 ug/m3
Dioxide See. 260 ug/m3 60 ug/m3
0.10 ppm (0.02 p2m)
100 ug/m3
Nitrogen Prim. (0.05 ppm) ppm x 1880 ug/m3
Dioxide See. 100 UgIm 'i
(0.05 ppm)
1.50 COH/1000 0.60 COH/1000 0.75 COTT/1000
Prim.
Soiling linear ft. linear ft. linear ft.
Index
See.

Source: Louisiana Air Control Commission (1978), page 32.

THE WETLANDS ECOSYSTEM

Introduction

Lafourche Parish sits astride one of the most dynamic

and productive ecosystems in the world. In its entirety,

coastal Louisiana contains about ten and one-half million

acres of land: one and one-half million acres are dry land,

and eight and one-half million are coastal wetlands. These

eight and one-half million acres represent roughly 25% of the

entire wetlands average in the United States (Louisiana State

Planning Office, 1977). South central Louisiana contains

nearly 31% (or three and one-half million acres) of the state

total wetland area (Louisiana State Planning Office, 1975).

Lafourche Parish contains over 973,000 acres of wetland or

water, over 80% of the total.

The geology, climate, geomorphology, vezetation, water,

drainage, and soils of Lafourche Parish are elements that

enable the estuarine ecosystems of wetlands to function as a

productive system to man and nature. The following is a dis-

cussion of the workings of this system and its value to man

and to nature.

Ecosystem Components

The wetlands estuarine ecosystems of coastal Louisiana

are excellent examples of a productive, circular biolozic sy-

stem. The primary elements in this system are:

(1) Sediment (.4) Water

(2) Wetlands (5) Living Organisms

(3) Detritus @(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 dis-

cussion of each element of this system.

Sediment

Sediment performs several functions in the wetlands eco-

system:

(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 advefit of man, yearly overflow of the Missis-

sippi River on its deltaic plain provided the sediment load

responsible for deltaic plain Progradation. Deposition

within es.tuarine basins was limited to fine clays, heavier

siltymaterials being deposited on the "natural levees".

Since the advent of man and artificial flood control struc-

tures almost all sediment deposits have ceased within south

central Louisiana.

Wetlands

The wetlands areas, consisting of swamp forest, fresh,

brackish, and saline marsh, provide the floral vegetation com-

ponent of the ecosystem. This vegetation provides habitat and

food for primary consumers and provides "detritus" to the

estuarine system.

Detritus

"Detritus" or partially decomposed organic matter can

be compared 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 ecosy-

stem of south central Louisiana.. Water performs the following

functions:

(1) Transports sediment from the river into wetlands
areas, -providing nutrients to the basin

(2) Transports detritus throughout the system, providing
the basic food source for the food chain base

(3) Determines the vegetation typeat any point, in the
basin by its depth and salinity

(4) Provides.the living environment,directly or indirect-
ly,for all of the creatures of the ecosystem

(5) Provides the means of travel for the interaction of
the living creatures of the system

Living Orgpnisms

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

ecosystems.

Other Properties of Estuaries

Table 1.5 lists other properties of estuaries that inter-

act to form the ecosystems extant in south central Louisiana.

TABLE 1. 5

Physical Properties Governing

Productivity of Estuarine Systems

1. Confinement

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 bn t@he bottom
b. fosters growth of marsh plants and tideflat biota
C. discourages oceanic predators whi.ch avoid shallow water

3. Salinity

a. freshwater flow may create a distinct surface layer over
saltier, heavier bottom layer, indicating beneficial
stratified flow
b. fresh water dillution deters oceanic predato:@s and en-
courages estuarine flows

4. Circulation

a. sets up beneficial 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
adaptions

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 accumulation of available nutrients
in animal tissue

Source: Clark, 1974: 2.

These elements involve water, landforms, vegetation, and

detritus. These driving forces keep the system operating

at a peak level of productivity.

A View of the Ecosystem of the Estuarine Basin

In this section we will travel down the estuarine system

from the upp er portion of the basin to the sea to provide the

reader with an insight into the complex system at work in the

wetlands areas that comprise the.coastal areas. This section

draws heavily from the work of Clark (1974), Mumphrey et al

(1975), Day et al (1973), and Bahr and Hebrard (1976) for

information on the-ecosystem function. Let us begin our

journey.

Upper Basin

Freshwater enters the system throughriver overflow and

rainfall. This water is fresh and laden with sediment and

nutrients as it'flows off of the natural levee into the swamp

forest. Trees living here use sunlight and these nutrients to

grow. The organic matter shed into the shallow water is used

by the organisms there,as well as reused by the aquatic and

terrestrial plants growing in the area. Three primary organ-

isms 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 sy stem is the same (Day et al, 1973, and

Mumphrey et al, 1975) have determined their function thusly:

Packagers organize organic material into forms
avaifa-ble 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 consume
primary plant matter). Cord grass (Spartina)

.90

and phytoplankton are examples of the former;
snails and zooplankton are examples of the
latter.

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 are sub-
divided into two classes: subsystem regu.-
lators and whole system regulators. Sub-
system regulators feed on specific organisms,
thus controlling specific populations. Cat-
fish, blue crabs, shore birds, drum, croaker,
etc. are considered subsystem regulators. This
level (subsystem regulators) is analogous to
mid-level carnivores. Whole system regu-
lators feed on system regulators, as well as
what the subsystem regulators feed on. Thus,
they regulate the other regulators. This
group includes animals such as trout, coons,
most birds, and man. There is little preda-
tion on these organisms (also called top
carnivores), except by man who, of course, has
assumed the role of regulator of the entire
system.

The Regenerators take waste from all sources
and regenerate these wastes into nutrients to
start the whole cycle over again. Bacteria,
yeast, etc., are examples of this type of
organism.

Table 1.6 illustrates some examples of each
type of organism. It is by no means implied
that these categories of life are rigid. There.
are organisms that function in more 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 simply to give the
reader a more general, but fairly accurate view
of the circle of life.

Source: Mumphrey et al (1975), pages 45, 47.

TABLE 1. 6

Ecological Roles of Some Estuarine Species

Packagers Regulators Regenerators

Spartina Mature Fish Bacteria

Benthic Algae PorDoises Yeasts

Peri.phyton Pelicans Molds

Phytoplankton Herons Meiofouna

Killifish Egrets Protozoa

Shrimp Gulls

Fiddler Crabs Comb-jellies

Juvenile Fish Raccoon

Marsh Snails Man

Modiolus

Oysters

Source: Day et al, 1973.

The Swamp Forest Drovides habitat for birds, fish, rep-

tiles, insects, etc. Water flowing by means of pressure and

a very slight downhill grade moves detritus and organisms out

of the swamp forest into the fresh marsh.

Fresh Harsh

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 slowbut here the water is slightly deeper

and moves a bit faster. Adequate 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 more 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 habi-

tat.

Brackish Marsh

This zone may be the most important part of the estuary

system. It is here that inland fresh water and fresh water

species meet 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. Perret (1971) has

estimated that th e estuary is relied on directly, (nursery

and habitat) in 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 juve-

nile 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 in-

tegrity, 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 eco-

system the most.

Salt Marsh

This zone is highly marine in character. Detritus and

fresher waters intrude occasionally, but saltwater is the

norm for this area. Although not as productive as the brack-

ish 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 ecoi@ystem significantly

and increased the rate of erosion.

Resultant Estuarine Productivity

The result of this estuarine interaction within the

coastal basins that cover in or near Lafourche Parish i.e.

Terrebonne and Baratari a Basins, is tremendous productivity.

It is no accident that the state with the most wetland area

also leads the nation in fisheries production. (See Chapter 3

for statistics on commercial fish catch in Louisiana). These

figures do not include the spo rt fishing catch in Louisiana

waters. The millions of birds, especially ducks that frequent

the marsh and the fur bearing creatures that are harvested year-

ly, also enhance the value of this ecosystem to man. Table 1.7

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.

TABLE 1. 7

Benefits of the Estuarine Ecosystem

A. Benefits to the Natural System

1. Habitat for birds, fish, mammals, reptiles and the
varied flora of the region.

2. Nursery area for birds, fish, mammals, 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, mammals, reptiles to both
commercial and sport interests. .

3. Buffer zone against tropical storms.

4. Recreation area for coastal residents.

Source: Author.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bahr, L. M., and Hebrard, J. J. (1976) Barataria Basin:
Biological Characterization. Center for Wetlands
Resources, Louisiana St University, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.

Clark, J. (1974) Coastal Ecosystems: Ecological Con-
siderations for Management of the Coastal Zone. The
Conservation Foundation, Washington, D.C.

Day, J. et al (1973) Community Structure and Carbon Budget
of a Salt Marsh and Shallow Basin Estuarine System in
Louisiana. Center for Wetland Resource, Louisiana
State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Durabb et al (1980) Land Use Report Phase I. South Central
Pl_in_nT_ng and Development Commission, Thibodaux, LA

Gagliano and Van Beek (1970) Hydrologic and Geologic Studies
of Coastal Louisiana, Report No. 1: Geologic and Geo-'
morphic Aspects of Deltaic Processes, Mississippi Delta
System. Coastal Resources Unit, Center for Wetland Re-
sources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Gagliano, S. et al (1981) "Land Loss in the Mississippi Del-
taic Plain" in Transaction-Gulf Coast Association of
Geological Societies, Volume XXXI (1981)

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

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

Louisiana State Planning Office (1977) Louisiana Coastal Re-
sources. Louisiana State Planning Office, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.

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

Muller, R. A., and Oberlander, T. M. (1978) Physical Geog-
raphy Today: A Portrait of a Planet. Random use,
New York, New York.

Mumphrey, A. J. et al (1975) Louisiana Metropolitan Wetlands:
A Planning Te-i-sPective. Urban Studies Institute, Uni-
versity of New Orleans, New Orleans,.Louisiana (unpub-
lished)

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

Perret, W. S. et al (1971) Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Es-
tuarine Inventory and Study, Louisiana: Phase I and IV.
Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission, New.Orleans,
Louisiana.

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.

Urban Studies Institute, UNO (1976) Urban Development in the
Louisiana Coastal Zone: Proble-m-F-a-n-d-Midelines; Pre-
Pared for Louisiana State Planning Office, Coastal
Revenues Program, New Orleans, Louisiana.

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

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (1973) Inventory of Basis En-
vironmental Data: South Louisiana. Engineer Agency for
Resource Inventories, U. S. ArmF-E-ngineer Topographic
Laboratories, Washington, D. C.

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
Commerce, Environmental Data and Information Service,
National Climatic Center, Ashville, North Carolina.

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

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
ol commerce, Environmental Data and Information Service,
National Climatic Center, Ashville, North Carolina.

U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (No
date) Tropical Cyclone in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic
Ocean 195Z - 1976. New Orleans 5uter Continental Shelf
Office, Bureau FT Land Management. U. S. Department of
the Interior, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D. C.

CHAPTER II

DEMOGRAPHY AND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS

GENERAL HISTORY

Prior to the settlement of the area which is now Lafourche

Parish, the area was.,inh,abited by Indians, primarily the Chit-

macha and the Was ha/Chawasha tribes (upper and middle Lafourche

Parish respectively). These peoples belonged to the eastern

maise culture group, hunters, and fishermen who depended sig-

nificantly on agriculture for their continuing source of food.

The primary technique of farm'ing was the.slash and burn method.

As fields lost their productivity, they were abandoned and

left fallow to return to forest as new land was cleared. The

various tribes lived mainly on the alluvial ridges that formed

the Bayou Lafourche distributary systems.

The French were the first Europeans to make successful col-

onization efforts in Louisiana when they established New Orleans

in 1718. The city struggled well into the 1770's and did not

experience rapid growth till Spanish domination in the latter

part of the 18th century.

For the most part, the French settlers stayed near New

Orleans; John Law in the 1720's led the first move to colonize

the area outside of the citY. Several groups came to the new

world to find a new life, especially Germans who settled

along the Mississippi alluvial ridge near what is now Rahnville

in St. Charles Parish. A few Germans did hunt a nd fish and

established what is,now Des Allemands in the swanp in western

St. Charles Parish. The French were never very successful in

colonizing New'Orleans or the surrounding areas until the

early 1760's when the Louisiana colony, which was at that time

under Spanish control, allowed Acadian settlers driven out of

Nova Scotia during King George's War to settle near St. Martin-

ville. These settlers numbered upwards of 10,000 persons.

From St. Martinville, these settlers moved up the Missis-

sippi and down Bayou Lafourche to establish the Acadian coasts.

Although culturally similar to the other French settlers, they

tended to isolate themselves from the rest of the colony. The

people were very successful farmers and multiplied so fast that

in 1772, Spain created the ecclesiastical parish of Ascension.

In 1778, the District of Valenzuela was established in what is

now Assumption Parish.

The Acadians along Bayou Lafourche generally were not

large landowners. They grew corn, rice, cotton, and okra.

There were some cattle and other domestic animals mainly for

family use. Cypress and spanish moss were also utilized for

subsistence, as well as commercial purposes. Some Acadians

moved out into the swamps and marshes to utilize the hunting

and fishing resources, but most remained small farmers.

After initial Acadian settlement, Anglo-Americans came bY

land and sea to take advantage of free land offered by Spain,

to encourage settlement of Louisiana. Bayou Lafourche espe-

cially felt the effects of this American colonization after

the discovery of crystallization of sugar by Etienne de Bore

in 1774. Cotton planters and small farmers from the lower

south flooded to south Louisiana hoping to establish them-
selves. The unstable cotton mark;t, and the crystallization

of sugar led many newcomers to turn to sugar as a cash crop.

The land and climate along Bayou Lafourche were conducive to

the development of sugar as a dominant crop.

In the early 19th centry, many wealthy planters from

the Natchez area and elsewhere purchased property and settled

along Bayou Lafourche so that the area once densely settled

by white Fren ch farmers was transformed into plantations

occupied by a few rich Americans with many black slaves.

Blacks were introduced to Bayou Lafourche as slaves to work

the large fields of the planters. Just before the Civil War,

blacks in the agricultural areas constituted over 5011n of the

total population.

After the Civil War, many factors contributed to a de-
cline in the black pop'ulation in the agricultural areas along

the bayou.

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS

In coastal Louisiana, settlement patterns were historically

dictated by waterways, the primary transportation arteries of

the area until quite recently. The French government even used

waterways as a convenient reference by developing land. They

utilized the arpent (192 foot squares) as their measuring unit.

This unit allowed maximum utilization of high land along the

crests of the natural levee of Bayou Lafourche.

The arpent system and the use of the waterway as a trans-

portation artery-combined with vast areas of hostile wetlands

between natural levee ridges surrounding the waterways led to

a largely linear settlement pattern. Bayou LaTourche illus-

trates this settlement pattern better than anywhere else in

Louisiana.

Within this linear pattern, confluence of waterways,

waterwa locations of churches became the mag-
crossings, or

nets that encouraged the development of urban centers.

Cities like Napoleonville (Assumption Parish), Thibodaux

(Lafourche Parish), and Houma (Terrebonne Parish) owe their

initial settlement to these factors. In the lower portions of

Lafourche Parish, where the natural levee was narrow and in

the swamps and marshes, the populations were small, widely

dispersed and isolated, the environment shaping their exis-

tence. (Portions of this section excerpted from Land Use

Report, Phase I by Durabb et al (1980).

DEMOGRAPHY

It is in the context of the history of settlement, the

character of long alluvial ridges surrounded by wetlands, the

French system of land division and the agriculture and fisher-

ies resources of the area that have shaped the Population that

exists today in Lafourche Parish. Settlement is still linear

along an increasingly narrow natural levee ridge that bisects

the parish from its northern boundary to.just south of Golden

Meadow. Modern drainage and reclamation efforts have expanded

this strip of develODment, especially in the coastal zone of

Lafourche Parish south of the Intracoastal Waterway. (See

Table 2.1)

Table 2.1 lists the population of Lafourche Parish for

the years of 1960, 1970, 1980. It is important to point out

that although the parish is quite large (2,169 square miles)

over 80% is wetlands or water (Louisiana State Planning Office,

1975). Almost all of the population lives on less than 20%

of this land area. There are only three incorporated munici-

palities in Lafourche Parish. These municipalities include

Thibodaux with a 1980 population of 15,810; Lockport with a

1980 population of 2,4@4; and Golden Meadow with a population

of 2,282. Table 2.2 lists births and deaths for the period of

1960 - 1980.

The southern third of Lafourche Parish (below what is now

the Intracoastal Waterway) had a history of hunting and fishing

Table 2.1

LAFOURCHE PARISH POPULATION

BY WARDS

1.
Ward I Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6

1960 1,982 14,008 5,752 5,530 2,101 3,267

1970 4,104 16,055 7,561 71112 1,762 41323

1980 70754 16,174. 10,414 8,n 2,262, 5,323
238

Population Change + + + + +
1960 - 1970 2,122 2,047 1-,8-0-9- 1,582 339 1,056

Population Change + + + . + + +
1970 - 1980 3#650 119 2,853 1,126 4SO 1,000

Total Change + + + + +
1960 - 1980 5,772 ?,166 4,662 P,708 161 2,056

Percentage Change + + + + + +
1960- 1980 391% 15%
49% 631,

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce (1960, 1970, 1990)
I. Partially In Coastal Zone
2. In Coastal Zone

Table 2.1 (cont.)

LAFOURCHE PARISH POPULATION

BY WARDS
2. 1. Parish
Ward 7 Ward 8 Ward 9 Ward 10 Ward 11 Total
1960 3,327 534 1,596 15,596 1,688 -55.181-

1970 3,603 849 1,708 18,831 3,033
.1980 3,576 795 2,175 21,32.8 4,444 82,493

Population Change + + + + + +
1960 - 1970 276 315 112 3,235 1,345 13,560

Population Change - - + + + +
1970 - 1980 27 54 467 2,4q7 1,411 13,542

Total Change + + + + + +
1960 - 1980 249 261 579 5,732 2,756 27,102

Percentage Change + + + + + +
1960 - 1980 7% .49% 361, 371, 263% 49%

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce (1960, 1970, 19SO)

1. Partially In Coastal Zone
2. In Coastal Zone

Table 2.2

POPULATION, BIRTHS, AND DEATHS BY RACE AND BY BIRTH AND DEATH RATES

1960 TO DATE

LIVE BIRTHS

REVISED
POPULAT10N TOTAL WHITE NON-WHITE

LAFOURCHE

1960 55381 1743 1448 295

1961 56086 1775 1481 294

1962 56749 1803 1504 299

1963 58079 1749 1431 318

1964 60127 1829 1530 299

1965 61475 1777 1476 301

1966 62410 1768 1494 274

1967 62842 1701 1403 299

1968 63826 1529 1245 284

1969 65627 1557 1312 245

1970 68941 1362 1140 222

Source: Louisiana State Planning Office (1981).

(con t

Table 2..?

POPULATION, BIRTHS, AND DEAT"S BY RACE AND BY BIRTH AND DEATH RATES

1960 TO DATE

LIVE BIRTHS

REVISED
POULATION TOTAL WHITE NON-WHITE

LAFOURCHE

1971 70400 1460 1203 257 00

1972 71958 1264 1037 227

1973 71479 1260 1025 215

1974 7189.1 1217 1008 209

1975 72999 1232 981 251

1976 74793 1120 1099 221

1977 76208 1434 1155 279

1979 77331 1464 1219 245

1979 79084 1517 1237 2RO

1980 824R1

Source: Louisiana State Planning Office (1991).

with mainly sparse settlement. Although there was some sugar

cane agriculture in the more northerly areas and even some

citrus plantations near Leeville, the predominant occupations

were trapping and fishing. Coastal erosion and subsidence as

well as blockage of Bayou Lafourche in the early 20th century

helped to eliminate agriculture south of Golden Meadow. Hur-

ricanes wiped out settlements at the coast and later at Lee-

vi*lle-concentrating people along the alluvial ridge from

Golden Meadow north. It was not until the advent of the oil

and gas development that there was a significant growth in

population in this area.

The Coastal Zone population of Lafourche Parish encom-

passes all of Ward 10 and a small portion of Ward 4 (Table

2.1). However, almost all of the population in the coastal

zone of Lafourche Parish resides in Ward 10. Table 2.3 lists

the population of Ward 10 from 1960 - 1980.

The population in Ward 10 has remained about one-fourth

of the parish total for the last twenty years. Small fluc-

tuations due to the variable property of the oil and gas

industry have largely accounted for seasonal population change.

With the Coastal Zone of Lafourche so dependent on the

unstable oil and gas industry and their'utilization of a non-

renewable resource (See Chapter 3),the growth or decline of

the population there is largely tied to the fate of the energy

industry. Any population projections, therefore, have limited

validity if they assume normal historical in and out migrations

as well as births and deaths. With this fact in mind only one

method of projection was used to forecast possible trends in

TABLT, 2. 3

WARD 10 POPULATION

OF PARISH
YEAR POPULATION INCREASE T(7rtAL

1960 15,596 -- 28%

1970 18,831 3,235 27%

1980 21,328 2,497 2 6 5,

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce (1960, 1970, 1980)

the coastal zone - the Cohort Survival Method. Table 2.4

lists projected populations for Lafourche Parish to the

year 2000. Table 2.5 lists the projection for Ward 10

assuming a constant percentage of the parish total..

Table 2.4

POPULATION PROJECTIONS

LAFOURCHE PARISH

Population Change

1980 current 82,433 ----

1985 projected 90,531 +109,17

1990 projected 98,925 +09%

1995 projected 105,972 +079i'

2000 projected 112,350 +06q@

Source: Maruggi et al (1982)

Middle Migration Assumptions, Segal Projections.

Table 2.5

WARD 10

POPULATION PROJECTIONS

Populption

1980 - Current 21,328

1985 - projected 23,538

1990 - projected 25,721

1995 - projected 27,553

2000 - projected 29,211

Assumes constant 26% of total parish
population based on 1980 parish popu-
lations and parish population 'projections
in Table 2.4

Source: Maruggi et al (1982)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Durabb E. et al (1980) Land Use Report Phase I. South Central
7'- -
Planning and Development Commission, Thibodaux, Louisiana

Louisiana State Planning Office (1975) Land Use - and Data
Analysis Program. Louisiana State Planning Off-ice, Baton
Rouge, Louisiana

Maruggi V. et al (1982) Interim Population Projections to
2000 for Louisiana and its Planning Districts, Metro-
politan Areas, and Parishes: Series II ReDort.
University of New Orleans, Division of Business and
Economic Research and the Louisiana State Planning-Office,
New Orleans, Louisiana

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (1960, 1970,
1980) Population Summary: Louisiana. Bureau of the Cen-
sus, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

CHAPTER III

THE ECONOMY OF THE LAFOURCHE PARISH

COASTAL ZONE

EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES

The employment base in Lafourche Parish has traditionally

been divided into three areas: agriculture, fishing, and re-

source extraction. South of the Intracoastal Waterway in the

Lafourche Coastal Zone, agriculture plays a minor tole. The

primary employers are the fishing and resource extraction sec-

tors of the parish economy.

Table 3.1 lists employment in Lafourche Parish by major

in dustrial-sectors from 1958 - 1981. There are no statistical

break-outs for the coastal zone of Lafourche Pa*rish but other

figures indicate a prepondence of employment in the oil and gas

mining, service, and the allied construction industry in south

Lafourche.

Table 3.1 also shows average weekly wages for Lafourche

Parish in comparison to the state average for the years of

1958 - 1981. Although,Lafourche Parish wages are slightly

1 This section attempts a discussion of the economy of the
area designated as the Coastal Zone Management area of
Lafourche Parish. Because the CZM boundary is artificial
in that it cuts across a rural area, and because there is
little in the way of data generated specifically for the
land area under this program, parish-wide statistics are
utilized to describe conditions extant there. There possi-
ble, the data has been pared down to approximate the CZ11
area of the parish.

TABLE 3.1

AVERAGE EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY IN LAFOURCHE PARISH

COVERED BY THE LOUISIANA EMPLOYMENT.SECURITY LAW

@EAR TOTAL MANUFACTURING MINING CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORTATION TRADE

1958 7,524 ------- --- ------ ----------

1959 7,787 1,884 --- ------ ---------- ---

1960 7,662 1,721 --- ------ ---------- ---

1961 7,504 1,797 ------ ---------- ---

1962 7,626 1,790 --- ------ ---------- ---

1963 7,912 1,843 --- ------ ---------- ---

1964 8,528 1,985 --- ------ ---------- ---

1965 8,881 1,957 1,509 424 1,948 2,197

1966 9,615 2,0-12 1,602 610 2,091 2,396
1967 9,695 2,077 1,503 613 2, 06 2,482

1968 9,938 2,059 1,670 536 2,196 2,497

1969 9,839 2,056 1,554 479 2,210 2,511

1970 9,609 1,977 1,468 447 2,214 2,460

Source: Loulslana Department of Labor, (195R-1991)

(cont.

TABLE 3. 1

AVERAGE EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY IN LAFOURCHE PARISH

COVERED BY THE LOUISIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY LAW

YEAR TOTAL MANUFACTURING MINING CONSTRUCTION TRANSPORTATION TRADE

1971 9,844 1,980 1,518 401 2,224 2,614

1972 12,307 2,092 1,582 572 2,494 3,014

1973 13,082 2,077 1,491 717 2,684 3,123

1974 14,600 2,671 1,716 793 92,783 3,228

1975 15,104 3,084 1,590 932 2,877 3,352

1976 15,969 3,183 1,496 967 3,928 3,786

1977 16,998 3,466 1,383 969 3,583 4,018

1978 22,244 3,873 1,351 1,172 4,138 4,077

1979 23,214 3,576 1,420 1,352 4,449 4,196

1980 23,843 3,560 1,579 1,5B3 4,838 4,417

1981 24,716 3,697 1,779 1,433 5,182 4,650

Source: Louisiana Department of Labor, (1958 1981)

(cont

TABLE 3. 1

AVERAGE WAGE BY INDUSTRY IN LAFOURCHE PARTS"

COVERED BY TqP LOUISIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY LAW

GOVERNMENT
YEAR FINANCE SERVICES *PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AVERAGE WEEKLY WAGES LA. AVERAGE WEEKLY WAGE

1958 --- --- ---------- 77.19 78.14

1959 --- --- ---------- 79.18 81.05

1960 --- --- ---------- 80.26 82.76

1961 --- --- ---------- R4.48 95.60

1962 --- --- ---------- 85.77 88.75 00

1963 --- ---------- 87.58 92.51

1964 --- --- ---------- 91.40 96.131

1965 215 632 ---------- 94.77 100.58

1966 256 656 ---------- 102.95 106.30

1967 253 689 ---------- 109.01 112.32

1968 273 717 ---------- 117.17 119.69

1969 302 725 ---------- 119.93 126.34

1970 324 698 ---------- 129.77 133.14

Source: Louisiana Department of Labor (1958 1981)

(cont.

TABLE 1. 1

AVERAGE WAGE BY INDUSTRY IN LAFOURCHE PARISH

COVERED BY THE LOUISIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY LAW

GOVERNMENT
YEAR FINANCE SERVICES *PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AVERAGE WEEKLY WAGES LA. AVERAGE WEEKLY WAGE

1971 338 748 --------- $131.63 $140.24

1972 417 1,443 694 137.97 144.23

1973 488 1,679 819 145.93 150.46

1974 539 1,978 892 159.55 164.78
1975 614 2,470 184* 180.44 181.32 0)

1976 607 2,558 145* 195.14 196.88

1977 683 2,749 147* 204.60 213.06

1978 792 6,171 671* 212.30 224.25

1979 748 6,140 686* 234.07 246.93

1980 809 6,320 737 264.49 276.43

1991 835 6,418 733 295.51 308.07

Source: Louisiana Department of Labor (1958 1981).

below the state-averages, the Lafourche Parish figures in-

dicate the lower scale agricultural and service jobs in the

northern and central portion of the parish. Wages in the

oil and gas industry have been traditionally higher than the

average for the State of Louisiana.

Table 3.2 lists per-capita personal income for the parish

in comparison to the surrounding parishes in southeast

Louisiana.

The oil and gas industry has, until recently,suffered

little in the way of recessionary cutbacks. Typically, there

has always been a shortage of workers in south Lafourche to

meet the demands for construction, service, and mining of the

vast oil and gas reserves onshore and offshore. However, the

latest national recession has affected all sectors of the

economy and the economy has cooled down even in the oil in-

dustry. Table 3.3 illustrates a consistently lower unemploy-

ment rate for Lafourche Parish for the last seven years even

though recent rates reflect the national recession and higher

unemployment.

TABLE 3.2

PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME, BY PARISH

LOUISIANA, 1973 - 1978

PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME (DOLLARS)

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978

Assumption 3,095 3,960 4,169 4,637 5,068 5,819

Lafourche 3,488 4,148 4,670 5,217 5,789 6,680

St. Charles 3,549 4,077 4,714 5,419 6,199 7,167
00
Terrebonne 3,847 4,382 4,943 5,707 6,412 7,504

Source: University of New Orleans, Division of Business and Economic Research
and Louisiana State Planning Office (1981) p. 160.

TABLE 3.3

UNEMPLOnIENT RATES

LAFOURCHE PARISH - LOUISIANA

Louisiana State Lafourche
Average Parish

1976 6.8 4.2

1977 7.0 4.4

1978 7.0 5.8
Annual Average
1979 6.7 5.6

1980 6.7 3.5

1981 8.4 6.2

Jan. 10.2 6.9.

Feb. 9.8 7.6

Mar. 10.1 7.1

Apr. 10.2 7.7
Monthly Average May 10.5 9.8
1982
June 11.8 10.6

July 11.4 9.7

Aug. 10.9 9.4

Source: Louisiana Department of Labor, 1976 1982.

ECONOMIC SECTORS

Manufacturing

Table 3.4 is am' incomplete but representative of the manu-

facturing establishments in Lafourche Parish contained in the

1981 yearbook of the Louisiana Department of Commerce. Note that

the types of industry reported for the Lafourche Coastal Zone

(Larose, Cut Off, Galliano, Golden Meadow) are mainly associ-

ated with f ishing and oil and gas production or service.

The Oil and Gas Industry

The lifeblood of the economy of south Lafourche is the

oil and gas industry. This industry has also played a major

role in the environment of the wetlands surrounding the leveed

south Lafourche cities. Table 3.5 lists the major onshore and

offshore oil and gas fields in the Lafourche Coastal Zone.

Many of these fields date back to the initial exploratory

attempts at offshore drilling and exploration. This area

pioneered most of the technology used today in the offshore

oil drilling industry.

Louisiana has been a major energy producer for decades.

The oil and gas production from onshore and offshore areas of

the coast has steadily declined since the peak year of 1970.

Tables 3.6 and 3.7 compare production of oil and gas in 1974

and 1980 in south east Louisiana. A drastic decline in pro-

duction is evident over this 6 Year Period. Lafourche.Parish

TABLE 3.4

MANUFACTURERS IN LAFOURrqE PARISIT IN 1981

sic CODE LOCATION PRODUCT NUMRER Or EMPLOYEES NAME OF FIRM MARKET AREA

2026, 2022 Thibodaux Fluid milk, cheese, vegetables, 50 - 99 Acadia Dairy Regional
2033 preserves, jams and jellies

3732, 3731 Larose Offshore and Inland boats, barge 50 - 99 Allied Shipyard Regional
repair

3731, 3599 Lockport Boats for oil and fishing
industry, hydraulic steering
systems, marine propeller
repair, machine shop 250 - 499 Rollinger Shipyard International
Trade-Export
Only

2061 Thibodaux Raw sugar, blackstrip molasses 50 - 99 Caldwell Sugars Co-op Local

3523 Thibodaux Tractors, loaders, harvesters, 100 - 249 Cameco Industries International
cane tables Grand Moulins Trade Export
de Parish Only
Parent Co. - France

3711 Cut Off Marsh Buggies 20 - 49 Andrew A. Cheramle Local
Marsh Buggies, Inc.
3731 Larose Offshore and Inshore vessels, 10 - 19 Collins Seafood, Inc. Local
custom made shrimp boats
2711 Thibodaux Newspaper publishing and 20 - 49 The Daily Comet Local
printing - Monday - Friday

3599, 3533 Raceland Job shop, oil field equipment
repair, fishing (wirellne tools) I - 4 Panco Machine Shop, Inc. Local
2051 Golden Meadow Bread, pastries 10 - 19 Paul Pufrene Bakery Regional

Source: Louisiana Department of Commerce (1992)

= mm

(cont . )

SIC CODE LOCATION PRODUCT NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES NAME OF FIRM MARKET AREA

3823 Thibodaux Electrical Testing Equipment 5 - 9 Electrocraft Corporation Regional
for the Oil Industry

2399 Galliano Trawl Nets, butterfly nets 1 - 4 Alvin Gri ffin Net Shop, Inc. Regional

2092 Golden Meadow Shrimp Processing 10 - 19 Gulf Shrimp Processors, Inc. Regional

2013 Thibodaux Smoked, fresh and seasoned pork I - 4 Hebert's Processing Plant Local
sausage, pork chops, hamburger
patties, pickled salt pork, hog
head cheese, boudin

2091 Bayou Blue Dried shrimp, carded I - 4 Park Avenue Dried Shrimp Regional

2092 Golden Meadow Frozen headless shrimp 50 - 99 Hubert Lafont Shrimp Co. Inc. National

3731 Bourg Barge and tugboat construction 100 - 249 Acadian Shipyard, Inc. National
.and repair

to
3732, 3731 Bourg Marine construction and repair 100 - 249 Bourg Drydock and Service National co
of offshore boats and inland Co.
vessels, barge fabrication and
repair

2092 Des Allemands Frozen and fresh catfish, shrimp, 10 - 19 Sampey Seafood, Inc. International
crab, seafood Trade Export
Only

2077 Golden Meadow Fish Protein 20 - 49 Louisiana Marine Protein International
Inc. Trade Export
Only

2097 Golden Meadow lee 5 - 9 Martin Ice Co, Inc. Local

3443, 3471 Golden Meadow Fabrication Shop, sandblasting so - 99 TBW Offshore Welders Regional
of metal parts

2399 Golden Meadow Shrimp Nets 5 - 9 Terrebonne and Perez Net Local
Shop and Hardware
Source: Louisiana Department of Commerce (1982)

(con t

TABLE 3.4

MANUFACTURERS IN LAFOURCHE PARISH IN 1981

SIC CODE LOCATION PRODUCT NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES NAME OF FIRM MARKET AREA

2711 Larose Newspaper publishing 5 - 9 Tb@- Lafourebe Gazette Local
Inc.

3731, 3732 Larose Barges, offshore and inland 250 - 499 Therlot-Modec Enterprises National
boats (Mitsui Oceanic Develop-
ment Corporation Products)
Parent Co.

2621 Lockport Writing and printing paper 100 - 249 Valentine Pulp and Paper Co. International
offset paper, return post cards, (Litton Industries-Parent Trade Export
tablets Co.) Only

2821 Lockport Phenolic granular resin molding 50 - 99 Valentine Sugar National
compounds Vallte Division
to
3499, 3321 Lockport Steel marine closures, watertight I - 4 Weldbilt Marine Products Intern at ton a 1 00
doors, hatches; double steel doors, Trade Export
portlights, manhole covers Only

2911 Lockport Reduced crude and residual for 5 - 9 W. J. Oil Co., Inc. Regional
refinery feedstock (office Houston, TX)

3446, 3442 Raceland Ornamental Iron posts, window I - 4 Breaux's Ornamental Local
bars, fencing, steel doors Iron Works,-Inc.

3079 Raceland Polystyrene pipeline flotation 10 - 19 Pipeline Products and National
buoys, polystyrene surveying Services Inc.
marker buoys

2061 Thibodaux Raw sugar, blackstrip molasses, 50 - 99 Lafourche Sugars Corp. Local
bagass

2096 Thibodaux Coca cola, tab, fanta orange, 100 - 249 The Louisiana Coca-Cola Local
sprite, Mr. PIbb, Rondo, rex, Bottling Co., Ltd.
Welch's grape

Source: Louisiana Department of Commerce (1992)

(cont

TABLE 3.4

MANUFACTURERS IN LAFOURCHE PARISH IN 1981

SIC CODE LOCATION PRODUCT NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES NAME OF COMPANY MARKET AREA

2065 Thibodaux Candy 20 - 49 Howard Stark Company International
Inc. Trade Export
Only

3523, 3551 Thibodaux Sugar cane harvesters, loaders, 5Q - 99 Thompson International International
cultivators, and wagons, yard Co. Trade Export
equipment for sugar cane mills (Seilon Inc.-Toledo, Ohio) Only
Parent Company
3731 Lockport Tugs, push boats, barges, off- 200 490 Halter Marine National
shore support vessels, marine
repair

SOURCE: Louisiana Department of Commerce (1982)
00

TABLE 3.5

OIL AND GAS FIELDS IN THE

LAFOURCHE PARISH COASTAL ZONE

Lake Long Lake Enfermer

Larose Coffee Bay

South Larose South Little Lake

Kings Ridge Plum Point

Bayou Raphael Clovelly

Golden Meadow Cut Off

Bayou Ferblanc Montegut

East Golden Meadow North Montegut

Timbalier Bay Poignard Bayou

Bully Camp Delta Farms

Courant Bay Little Temple

Lake Raccourci Bay De Chene

Leeville Caillou Island

Lizette Bay Lake Barre

Fishermans Bay Point Chicot

Jaque Bay West Delta Farms

Raccoon Lake Little Lake

Bay Marchand

Source: Louisiana Geological Survey, July 1981.

TABLE 3.6

OIL PRODUCTION

1974 1980

Parish Crude Oil (Barrels) Crude Oil (Barrels)

Assumption 806,464 257,774

Lafourche 4600870249 16,493,007

St. Charles 90714#933 317,852
00
M
Terrebonne 34:739,965 13,869,393

Lafourche % -64%
Decrease in 1974-1980
Production

Source: Office of Conservation, Department of Natural Resources (1982).

TABLE 3.7

GAS PRODUCTION

1974 1980

Parish Natural Gas (MCF) Natural Gas (MCF)-

Assumption 98,375,285 48,042,415
Lafourche 239,913,664 -130,176,412
St. Charles 68,070,870 29,442,782

Terrebonne 723,812,065 357,642,069

Lafourche % -46%
of Decrease -------
in Production 1974-1980

Source: Office of Conservat-ion, Department of Natural Resurces (1982).

has not yet felt the full effect of this declining production

due to the drastic increases in prices for oil and the recent

attempts to deregulate natural gas. This price increase has

until recently created a windfall for the State of Louisiana.

Continued production declines, however, will more than affect

any price increases. It is anticipated that revenues from the

severance taxes will continue to drop at the state and parish

level.

Table 3.8 lists the number of oil and gas wells in

Lafourche Parish 1976 - 1981. The total assessed value has

actually dropped from 1979 - 1981.

Figure 3.1 illustrates that most of the revenues for

Lafourche Parish are derived from state money, mainly sever-

ance taxes on oil and gas production within the parishmaking

the parish highly susceptible to declining severance tax

revenues.

Table 3.9-and 3.10 list the total assessed valuation and

taxes on that valuation in Lafourche Parish for the last two

years. Since the parish receives no sales tax money on its

own, this table repres ents almost all of the taxes levied by

the parish and/or districts within it. Property taxes addi-

tionally have the rider of the Louisiana homestead exemption.

Therefore, most local tax money is derived mainly from assess-

ments on businesses. Since a large percentage of the busi-

nesses in Lafourche Parish are oil and gas related, any drop

in exploration and/or production decreases jobs and tax revenues

TABLE 3.8

OIL AND GAS WELLS

LAFOURCHE PARISH

Number Average Value Total Assessed Value

1976 2,633 $7,068.32 A18,610,880

1977 2,557 7,120.50 18,207,120

1978 2,764 8,081.36 22,336,890

1979 2,801 8,078.45 22,627,730,

1980 2,822 7,800.71 22,013,600

1981 2,809 7,702.93 21,637,540

Source: Louisiana Tax Commission, Eighteenth Biennial
Report (1978)

Louisiana Tax Commission, Nineteenth Biennial
Report (1980)

Louisiana Tax Commission, Twentieth Biennial
Report (1982)

PARSH @@-A-NUE@

LOCAL (Ward Taxes)
(Ward 1, IOJ 1)
LOCAL (Sheriff's Sales. Tax)
2.1%
0.4%
LOCAL
(Permits and Fees)

16.7%

LOCAL
Property Tax)

MISCELLANEOUS
STATE 3%
55.1%
FEDERAL

10.4%

Figure 1. 1

TQPLEWBUVI@T: gJ1029 J&9." JW%

TABLE 3.9

PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS

1978 - 1979
PARISH OF LAFOURCHE Dollar Amount
Total Assessed Value . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . $146,510,800-00

Local Taxes

@ 3.09 mills . . . . 395,245.92
Parish Tax . . . . . .

School Taxes:
Constitutional School Maintenance (q) 3.92 mills . . . . 574,322.32
Parishwide School - Maintenance . - @ 5.49 mills . . . . 804,344.28
Parishwide Consolidated.School - Bonds @ 7.00 mills . . . 1,025,575.60
Special Education District #1 - .
Maintenance and Bonds . . . . . . . @ 8.60 mills . . . . 526,506.62

Levee Taxes:
Atchafalaya Basin Levee District @ 3.65 mills . . . . 312,388.10
South Louisiana Tidal Water Control
Levee District . . . . . . . . . . ft 4.31 mills . . . . 271,961,60

Drainage Taxes:
Drainage and Improvements - Bonds @ 1.35 mills . . . . 197,789.58
Drainage - Maintenance . . . . . . . 0 3.61 mills . . . . 528,903.97
Drainage District #1 - Maintenance @ .89 mills . . . . . 37,961.35
5th Ward Drainage - Maintenance . . . (a 5.00 mills . . . . . 28,440.40
Drainage District #1 of 12 . . . . . @ $2.50 an acre . . . . 2,006.49
Drainage District #2 of 12 . . . . . @ $2.50 an acre . . . . 2,471.48
Drainage*District #3 of 12 . . . . . @ $2.50 an acre . . . . 5,265.63

Miscellaneous Taxes-
Public Buildings Maintenance and
Operation . . * * * ' * * ' * * ' 0 2.71 mills . . . . 397,044.26
Public Health Unit Maintenance and
Operation.. . : * ' ' * ' * * * * @ .90 mills . . . . 131,859.72
Library Tax - Maintenance . . . . . . . @ 1.80 mills . . . . 263,719.44
Recreation Tax - Maintenance . . . . . 1.80 mills . . . . 263,719.44
Recreation District #1 - Maintenance 2.81 mills . . . . 40,406.85
Fire Protection District #1 -
Maintenance and Bonds . . . . . . . . @ 4.80 mills 100,595.23
Fire Protection District #2 -
Haintenance and Ronds . . . . . . . . 0 1.97 mills 33,796.09
Fire Protection District #3 -
Maintenance and Bonds . . . . . . . . @ 3.83 mills . . . . 234,479.11
Tater District #1 - Maintenance and
Bonds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nr@ 5.36 mills . . . . 675,757.60

TABLE 3.9

1978 - 1979

PARISKOF LAFOURCHE
Dollar Amoun

Bayou Lafourche Fresh Water District. @ 1.58,mills . . . . 230,801.27
Hospital Service District #1 -
Maintenance'and Bonds . . * * * * * @ 12.35 mills . . . . 756,088.00
Hospital Service District #2 -
Maintenance and Bonds . . . . . . . . q 7.01 m'
267,170.17
Hospital Service District #3 -
Maintenance and Bonds . . . 0 10.36 mills . . . . 422,319.691
Road Lighting District #1 - Maintenance OQ 1.75 mills . . . . 213,164.56
Greater Lafourche Port Commission
Maintenance and Bonds . . . . . . . . 6.39 mills . . . . 39-L)206.1971
Garbage District #1 - Maintenance . . . On 3.71 mills . . . . 214,768.19
Garbage District #3 - Maintenance @ 3.78 mills . . . . 33 413.54
Law Enforcement District #1 . . . . . . 05 9.53 mills . . . 1,396:247.91
Parish Criminal Expense . . . . . . . . ft 90 mills . . . 16,365.78
Total Parish and Local Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . !@10,796,126.861

Source: Louisiana Tax Commission, (1980).

TABLE 3.10

PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS

1980 - 1981

PARISH OF LAFOURCHE

Dollar Amount
Total Assessed Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $166,562,630.00

Local Taxes

Parish Tax . . . . . . . . @ 3.08 mills . . . . . . 452,380.65
School Taxes: -
Constitutional School
Tax Maintenance . . . @ 3.92 mills . . . . . . 652,925.51
Parishwide School -
Maintenance . . . . @ 14.00 mills . . . . . 2,331,876.82
Parishwide Consolidated
School - Bonds . . . 16.00 mills . . . . . 2,665,002.08

Levee Taxes:
Atchafalaya Basin Levee
District . . . . . . 3.00 mills . . . . . . 286,841.55
South Louisiana Tidal
Levee District . . . @ 4.31 mills . . . . . . 314,085.61

Drainage Taxes:
Drainage & Improvement-
Bonds . . . . . . . @ i.35 mills . . . . . . 224,859.55
Drainage - Maintenance @ 3.61 mills . . . . . . 601,291.09
Drainage District #1 . .@ 5.00 mills . . . . . . 242,396.15
5th Ward Drainage Dis-
trict #1 - Mainte-
nance . . . . . . . @ 5.00 mills . . . . . . 34,940.35
Drainage District #1
of 12 . . . . . . . @ $2.50 per acre . . . . . 2YO06.48
Drainage District #2
of 12 . . . . . . . @ $2.50 per acre . . . . .. 2,471.47
Drainage District #3
of 12 . . . . . . . @ $2.50 per acre . . . . . . 5,265.93
Drainage District #1
of 12 . . . . . . . @ 20.00 mills . . . . . . . 7,258.60
Drainage District #2
of 12 . . . . . . . *@ 20.00 mills . . . . . . . 3,433.40
Drainage District #3
of 12 . . . . . . . @ 20.00 mills . . . . . . . 8,149.80

Miscellaneous Taxes:
Parish Criminal
Expense . . . . . . @ .90 mills . . . . . . . 17,717.23
Public Buildings -
Maintenance . . . . @ 2.71 mills . . . . . . . 451,384.73
Public Health Unit
Maintenance &
Operation . . . . . . q .90 mills . . . . . . 149,906.37

1980 - 1981

PARISH OF LAFOURCHE

Dollar Amount
Library Tax - Maintenance @ 1.80 mills . . . . . 299,812.73
Recreation Tax - Mainte-
nance . . . . . . . . @ 1.80 mills . . . . . . . 299,812.73
Recreation District #1 -
Maintenance . . . . . @ 2.81 mills . . . . . . 46,328.85
Fire Protection District
#1 - Maintenance . . . @ 4.80 mills . . . . . . 111,064.32
Fire Protection District
#2 . . . . . . . . . . @ 1.97 mills . . . . . . 39,303.96
Fire Protection District
#3 . . . . . . . . . . @ 3.40 mills . . . . . . 240,919.95
Fire Protection District
#5 . : ' : * * , * , , @ 6.00 mills . . . . . . 31,033.44
Water District #1
Maintenance . . . ... @ 5.86 mills . . . . . . 847,190.76
Bayou Lafourche Fresh
Water District . . . . @ 1.57 mills . . . . . . 261,251.58
Hospital Service Dis-
trict #1 - Maintenance @ 17.'24 mills . . . . . 1,221,605.88
Hospital Service Dis-
trict #2 - Maintenance @ 7.00 mills . . . . . 301,627.62
Hospital Service Dis-
trict #3 - Maintenance @ 12.00 mills . . . . . 553,104.60
Road Lighting District
#1 - Maintenance . . . @ 1.75 mills . . . . . 244,978.24
Greater Lafourche Port
Commission :c . . . . . @ 6.39 mills . . . . . 452,787.79
Garbage Distri t 01 -
Maintenance * , * , * @ 3.71 mills . . . . . . 248,557.20
Garbage District #2 -
Maintenance * * * * , @ 11.00 mills . . .. . . . 70,120.60
Garbage District #3 -
Maintenance @ 3.78 mills . . . . . . 39,367.31
Law Enforcement Dis-
trict #1 . . . . . . . @ 9.53 mills . . . . 1, 587,341.86
Special Education Dis-
trict #1 - Maintenance @ 8.60 mills . . . . 609,385.77

Total Parish and Local Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . SI.F,959,798.56

Source: Louisiana Tnx Commission, (1982)

for the parish in addition to severance tax lines. This fact

will pose some hard questions to pari sh officials for the

future of the economy in south Lafourche and the tax base of

the parish as a whole in the next few years if current trends

continue.

Fishing - The Renewable Resource

For many years the coastal zone of Louisiana has yielded

vast renewable resources, especially commercial fisheries.

Louisiana produces approximately 25T, of the nation's fishery

resources. Lafourche Parish sits astride the most productive

of Louisiana's onshore and nearshore fishing industry, the

Barataria Basin.

Table 3.11 illustrates the extent of the Louisiana fish-

ing both on poundage and dollar value. Tables 3.12 and 3.13

offer a breakdown by species of the finfish and shellfish that

make up the commercial catch. By far, the largest contribution

to the catch is menhaden,with over one billion pounds caught.

The most valuable harvest, however, is shrimp,bringing in over

131 million dollars in 1981.

Table 3.14 lists the leased water bottom acreage for oy-

sters in coastal Louisiana and Lafourche Parish. Table 3.15

is a list of wholesale and retail seafood outlets in the

coastal zone in 1979,illustrating the value of the fishing in-

dustr y to the local economy other than to the fisherman them-

selves.

TABLE 3.11

LOUISIANA LANDINGS

1981

0 - 200 Miles Offshore

All Fish

Pounds Dollars

Finfish 1,168,597,000 $ 84,735,000

C-0 Shellfish 132p4250000 -149,583,000

Total 1,168,597,000 $214,319,000

Source: National Marine Fisheries Service (1982)

TABLE 3. 12

LOUISIANA LANDINGS

1981

0 - 200 Miles Offshore

Finfish

Fish Pounds Dollars Price/Pound

Croaker 149,000 $ 41,000 $ .275

Atlantic Flounder 104,000 69-,000 .663

Groupers 5,000 5,000 1.00

Menhaden 1,024,611,000 39,203,000 .038

Mullet 1,799,000 273,000 .151
0
Sea Trout, Spot 523,000 518,000 .990

Sea Trout, White 83,000 26,000 .313

Sharks 2,000 1,000 .500

Red Snapper 410,000 628,000 1.531

Spanish Mackeral. 18,000 5,000 .277

Other Fish 8,468,000 3,197,000 --

Total 1,036,172,000 $43,966,000

Source: National Marine Fisheries Service (1982)

TARLF 3.1.3

LOUISIANA LANDINGS

1981

0 - 200 Rifles Offshore

Shellfish

Shellfish Pounds Dollars Price/Pound

Blue Crab 13,026,000 $ 3,609,000 $ .277

Shrimp 110,211,000 1310466,000 1.192

oyster Near 7,298,000 13,050,000 1.788

Squid 1,000 ------ .000

other Shellfish 1,889)000 11458)000' .771

Total 132,425,000 $149,583,000

Source: National Marine Fisheries Service (1982)

TABLE 3.14

LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES

SEAFOOD DIVISION - SURVEY SECTION

LEASED WATER BOTTOM ACREAGE

PARISH 1976-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 1979-80 1980-81

St. Bernard 71,750 74,341 72,377 72,083 69,818 69,011

Plaquem1nes 56,346 65,375 74,450 80,674 79,438 81,632

Terrebonne 33,012 38,781 44,762 43,284 41,265 42,595

Jefferson 16,147 16,572 19,826 20,295 19,608 19,775

C4
Lafourche 12,951 15,157 17,340 18,456 15,689 15,657

St. Tammany 940 940 925 925 940 940

Vermillion 720 720 720 720 720 720

St. Mary 643 643 643 620 573 543

Iberia 716 880 866 889 889 889

Grand Total 193,225 213,411 231,909 237,946 228,960 231,762

Lease Holders 1,424

Source: Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries (1982).

TABLE 3. 15

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL FISH AND SEAFOOD OUTLETS

LAFOURCHE PARISH

WHOLESALE

Bob's Seafood - Galliano

Dos Gris Seafood - Leeville

Guidry's Seafood Company - Cut Off.

Gulf Shrimp Processors - Golden Meadow

Hubert Lafont Shrimp Company - Golden Meadow

Louisiana Sea Products Golden Meadow

Andrew Martin Seafood Leeville

New Orleans Shrimp Company, Inc. - Leeville

Quality Seafood Company, Inc. - Leeville

RETAIL

Bayou Lafourche Fish Co., Inc. - Leeville

Dennis Collins - Golden Meadow

Dos Gris Seafood - Leeville

Golden Meadow Oyst er House, Inc. - Golden Meadow

J & L Seafood - Leeville

Eldon Lee Seafood - Leeville

Leeville Seafood and Oil Station - Leeville

Andrew Martin Seafood Leeville

Eddie Martin Seafood Golden Meadow-

Quality Seafood Company, Inc. - Leeville

M & M Fish Company - Leeville

Source: Fingerman and Durabb (1979)

With the declining oil and gas production anticipated in

future years, the fishing industry should remain a strong

viable industry in an area that will lose some of its viability

as an oil and gas production, service, and construction area.

There is some concern that the deteriorating condition of

parish wetlands could adversely affect what should be a con-

tinuing resource for the residents of the Lafourche Coastal

Zone.

Agriculture

ComDared with the oil and gas and f ishing industry and

support facilities, agriculture plays a minor role in the

coastal zone of Lafourche Parish. The main uses for agricul-

tural land are sugar cane and pasture. Almost all of the sugar

cane is located north of Galliano, Louisiana. Clovelly Farms-

is a large reclaimed area on the east side of Rayou'Lafourche

that is the largest sugar cane growing area south of the Intra-

coastal Waterway. It is anti cipated that sugar cane acreage

will continue to decrease as more pressure develops for more

intensive uses of the limited land area available within the

south Lafourche levee system. Due to the high cost of recla-

mation and environmental restrictions on such activity, it is

unlikely that any additional lands will be reclaimed for agri-

culture or anything else in the forseeable future.

Table 3.16 lists the number of farms in Lafourche Parish

as well as projections to 1990.. Table 3.17 lists the crops,

104

TABLE 3.16

CHANGES IN NUMBER

OF FARMS

Laf ourche Parish

of Farms

1969 519

1974 356

1978 399
Percentage change 1969 - 1978 -23.1%

Proje--ted 1990 361

Source: Lonnie L. Fielder, Jr. (1981)

105

TABLE 3.17

LAFOURCHE PARISH

FAFM STATISTICS - CROPS

1980 - 81

CROP ACREAGE VIELD/ACRE PRODUCTION

1980 Corn 150 40.0 bushels 6,000 bushels

1981 Corn 100 60.0 bushels 6,000 bushels

1980 Soybeans 3700 25.9 bushels 96,000 bushels
0
1981 Soybeans 4100 27.1 bushels 111,000 bushels

1980 Wheat 150 16.0 bushels 2,400 bushels

1981 Wheat 400 35.0 bushels 14,000 bushels

1990 Sugarcane 26,200 23.0 tons 619,000 tons

1981 Sugarcane 38,700 28.9 tons 830,000 tons

Source: Fielder, LonnieL. and Berger Nelson (1982)

acreages, yields, and total products for all' the major crops

in the parish in 1980 and 1981. Table 3.18 lists numbers of

beef and milk cattle in the parish 1979 - 1982. Table 3.19

lists changes in sugar cane and total cropland in Lafourche

Parish from 1969 1978.

107

TABLE 3.18

CATTLE AND CALVES ON FAMIS

1979 82

Lafourche Parish

1979 24,800

1980 22,300

1981 20,900

1982 25,400

MILK COWS ON FARMS

1979 - 82

1979 100

1980 50

1981 1

1982 0

Source: Fielder, Lonnie L. and
Berger Nelson (1982)

108

TABLE 3.19

CHANGE IN TOTAL CROPLAND

Lafourche Parish

1969 - 78 With Projections

Acres of Cropland

1969 81,409

1974 74,139

1978 80,777
Percentage Change 1969 78 -0.8%

Projected 1990 77,510

CHANGE IN SUGAR CANE

ACRES HARVESTED

1969 24,385

1974 27,365

1978 32,000
Percentage Change 1969 7 11.9%

Projected 1990 32,201

Source: Lonnie L. Fielder (1981)

109

FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL PROJECTS

IN THE COASTAL ZONE

These are the three projects of note in the Lafourche

Coastal Zone. They are as follows:

(1) The Louisiana Offshore Oil Port - An offshore
loading terminal pipeline, storage facility,
and distribution system financed for a consortium
of oil camps. This is the only offshore loadinz
Port in the entire U.S.

(2) Port Fourchon Multi-Port - A local oil and gas and
fishing support facility near the mouth of Bayou
Lafourche.

(3) The South Lafourche Levee System - A major ring
levee, flood gate, and pumping station that com-
pletely encloses the inhabited area of the coastal
zone from Larose to south of Golden Meadow. This
levee is the main line flood protection for the
entire area and is a federal project with local
and state matching funds.

Each of these three major facilities has a significant

effect on the economy and the ecology of Lafourche Parish.

The facilities are described here and their impact on Coastal

Zone Management is assessed in the chapter dealing with En-

vironmental Management'Units.

Table 3.20 lists information about Port.Fourchon. Table

3.21 describes the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port. Table 3.22

describes the South Lafourche Levee System.

110

TABLE 3.20

PORT FOURCHON MULTI-PORT

LOCATION-. Highway 30 90 near the coast of Lafourche Parish

AUTHORITY: Governed by the Greater Lafourche Port Commission

AREA
COVERED: 3,600 acres

FACILITIES: Jetties at Belle Passe
Belle Passe deepened to 20 feet, widened to 300
feet
Commercial marina with capacity of 68 large shrimp
boats completed
A warehouse and docking facility completed
Bridge constructed and Fighway 3090 improved to Port
Fourchon site

CURRENT ECON011IC ACTIVITY:

TOTAL LEASES: 7

Martin Fuel Distributors - crane service, fuel, sub-tenants
Deepwater Port Services - provide LOOP supertankers with
supplies
N/L Baroid, Inc. - drilling supplies
Dowell, Inc. - drilling supplies
J.O.B. Labor Contractors, Inc. - roustabouts, divers, etc.-
J & L Seafood, Inc. seafood
Cajun Trucking Co. Radcliff materials
L.O.O.P. Inc.

SUB-LESSEES OR TENANTS OF LESSEES:

Shell Oil Company
Tenneco Oil Company
OBI Hughes, Inc. - drilling fluids
Sea Con. Inc. - offshore construction
JFD, Inc. - production company
Exxon
Conoco
Pipeline, Inc. - pipeline laying
Cockrell Oil Corporation
Haliburton-

OTHER FACILITIES: Fourchon Docks, Inc.
Charlie Hardison Charter Boat Fishing

AVAILABLE LAND: 75 acres for lease
300 acres under development

Source: Ted Falgout, Port Commission Director, 1982.

ill

TABLE 3.21

LOUISIANA OFFSHORE OIL POPT FACTS

TOTAL CAPACITY: 1.4 million bar rels of throughput per day (42
gallons to a barrel)

PORT FACILITY: Located in 115 feet of water in Grand Isle,
Block 59 in the Gulf of Mexico - 19 miles
offshore

TRANSPORT: 5 611 subterranean pipeline from port to pumping plat-
form complex
4811 pipeline continuing irom pumping platform to
storage facility at the Clovelly Salt Dome

CLOVELLY
SALT DOME: 8 cavities of storage capable of holding 32 million
barrels of crude oil. Pipeline cavities are of the
brine displacement type.

CONNECTING
CARRIERS: 5 distributing pipelines tied to L.O.O.P. Clovelly
Dome.Storage Areas:

1) LOCAP, Inc. - 55,000 barrels/hour
2) Shell Pipeline - 12,300 barrels/hour
3) Exxon Pipeline - 7,500 barrels/hour
4) Texaco Cities
Service Pipeline - 15,200 barrels/hour-
5) CAM Pipeline - 1-1,600 barrels/hour

OWNERS: 1) Ashland Oil Co.
2) Marathon Pipeline Co.
3) Murphy Oil Corp.
4) Shell Oil Co.
5) Texaco, Inc.

TOTAL COST OF
LOOP PIPELINE: $700,000,000

SOURCE: Terry D. Trovato, Press Release, L.O.O.P., Inc., 1981

112

TABLE 3.22

SOUTH LAYOURCHE LEVEE DISTRICT

HURRICANE PROTECTION PROJECT

Length: 43 Miles

Construction: Earthen Levees
Concrete Walls
8 Pumping Stations
2 Flood Gates (Located on Bayou Lafourche)
at Larose and Golden Meadow

Height: +13 feet M.S.L. at the southern portion
+ 8j feet M.S.L. at the northern portion near Larose

Area
Protected: 32,400 acres including the communities of Larose,
Cut Off, Galliano, and Golden Meadow

Population: Approximately 26,000

Funding: 70% Federal, 30% Local Interest

Time Period: Construction Began in 1975
Estimated Completion date in 1988

Source: Windell Curole, Director, South Lafourche Levee District
(1982)

113

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Curole, Windell (1982) Director, South Lafourche Levee
District, Galliano, Louisiana, personal interview

Falgout, Ted (1982) Director, Greater Lafourche Port
Commission, Galliano, Louisiana, personal inter-
view

Fielder, Lonnie L. and Berger Nelson (1982) Agricultural
Statistics and Prices for Louisiana 1924 - 1981
Louisiana State University, Department of Agricul-
tural Economics and Agribusiness, Center for Agri-
cultural Sciences and Rural Development, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana

Fielder, Lonnie L. (1981) Changes in Louisiana Agriculture
by Parishes and by Type of Farming Areas with Pro-
jections for 1990. Louisiana State University,
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness,
Center for Agricultural Sciences and Rural Develop-
men't, Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Fingerman, Land Edwin Durabb (1979) Lafourche Coastal Zone
Management: 1979_Program. SoutE Central Planning and
Development Commission, Thibodaux, Louisiana

Louisiana Department of Commerce (1982) 1981 Directory of
Louisiana Manufacturers. Louisiana Department of
Commerce, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Louisiana Department of Conservation (1982) Oil and Cras
Production in Louisiana. Louisiana Department of
Natural Resources-7-0-f-f-ice of Conservation (Correspondence-
unpublished)

Louisiana Department of Labor (1958 - 1981) Employment and
Wages (Yearly summaries) Louisiana Department of Labor,
Office of Management and Finance, Research and Statis-
tics Unit, Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Louisiana Department of Labor (1976 - 1982) Unemployment
Rates for Lafourche Parish and Louisiana, Louisiana
Department of Labor, Office of Management and Finance,
Research and Statistics Unit .(Correspondence)

114

Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (1982) Leased
Water Bottom Acreage,-Louisiana Department of Wildlife
and Fisheries (unpublished data)

Louisiana Geological Survey (1981) Oil and Gas Map of
Louisiana, Completed by the Louisiana Ueological Survey,.
Published by Louisiana Department of Natural Resources,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Louisiana Tax Commission (1978, 1980; 1982) Eighteenth, Nine-
teenth, and Twentieth Biennual Reports of the Louisiana
Tax Commission. Moran Industries, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

National Marine Fisheries Service (1982) Louisiana Landings,
1981, National Marine Fisheries Service, (Unpublished
Data)

Trovato, Terry D. (1981) Public Information Officer, Louisiana
Offshore Oil Port, Inc., Harvey, Louisiana

University of New Orleans and Louisiana State Planning Offic e
(1981), 1981 Statistical Abstract of Louisiana, UNO
Division of Business and Economic Research and Louisiana
State Planning Office, New Orleans, Louisiana

115

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

LAMURCHE PARISH COASTAL ZONE

on 7 Urru
UNIE

10 a,
21
1. nita Famrs
@@j 6AW
i alh Uttle LaM
8ayou Pointe 4u Chien
_,_jIIy Camp
licit
.!.'@,jth Lafburche
11 it
-DoAh Labjr&e A
N
C-!,Yv&y Farn

0. Rqc=jrci
11. Golden Meadow
I?- South Bomtaria
13. Leeville CAR*Sam
say
14. limbafier LAM PACCama LANE
Lri Four&ton
Ira C=inado
10
4.

TRINNALIER RAW

Go" d likiiiiiiii,

Appendix i

LAND COVER: LAFOURCHE PARISH

1980

The following is a series of tables illustrating Land

Cover for'the Lafourche Parish Coastal Zone in 1980. This

information was derived from an experimental, joint effort

of Lafourche Parish, Louisiana State University, and the

National Aeronautics and Space Administration designed to

assess land loss in the Parish using Landsat satellite re-

motely sensed information and a computerized data base. The

information used to develop a land cover analysis was ex-

tracted from a satellite frame in September 1980 and, there-

fore, provides an up to date land cover for the parish and
for each of the'sixteen Environmental Management Units in the

CZM Program. Budgetary limitations prevented this analysis

from covering the entire coastal zone, nevertheless valuable

information was obtained that will benefit the CZM Program.

An explanation, description, and analysis results of the

Landsat Demonstration Project is available in a separate

Publication.

116

TABLE 1

LAND COVEP 1980

LAFOURCHE PARISR COASTAL ZONE

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 235,667.30 368.23

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 25,217.79 39.40

Urban Built Up/
Bare Ground 9,486.17 14.82

Marsh 152,536.10 238.34

Forest 15,114.49 23.62

Beach/Bare G round 881.53 1.38

Unclassified 335.44 0.52

Total- 4.99,238.82 686.31

NOTE: Classification using September,1980,Landsat frame
statistics of North Little Lake and'Delta Farm
areas and portions of Clovelly Parms, Bayou 'nointe-
au-Chien and Bully Camp are unavailable due to
frame cut off Point.

117

TABLES 2, 3

LAND COVER 1980

SOUTH LAFOUPCHE "C"

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 0 0

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 1231.18 1.92

Urban Built ITP/
Bare Ground 11.12 0.02

Marsh 38.30 0.06

Forest 124.17 0.19

Beach/Bare Ground 0 0

Unclassified 0 0

Total: 1404.77 2.19

LAND COVER 1980

RACCOURCI

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 84,269.13 131.67

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 386.71 0.60

Urban Built Up/
Bare Ground 544.86 0.85

Marsh 45,583.15 71.22

Forest 316..91 0.50

Beach/Bare Ground 3.09 0.01

Unclassified 54.98 0.09

Total: 131,158.83 204.94

118

TABLES 4, 5

LAND COVER 1980

SOUTH BARATARIA

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 78,852.06 123.21

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 952.49 1.33

Urban Built UP/
Bare Ground 2,656.32 4.15

Marsh 45,271.80 70.74

Forest 115.52 0.18

Beach/Bare Gr6und 3.71 0.01

Unclassified 43.86 0.07

Total: [email protected] 199.69

LAND COVER 1980

TIMBALIER

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 27,065.48 42.29

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 37.07 0.06

Urban Built Up/
Bare Ground 24.71 0.04

Marsh 1,179.28 1.84

Forest 939.07 0.37

Beach/Bare Ground 133.43 0.21

Unclassified --- ---

.Total: 28,679.04 44.81

Ila

TABLES 6, 7

LAND COVER 1980

CAMINADA

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 5,827.85 9.11

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 72.28 0.11

Urban Built UP/
Bare Ground 160.61 0.25

Marsh 4,769.03 7.45

Forest 38.30 0.06

Beach/Bare Ground 2916.52 0.46

Unclassified 14.83 0.02

Total: 11,179.42 17.46

LAND COVER 1980

SOUTH LAFOURCHE "B"

Class Acres Square Milps

Water 1,228.70 1.92
Agriculture/ 1,937.26 3.03
Bare Ground

Urban Built UP/
Bare Ground 297.76 0.47

Marsh 955.04 1.49

Forest 1,376.35 2.15

Beach/Bare Ground 46.95 0.07

Unclassified 6.80 0.01

Total: 5,848.86 9.14

120

TABLES 8, 9

LAND COVER 1980

GOLDEN MEADOW

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 1,827.30 2.86

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 48.80 0.08

Urban Built UP/
Bare Ground 35.83 0.06

Marsh 2,416.02 3.78

Forest 29.65 0.05

Beach/Bare Ground 7.41 0.01

Unclassified 12.97 0.02

Total: 4,377.98 6.86

LAND COVER 1980

FOURCHON

Class Acres _Sgupre Miles

Water 7,065.21 11.04

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 252.04 0.39

Urban Built UD-/
Bare Ground 389.18 0.61

Marsh 2,86n.65 4.47

Forest 15.44 0.02

Beach/Bare Ground 172.35 0.27

Unclassified 18.53 0.03

Total: 10,775.40 16.83

121

TABLE 10

LAND COVER 1980

CLOVELLY *

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 16,782.41 26.22

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 737.59 1.15

Urban Built Up/
Bare Ground 488.02 0.76

Marsh 19,556.73 30.56

Forest 470.73 0.74

Beach/Bare Ground 6.80 0.01

Unclassified 12.97 0.02

Total: 38,055.25 59.46

NOTE: Coverage on Landsat frame used in this analysis
did not cover northern 10% of this E.M.U. There-
fore,statistics shown only-reflect the lower 909o'
of this unit.

122

TABLE 11

LAND COVER 1980
BULLY CAI.IP * I

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 3,486.58 5.45''

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 2,066.37 3.23

Urban Built Up/
Bare Ground 138.38 0.22

Marsh 9,006.79 14.07

Forest 1,650.63 2.58

Beach/Bare Ground 0 0

Unclassified 0 0

Total: 16,348.75 25.55

NOTE: Coverage on Landsat frame used in this analysis
did.not cover northern 10% of this unit. There-
fore, statistics shown cover only 9017o of this
unit.

123

TABLE 1,2

LAND COVER 1980

SOUTH LAFOURCHE "All

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 1,178.05 1.84

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 15,208.39 23.76

Urban Built Up/ 3,602.10 5.63
Bare Ground

Marsh 2)765.67 4.32

Forest 4,70-9.30 7.50

Beach/Bare Ground 139.61 0.22

Unclassified 103.78 0.16

Total: 27,796.90 43.43

NOTE: 'Coverage on Landsat frame used in this analysis
did not cover the northern 15% of this F.M.U.
Therefore, statistics shown cover only 85% of
this unit.

124

TABLE 13

LAND COVER 1980

CLOVELLY FARMS

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 8.07 0.01

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 895.74 1.40

Urban Built Up/
Bare Ground 147.64 0.23

Marsh 25.95 0.04

Forest 1.85 0.01

Beach/Bare Ground 0 0

Unclassif ied 0 0

Total: 1,079.25 1.69

NOTE: Coverage on Landsat frame used in this analysis
did not register the northern 2/3 of this E.M.U.
Therefore, statistics shown only reflect about
1/3 of the area of this unit.

125

TABLE 14

LANP rnVER 1980

BAYOU POINTE-AU-CHIEN

Class Acres Square Miles

Water 1,288.01 2.01

Agriculture/
Bare Ground 1,386.23 2.17

Urban Built Up/
Bare Ground 808.02 1.26

Marsh 13,352.05 -20.86

Forest 5,932.25 9.27

Beach/Bare Ground 35.83 0.06

Unclassified 37.07 0.06

Total: 22,839.46 35.69

NOTE: Coverage on Landsat frame used in this analysis
did not cover northern 25% of this E.M.U. There-
fore, statistics shown only reflect the lower
75% of the unit.

Source: Braud, Durabb, Howard, Whitehurst (1982).

126

@ li@luillililille 1
3 6668 14103 8515 , I
I
i

A
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I I
i
I
I
I
I
I