U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

37–446 PDF 2007

S. HRG. 109–990

EXAMINE COASTAL EROSION CAUSES,

EFFECT AND SOLUTIONS IN LOUISIANA,

INCLUDING THE LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA

ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PLAN PROPOSED

FOR AUTHORIZATION IN THE WATER

RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2005

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

AUGUST 26, 2005—NEW ORLEANS, LA

Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress.senate
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma, Chairman 

JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia 

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

LINCOLN CHAFEE, Rhode Island 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JAMES M. JEFFORDS, Vermont 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

ANDREW WHEELER, Majority Staff Director 

KEN CONNOLLY, Minority Staff Director

(II) 
(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

AUGUST 26, 2005—NEW ORLEANS, LA 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Vitter, Hon. David, U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana ............................ 1 

WITNESSES 

Angelle, Scott, secretary, Louisiana Department of Natural Resources ............. 10

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 41

Boasso, Hon. Walter J., Senator, Louisiana State Legislature, Senate

District 1, St. Bernard and Plaquemines Parishes ........................................... 14

Duval, Alexis, chairwoman of the board, Houma-Terrebonne Chamber of Commerce ..................................................................................................................... 27

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 64

Francis, Roy, executive director, LA1 Coalition .................................................... 33

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 69

Lanctot, Randy, executive director, Louisiana Wildlife Federation .................... 30

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 66

Landrieu, Hon. Mary, U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana ........................ 4

Penland, Shea, director and professor, Pontchartrain Institute of Environmental Sciences, and Chairman, Department of Geology and Geophysics, 

University of New Orleans .................................................................................. 29

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 65

Randolph, Charlotte, president, Lafourche Parish ............................................... 15

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 61

Riley, Major General Don T., Director of Civil Works, U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers .......................................................................................................... 8

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 40

Zeringue, Jerome, executive director, Terrebonne Levee and Conservation 

District .................................................................................................................. 24

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 62

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL 

Statement, of John Lopez, director of coastal sustainability, Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation, Matairie, LA ........................................................ 70

(1)

EXAMINE COASTAL EROSION CAUSES,

EFFECT AND SOLUTIONS IN LOUISIANA,

INCLUDING THE LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA 

ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PLAN PROPOSED FOR AUTHORIZATION IN THE 

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 

2005

FRIDAY, AUGUST 26, 2005

U.S. SENATE

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, New Orleans, LA. 

The committee met pursuant to notice, at 10 o’clock a.m. at the 

University of New Orleans (UNO) Research and Technology Park, 

2045 Lakeshore Drive, Room 236, Lindy Boggs Conference Center, 

New Orleans, LA. Hon. David Vitter presiding. 

Present: Senator Vitter. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID VITTER, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Senator VITTER. We will now convene the U.S. Committee on the 

Environment and Public Works to review the causes and effects of 

coastal land loss in Louisiana and the proposed solutions to address this crisis. Thanks to all of you for being here. 

Now, in Louisiana, though we’re not too strict on needing reasons 

to throw a party, I think we have some real good substantive reasons this year: Several major victories on the Federal level, WRDA, 

which is moving through the process; the Highway bill, which is 

now signed into law; the Energy bill, which is signed into law with 

the major coastal provision. I’m very hopeful we’re just getting 

started. 

I want to begin this year by saying thank you to all the folks in 

this room and elsewhere all around Louisiana. All the citizens of 

Louisiana who came together and are dedicated on this issue, dedicated to the restoration of Louisiana’s coast, so please give yourselves and everyone who deserves it a round of applause. 

[Applause.] 

Together we are making a difference with some initial successes, 

and more work needs to be done but we are making a difference. 

There are so many people to thank, including some here. I can’t 

go through the entire list but I certainly want to point out the work 

of Secretary Angelle on behalf of the Governor and her administration, Sidney Coffee and Randy Hanchey with the State; and, cer-
2

tainly my partner in the Senate, Senator Landrieu, who we’re 

going to hear from in just a few minutes. Also Jason, Bubba and 

Kathleen in Mary’s office. Also the two of us want to join together 

and thank the whole Louisiana congressional Delegation, which is 

very much united as a team on this important work, and that’s 

paying off. 

In my opening statement, I want to very briefly go through the 

recent history of coastal restoration efforts and where things currently stand today. In 2000, the U.S. House of Representatives 

passed the Conservation and Reinvestment Act, better known as 

CARA, and that was originally authored in the House by Congressmen Billy Tauzin, Don Young, and John Dingle. 

Of course, it was authored in the Senate by Senator Landrieu, 

who is with us today. The bill passed by a 3 to 1 margin and would 

have provided $311 million to the State of Louisiana annually. Despite valiant efforts and a lot of hard work by Mary and others in 

the Senate, it got bogged down really in some of the instruction 

there. 

So we set out again—my predecessors, I should say, set out, the 

whole delegation in 2002 and 2003 in CARA, moving it along but 

not quite to the ultimate finish line. That really paved the way for 

our continuing work, including our victory in the Energy bill, just 

a few weeks ago which I’ll get to in a minute. 

At the same time we’ve all been working hard on another key 

piece of Federal legislation, and that is WRDA, the Water Resources Development Act. We had significant inclusion of a Louisiana coastal provision in WRDA last year that was about $325 

million a program for coastal Louisiana. 

It didn’t pass last year so we came back and redoubled our efforts on WRDA this year with really good success. This year we’re 

able to increase that authorization to $1.9 billion in the current 

Senate WRDA, that comes before the jurisdiction of this committee 

on which I serve, Environment and Public Works. So we’re eager 

to continue the work to pass WRDA through the Senate and have 

it signed by President Bush. 

That finally brings me to the Energy bill. As I said, all of this 

work, including CARA, led to our efforts on this year’s Energy bill. 

That was finally passed into law and signed by President Bush on 

August of this year. We were able to include in it—Through a lot 

of folks’ hard work, certainly Mary, also myself, working on the 

Senate side, we had a Senate floor amendment, which passed, to 

provide the State with $540 million to restore the coast. That was 

part of a billion-dollar, 4-year provision for the coastal-producing 

States, Louisiana getting the lion’s share of that $540 million. 

A full 35 percent of these funds will go directly to the parishes, 

coastal parishes, to help; directly to them for their battle on coastal 

erosion. Then the remaining 65 percent will go to the effort statewide, led by the State, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and others to extend this. This is the first time in decades that the U.S. 

Senate has passed mandatory spending associated with oil and gas 

royalties for our coast. 

This, together with the Environment and Public Work Committee’s WRDA bill provision authorizing a joint effort of seven Fed-
3

eral Agencies and a $1.9 billion program, are major actions toward 

comprehensive restoration. 

These actions represent the substance of three of the five bills, 

included in my coast package that I introduced earlier this year 

with the active partnership and help of everyone in the Louisiana 

congressional Delegation. 

So these are huge victories for all of us that everyone worked on 

and that we’re all very proud of and it’s a great start, but, of 

course, it’s just a start on which we need to build. 

You know, for decades we’ve been talking about comprehensive restoration. I want to be clear, this $540 million Energy bill and 

this $1.9 billion authorization are for construction to actually begin 

restoration, not just more studies, reviews or reports. 

I also want to be clear that this is the start and not the end. This 

is not the end and this is not in place of the $15 billion comprehensive restoration program identified in the Corps in the coast 2050 

plan, this case is just a deposit on that $15 billion program. There 

will be much more to come as there needs to be. 

Note, at the national level, Louisiana coastal area program as 

compared—has been compared to other large scale projects, like the 

Florida Everglades and Chesapeake Bay. 

Growing up here I’ve spent a tremendous amount of time in 

coastal Louisiana. I’ve also been to Chesapeake Bay in Florida. I 

am here to tell you that there is absolutely no comparison. Those 

areas, those projects are important and I’m supportive of them, but 

there truly is no comparison, including in terms of the national significance of what we’re dealing with here in coastal Louisiana. 

Maryland’s crab cakes use Louisiana blue crab meat, I’ll have 

you know. I understand many of the problems Florida is experiencing are attributable to the decisions of State and ad interest 

and water interest and others have made there on the ground for 

temporary political or parochial or State gain. 

Further, Florida has repeatedly rejected efforts to address our 

Nation’s need to enhance energy secured and reduce our alliance 

on foreign energy sources by beginning production of Federal energy resources offshore. 

It may be politically correct for Florida to consume energy and 

oppose production off their coast, but the reality is that they’re utilizing up to 23 times the energy they produce and claim energy 

production offshore will adversely impact their sunbathing, and we 

are paying $2.60 a gallon for gasoline in New Orleans today; meanwhile, what is the very different picture in Louisiana? 

The different picture is we’ve provided over $120 billion to the 

Federal Government in energy royalties from our offshore production and we’re one of the few States that produce much more energy than we consume so that States like Florida and California 

and some other coastal States can keep the lights and their home 

air conditioned without really doing their part. 

I wanted to hold this hearing today to talk about this: Where we 

are, where we go from here, because we are at a truly historic and 

crucial point. 

As we begin to implement our comprehensive restoration strategy, we must keep in mind that the same activities that make our 

coast important have the potential to derail this effort. 
4

We have come this far because we have had open communications. We’ve been inclusive and we’ve worked together. So we need 

to continue in that vein. 

Louisiana has grown into the top seafood producer in the lower 

48 States. The Census Bureau determined that Louisiana is the 

most productive work force in the country. We have developed the 

largest port system in the world. We produce more energy offshore 

than the next five most-productive States combined. We’re doing 

great things on our working coast. 

If we’re going to continue to move forward, we must continue to 

include fishermen, maritime community, oil and gas community, 

and most importantly, all citizens of South Louisiana. 

We really have an excellent group of panelists today in three distinct panels, and I look forward to hearing from all of them. 

According to the rules of the committee, I’m going to ask each 

witness to keep oral statements to about 5 minutes, and, of course, 

full written statements will be included in the reference. So let’s 

move on to our hearing and our first panel, and our panel is a very 

distinguished panel, Senator Mary Landrieu will testify on this 

topic. 

I want to thank Mary for being a full partner in the Senate, for 

being extremely active and energetic on this issue from the moment she ran for the Senate. She’s clearly made coastal restoration 

an absolute top priority and serves on two extremely important 

committees for this effort, the Senator Energy Committee and the 

Senate Appropriations Committee. 

Mary, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARY LANDRIEU, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Senator Vitter, and thank you all 

for being a part of this very important hearing today. I want to 

start by thanking Chairman Inhofe, who is a great colleague of 

ours and partner of the Senate that is really focused on his efforts 

as chairman of this important committee on Louisiana’s coast. 

I want to thank Senator David Vitter for conducting this hearing 

because now, as a new member of this committee, he is very strategically placed to continue to push this issue, not only here at home 

but throughout the Nation. So having this hearing in Louisiana 

and right here in New Orleans at the University of New Orleans 

is quite important. I thank Senator Vitter. 

Let me just make a couple of very brief comments, because the 

Senator covered a great deal of the importance of the coast. First 

let me say that the loss of much of America’s wetlands is indeed 

catastrophic. With quick, decisive and bold action, this wetland can 

be restored and rebuilt. 

The cost sharing of the Federal Government should be, in my 

opinion, 75/25; more aggressive than the current cost sharing. I 

think the witnesses that are on the first and second panel will give 

the details for the record of this conference why this should be the 

case. 

The magnitude of the security and economic benefits of this 

working coast, the only energy coast in the Nation, will justify 

this—this cost sharing. 
5

Unfortunately, as Senator Vitter knows and is committed to help 

me reverse this decision, the current administration is arguing for 

a 50/50 cost share. I understand there will be a lot of testimony 

about that, but let me in my opening remarks be right on the 

record. 

Because of the uniqueness of Louisiana’s coast, because of the 

unique and special contribution the Corps of Engineers is certainly 

aware of, we’re going to have to receive—in order to restore the 

coast the way we know we need to, we are going to have to receive 

a more generous cost share. We think we deserve it. The testimony 

that will be laid down today will hopefully move us in that direction. 

Let me just add a few things to what Senator Vitter said about 

the history here. The foundation for a lot of this work that we are 

now pushing forward through the WRDA bill and through the Energy bill was initially laid down by our predecessor, Senator John 

Breaux, when he passed the Breaux Act—and somebody can put 

the date into the record in 1990. 

The Breaux Act was not related to energy; it wasn’t necessarily 

related to WRDA, but it was through the Finance Committee that 

there was a special tax that was directed, particularly to Louisiana, 

and that $20 to $50 million a year, which Senator Breaux and Congressman Tauzin, particularly Congressman Tauzin helped, and 

John was on the Finance Committee—laid that down and that gave 

us the science. The Corps has used that money with the State and 

the previous Administration, the Foster Administration, and now 

in the Blanco Administration, to lay down the science that we now 

know the coast can be restored. 

Ten years ago that was a real question. But we believe with the 

work that’s been done and the research that our university and the 

Corps have done primarily, that we know that the coast can be 

saved. We have a plan now to save the coast. The challenge is that the plan is going to cost us between $15 and $20 billion. So we have to get as many different sources of Federal revenue as we can so that we can actually accomplish this 

task. 

The people of Louisiana cannot afford to pick up this tab. They 

shouldn’t be asked to, considering, as Senator Vitter has stated, the 

tremendous contributions that this working coast makes to the bottom line of the economy and to the direct impact positively to the 

General Fund. 

So I’m going to submit the rest of my statement to the record, 

but I wanted to add that. The work on the education work that was 

done through CARA, I think in large measure laid much of the 

ground work for—at least for the recognition of the importance of 

this issue to Louisiana and to the Nation. 

Then, finally, as the Senator mentioned on this final Energy bill, 

it is not insignificant and should not be underestimated the importance of only $2 billion being in the entire Energy bill for the Nation in direct spending in it’s entirety, $2 billion. This coastal 

project for the energy coast, for Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and 

Alabama, California, and Alaska—and I’ll get to California in a 

minute—we got half of that money directed; half, $1 billion. Of 

that, Louisiana has 54 percent. 
6

So the Federal Government is awake. They’re recognizing what 

we’re doing. If this, hopefully, committee that David is conducting 

lays down testimony, we can build on that record and really begin 

to bring the huge dollars that it’s going to take to restore this coast 

and make a tremendous contribution to our State and the Nation. 

Thank you. Senator Vitter. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Senator. 

I’ve never had the opportunity to cross-examine you before so I’m 

certainly not going to let that pass now. I did just want to ask you 

a few things that you’ve been very involved in, and one is this cost 

share. 

As you know, a sort of typical standard cost share for projects is 

65 percent Federal. I believe, as you do, there’s a lot of justification 

for going higher than that, say, 75 percent, but the Administration 

has proposed significantly less, 50 percent. 

If you can speak a little more to that and why we should—we 

should not only get 65 but higher. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Well, I think the Senator points out a great 

point. The normal cost share in the WRDA bill for all projects of 

this nature are 65/35. It’s been a standard the Corps has used. The 

Corps will be here to testify to that. 

The Administration is, I think, wrongly proposing that this plan 

have a 50/50 cost share. I’m hoping the testimony today will make 

clear into the record that our cost share should really be 75/25 because of the direct and substantial contribution that this coast 

makes, uniquely—uniquely to the Federal Government. 

The Everglades is not host to the oil and gas industry. The Great 

Lakes do not drain two-thirds of the United States. The Chesapeake does not produce anywhere near either energy or fisheries 

resources that this Delta does. It is the only one like it in North 

America. 

So the Federal Government must understand that they have 

more of an interest; therefore, they should pick up more of the tab. 

Not only to mention that Louisiana, while we’re a proud State, we 

are not as wealthy as some of the other States are: Connecticut and 

New York. 

We keep the lights on in Connecticut. We keep the lights on in 

New York, and we keep the lights on in California. 

Our people don’t have the same level of income to support this 

massive project, and we shouldn’t have to. 

So, Senator Vitter, I know you feel as passionately as I do about 

this, and I hope we can lay this testimony down in a way that we 

might persuade some of our colleagues that you and I are correct 

about this, and change some minds in Washington. 

Senator VITTER. Mary, I know a big part of this challenge, nationally, that you have taken a leadership role in is the education 

of challenge; educating a lot of folks, certainly other U.S. Senators. 

How do you think that has progressed in the last several years? 

Senator LANDRIEU. Well, one word to describe it would be an 

amazing turnaround. You know this, and others in the room know 

this, but 8 years ago when the testimony—and the Energy Committee will show this, Senator Pete Domenici, who chaired the Energy Committee stated 8 years ago at a public hearing that he was 
7

opposed, unequivocally opposed to revenue sharing with the Federal Government for Louisiana. 

Eight years later, after many conversations and many hearings 

and all of the work that went on and a flight over the marsh, he 

led the effort—republican Chair of the Energy Committee, led the 

effort to make this possible. 

So, Senator Vitter, I can only say that the many trips that you 

and others and our delegation and the Governors have hosted for 

Members of Congress worked because we can see the results; and 

even with Senator Bingham, who you know initially opposed it, 

once he got down here to see it for himself. 

So I’m hoping—You know, our Governor’s extended an invitation 

to the President to come see the coast. Senator Vitter and I have 

urged him to take her up on that offer. I hope the President himself will come and see it. The Corps obviously sees it; they work 

on it every day. Hopefully we can get, I don’t know, a little bit 

more energy, if you will, about what we’re trying to do. 

Senator VITTER. Great. 

The last question: Could you briefly describe the differences between onshore and offshore royalty treatment under Federal law 

and the enormous disadvantage that it creates for us? 

Senator LANDRIEU. Absolutely. 

Every State came into the union with a different boundary and 

Louisiana’s boundary was set by Federal law decades ago at 3 

miles. Outside of that three-mile limit, the State basically does not 

share directly in any royalties, severance with the Federal Government. 

With one exception, that exception is between 3 and 6 miles 

there was dispute about leases and where the oil was, you know, 

being drilled, whether on Federal land or State land, so Bennet 

Johnson and John Breaux—this was before we were even in Congress—argued successfully with the Federal Government to get 27 

percent of that funding, which is—now makes up the AG Fund, 

which we refer to, $640 million. 

The legislature spent 500—spent 100—put 540 in a trust fund 

and that money is still with us today. I used to manage it when 

I was State treasurer. It’s now over a billion dollars, and it funds 

the university that you’re sitting in, so it’s going to good use; and 

all the universities. 

The problem is, is that we’re generating now off of that 3 miles 

about $5 billion a year—it used to be about $2 and now it’s up to 

$5, and it’s projected to go up to $8. 

The reason is, is because drilling is moving offshore—I mean 

from onshore to offshore to deeper and deeper waters. So one idea 

Senator Vitter has suggested, that we move our boundaries out, 

which we may be able to do; whether other States will allows us 

to move our boundaries without them moving theirs, we don’t 

know, but I think Senator Vitter has a great idea to move it out 

if we can, or we can get a percentage of everything out from zero 

to 200 miles because the outer Continental Shelf is 200 miles, from 

zero to 200. That is basically off limits except for drilling—except 

off the coast of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas. 

So any way we do it, whether we move our boundaries or just 

increase our percentage, we need to get a couple of hundred million 
8

dollars a year, at a minimum, from that source because the General Fund is running a pretty significant deficit as we speak. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much, Senator. Thank you for 

being here today. More importantly, thanks for all your work on 

this particular issue. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator VITTER. We’d like to invite our next panel to take the 

stage, and that includes General Riley, Secretary Angelle, Senator 

Boasso and President Randolph. 

As they get seated up here, I’m going to go ahead and begin the 

introductions so we can move right to their testimony. 

First, we have Major General Riley, Director of Civil Works and 

Deputy Chief of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. By the way, 

General, the new star looks great on your uniform. Congratulations 

on that. 

STATEMENT OF MAJOR GENERAL DON T. RILEY, DIRECTOR 

OF CIVIL WORKS, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

General RILEY. Thank you. 

Senator VITTER. I also wanted to mention a quick story involving 

General Riley. You know, in Washington we have strategically 

placed a number of Louisianians all over the Federal Government 

to work on our issues and protect our interests. A lot of folks up 

there refer to these folks as the ‘‘Louisiana Mafia.’’

Well, we kept trying to break into General Riley’s office in that 

effort, we tried assistance, cleaning people in the office, nothing 

seemed to work. Finally, we realized the huge opportunity that we 

had missed before: General Riley’s wife is from Louisiana. So we 

now—we definitely have the inside practice; she’s been all over him 

about restoring our coast. 

General Riley was former district commander for the Mississippi 

Valley Division, which includes Louisiana. He has been a key player in the development of the LCA. Mr. Dan Hitchins from his division office is also with General Riley today. 

Also on the panel we’re very honored to have Secretary Scott 

Angelle, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources. Secretary Angelle is the former parish president and has 

clearly placed coastal restoration at the top of his priority list for 

the department, working very closely, of course, with Governor 

Blanco on that commitment. 

We also have Senator Walter Boasso. Senator Boasso represents 

the southeast portion of the State, a good part of St. Bernard and 

Plaquemines Parishes. This is the area where the Mississippi River 

Gulf Outlet is located. Senator Boasso is extremely well-versed on 

this environmental disaster because he has lived in one of the center of gravity for that very worrisome activity. We’re honored to 

have him today and President Charlotte Randolph, the President 

of Lafourche Parish. Charlotte is very involved in this issue as 

President of Lafourche Parish, but also as a real leader and a great 

organization named PACE, Parishes Against Coastal Erosion. 

That is a collection of parish leaders from throughout our coastal 

parishes that has really been very effective, fighting and battling 

that land loss and fighting for the policy we need to send to the 
9

top. President Randolph has a very unique prospective to provide 

to the committee, really from front lines of coastal erosion. 

So welcome to you all, and we’ll begin with General Riley. 

General RILEY. Thank you, Senator Vitter. 

As General—Senator Vitter said, I’m General Don Riley, Director 

of Civil Works for the Corps of Engineers, as well as the acting 

deputy chief of engineers at this time. 

Senator I want to thank you for this opportunity to testify. You 

and Senator Landrieu, thank you both for your leadership in the 

Senate and our Nation and certainly on this important effort as we 

restore coastal Louisiana. 

You have heard already and will hear more about this great effort, and certainly the urgency to restore America’s wetlands. I am 

here from Washington to demonstrate that both the Corps’ and the 

Administration’s support for this work. 

We are sincerely committed to this effort with the State of Louisiana. Our strategy has been to reverse the trend as we develop 

this plan; reverse the trend and stop the losses of coastal wetland 

loss. 

Our initial plan that we have developed addresses the most critical, ecological needs over the first 10 years or so. We have three 

major components of that: First is targeted restoration of certain 

areas of the wetlands where we can achieve the most effective impact quickly; second, sustain the natural system as much as possible over a long period of time; and, third, to seek an integrated 

program across all Federal agencies, State agencies, communities 

and an integrated project life, as well, with all the project and the 

coastal restoration efforts ongoing. 

This effort has been a multi-Agency achievement, a really heroic 

effort with the Senate as the team between the Corps and the 

State of Louisiana. 

The chief of engineering signed his report with Senator Landrieu 

earlier this year. At first, in that report addresses the needs 

through several different features. It provides the most and the 

highest return on net environmental and economic benefits per dollar of cost. 

As you stated earlier, Senator Vitter, this is just the beginning. 

Also in the chief’s report we recommend studies, potentially longterm, large-scale, long—very promising ecosystem restoration concepts that have a great deal of uncertainty in them, and that’s why 

it’s a longer term. 

Second, over the long term, we recommend and we clearly recognize we need to address key scientific uncertainties as well as engineering challenges through an S&T program, science and technology program, as well as a science and technology demonstration 

program. 

We do recognize the urgency of this challenge, and we also recognize because of that we cannot proceed with business as usual. So 

we do look forward to working with the State of Louisiana to develop more streamline approaches that are; one, both timely and effective; and, two, once authorized, we get the projects in the ground 

quickly. 

We are committed to a program that will enable the State and 

the Nation to protect American wetlands. Again, Senator Vitter, I’d 
10

like to thank you for this opportunity to testify and I look forward 

to answering any questions you might have. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much General. 

Secretary Angelle, welcome and thank you for being here. 

STATEMENT OF SECRETARY SCOTT ANGELLE, LOUISIANA 

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

Secretary ANGELLE. Thank you, Senator. Good morning. 

Thank you, Senator, for hosting this very important meeting in 

New Orleans on such a critical issue for all of America. I am honored to testify today on behalf of Governor Blanco and the pending 

WRDA bill and a provision that is critical to Louisiana, the LCA. 

Let me take a moment to publicly thank you, Senator Vitter, 

Senator Landrieu, and members of the congressional Delegation for 

your great work during the consideration of the Energy bill. 

Because of the cooperation and leadership of the Governor, our 

congressional Delegation, our State Legislature and our parish 

leaders, we are one step closer to restoring America’s Wetlands. Indeed, there is a new hope in Louisiana. 

As you well know, Senator, Louisiana’s coast provides benefits to 

our Nation, unrivaled by any other coastal area in the United 

States, from oil and gas production to fisheries to flyaway habitat. 

These working wetlands serve as storm surge protection for the 

world’s largest port system and for more than two million of our 

citizens. 

As they disappear at the rate of 24 square miles a year, the Nation’s economic and energy security is put at risk. The loss has 

reached crisis proportions and Congress must address it as an 

emergency, both through funding and speed of action. 

While we value and appreciate the Everglades, our problem cannot be compared with restoration effort or any other restoration effort in all of the country. No place on the planet is experiencing 

land loss of this magnitude, and in no place are the economic and 

energy impacts to our Nation so severe. 

There are many causes of Louisiana’s land loss, natural and 

man-made, not the least of which is the leveeing of the Mississippi 

River; done for the best of reasons but with the unintended consequences that we protect the wetlands from rebuilding and staying ahead of natural subsidence and sea-level rise. 

This generation is not about the blame—blame-game, it’s about 

pulling together to save this vital area and to sustain its values for 

future generations of Americans. Louisiana considers the Corps of 

Engineer to be a valuable partner. 

Because the special circumstances surrounding Louisiana’s 

unique situation, I would like to point out a few elements of the 

proposed LCA plan we consider critical. 

First, justification for reduced cost share, rather than the traditional 35/65 WRDA match, not just because Louisiana is a poor 

State and will find it very difficult to match this level of funds for 

such a massive undertaking, but more importantly, as both you 

have said, and Senator Landrieu, because Federal actions associated with the land loss and the energy and economic benefits the 

Nation derives from this area, justify a reduced cost-share requirement. 
11

Second, the passage of the Energy bill was the first major step 

by Congress to recognize the needs of coastal oil and gas-producing 

States. 

Again, we thank you and the entire delegation for your work in 

that area. We consider it to be a tremendous down payment; however, we refer to it, as you do, a down payment, not out of greed 

but out of need for a permanent funding source and we will continue to press Congress to pass legislation that would provide true 

sharing of OCS revenues with the coastal-producing States. 

Louisiana is serious about using such funds to restore our coast. 

Our State Legislature unanimously passed a bill that will allow our 

people to vote on a constitutional amendment next fall to dedicate 

to coastal restoration, the first $600 million a year of any OCS revenues we receive. We feel confident, as other constitutional amendments have passed, this one will also pass overwhelmingly. 

President Bush recently said that Louisiana should use the revenues to match with other Federal funds. We believe this is great 

news. We suggest language in the WRDA bill to codify that notion 

and that future said such revenues could indeed be used as State 

matching funds. 

Third, part of Louisiana’s Energy bill funds will be spent on 

jump-starting the scientific modeling and a construction of LCA 

projects. We feel such work to be accepted as in-kind credit by the 

Corps of Engineers. 

Fourth, I spoke of the urgency and the need for swift action. 

Ironically, what would prevent us from achieving our goal, more 

than a lack of funds, will be the lengthy Corps of Engineers process 

we are forced to endure. By the Corps’ own admission, it takes an 

average of 11 years from authorization to completion of a project. 

That’s an average. We have a river diversion project that took more 

than twice that to complete. 

Louisiana, as General Riley has said, does not have the luxury 

to have ‘‘business as usual.’’ The reality is that we will have very 

little land to save if the LCA is not treated as a special circumstance and changes are not made to shorten the Corps process. 

We ask you to please help the Corps so the Corps can help us. 

Finally, I would like to address the critical element of the proposed LCA plan, the science and technology program. State and 

Federal agencies, NGO’s and our coastal stakeholders agree on the 

value of an independent, yet inclusive, science and technology program to insure that sound science and engineering continue to 

guide the restoration efforts. 

I have included for the record a short document that outlines the 

proposed science and technology program. It includes a science advisory board named by and given oversight by USGS, a science coordination board and other elements that ensure the coordination 

of Federal and State Agencies as well. 

[The referenced document follows.]

THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM OUTLINE

The LCA Science and Technology program has been designed to ensure the best 

available science and technology is continually applied to implementation of the program’s recommendations. To accomplish this mission, both review and research and 

development activities are required. The S&T Program has been constructed to 

maximize the three qualities of independence, accountability, and inclusiveness. 
12

This document provides a short description of the S&T Program structure, and then 

describes how these core characteristics have been incorporated. 

S&T PROGRAM STRUCTURE

The goal of the S&T Program is to provide the necessary science and technology 

to effectively address coastal ecosystem restoration needs. The S&T Program would 

provide analytical tools and recommend to Program Management Team appropriate 

studies to ensure that current issues of uncertainties can be reduced by sound scientific investigations. 

The S&T Office, under the leadership of the S&T Program Director, is the focal 

point for activities of the S&T Program. It provides a physical location and single 

point of contact for all agencies and individuals with interests in science and technology. It must communicate regularly and efficiently with the LCA Program Management and the Program Execution Team while maintaining a separate identity 

and independence from the day-to-day activities of implementation. While addressing the scientific needs of the LCA Program, the S&T Program would also strive 

to meet the technical needs of participating agencies within the context of their participation in the LCA Program. The S&T Office must also be responsive to the technical needs of the Program Execution Team and provide analytical tools responsive 

to the team (e.g., hydrodynamic and ecological models) and frequently assess the effectiveness of those tools through close communication. 

The Science Board is charged with three tasks: 1) understanding and improving 

the technical underpinnings of the LCA Program; 2) reviewing the structure and operations of the LCA S&T Program; and 3) reviewing and improving the processes 

for integrating the S&T Program activities with the LCA Program. The Science 

board, in its independent capacity, will ensure the application of world-class science 

to the LCA Program and provide national perspective and oversight of general scientific processes and structure in support of the Program Management Team and 

the S&T Program Director. 

The Science Coordination Team is charged with four tasks: 1) facilitate information transfer; 2) aid in planning periodic science symposia; 3) assess and advise on 

new and innovative science and technology; and 4) leverage resources to support 

LCA S&T plan activities. The S&T Program Director will serve as the Chairperson 

of the Science Coordination Team in order to facilitate focusing available resources 

on execution of the LCA S&T Plan. 

The S&T Program Director will establish ad hoc peer review committees for individual LCA project studies. The peer review process will include a review of the economic and environmental assumptions and projections, project evaluation data, eco-
13

nomic analyses, environmental analyses, engineering analyses, formulation of alternative plans, methods for integrating risk and uncertainty, and models used in evaluation of individual projects. 

MAINTAINING INDEPENDENCE

The Science Board has been incorporated as the primary mechanism to ensure 

independence. This independent review body, composed of nationally and internationally recognized experts is empowered to review any aspect of either the S&T 

Program or the overall LCA Program and make recommendations to both the S&T 

Program Director and the Program Manager on how to improve scientific and technical methods and their incorporation into the program. The tasks of chartering, incorporating, staffing, and managing the operations of the Science Board have been 

delegated to the USGS; they have appointed their Gulf Coast and Lower Mississippi 

Valley Science Coordinator as the Executive Director of the Science Board. Although 

the USGS is responsible for operations of the Science Board, they are being funded 

for these activities by the USACE with LCA Program funds. 

In addition, the management structure of the LCA Program has been constructed 

to place the S&T Program Director and the S&T Program as co-equal with the New 

Orleans District of the USACE, the entity responsible for executing feasibility, design, and construction activities. Both the District Engineer and the S&T Program 

Director report to the Mississippi Valley Division Commander who is acting as the 

program manager. This structure minimizes the perceived potential that the technical teams responsible for developing projects can exert improper influence over the 

scientific and technical activities being undertaken to reduce uncertainty in the 

overall program. The S&T Program Director has been given his own budget and the 

authority to manage that budget. In addition, the S&T Program Director reports to 

a member of the Program Management Team, which has been incorporated to support the MVD Commander in making program decisions. 

MAINTAINING ACCOUNTABILITY

Since review functions are not the only functions assigned to the S&T Program, 

accountability and responsiveness to program needs are necessary. The S&T Program in general is responsible for reducing uncertainties in LCA Program implementation, and so must orient its activities toward those ends. This accountability 

and responsiveness is ensured by placing the S&T Program Director within the 

USACE chain of command, specifically hired by the Mississippi Valley Division and 

reporting directly to the Division Commander. This reporting structure gives the 

Program Manager the ability to exercise due diligence in ensuring that the expenditure of S&T Program funds is for their authorized purpose. The USACE maintains 

the responsibility to implement the S&T Program in a manner that supports overall 

LCA Program needs, and has the authority to change the S&T Program operations 

if the Program Manager and the Science Board have identified issues that need to 

be corrected. 

MAINTAINING INCLUSIVENESS

Many entities have been involved in the discussions concerning the structure of 

the S&T Program, including the USACE, ERDC, State of Louisiana, academic and 

private sector scientists, and the USGS. The S&T Program has been constructed to 

address lessons learned from other large-scale ecosystem restoration programs, and 

provides avenues for all interested agencies, academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, and the private sector to participate. The structure specifically includes a Science Coordination Team, which is designed to provide an interface between the LCA S&T Program and other research and development programs, 

allowing other entities to participate in the implementation of the S&T Plan. In addition, all activities will be documented and all reports will be made public for any 

interested parties to review and comment on.

In closing, I stress to the committee that Louisiana is a land in 

crisis. There is no time for business as usual. We are experiencing 

a true emergency. Because of the national benefits provided by 

what is truly America’s wetlands and the impacts of the Nation as 

a result of this crisis, Congress should recognize it as a special circumstance and address efforts to save it accordingly. 
14

After all, all we are trying to do is save a portion of the very 

same land that President Jefferson purchased some 200 years ago 

on behalf of all Americans in the historic Louisiana Purchase. 

Thank you, Senator, for holding this field hearing in New Orleans, allowing the State to share its views on the legislation we consider critical to our State survival and the future of our Nation. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. 

Senator Boasso, thank you for your leadership, particularly with 

regard to the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, MR-GO. We’d love to 

hear your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER J. BOASSO, SENATOR, LOUISIANA STATE LEGISLATURE, SENATE DISTRICT 1, ST. BERNARD AND PLAQUEMINES PARISHES 

Senator BOASSO. Thank you, Senator. I just want to add for the 

record that I also represent Orleans Parish and St. Tammany, so 

I have the whole east-coast Louisiana. The Southeast corner of our 

State is very highly vulnerable to advanced land loss from ravages 

from coastal erosion. Today I’m going to just narrow my comments 

to the MR-GO. 

Senator someone has to make a decision. The new locks at the 

Industrial Canal is an excuse that no longer can be used as an alternative to wait to close the MR-GO. With the deficits today in our 

Federal Government, I personally believe we will never see the $1 

billion to replace the locks in my lifetime. 

In the meantime, there is uncertainty in the maritime industry 

on whether they should or should not continue to do business with 

the Port of New Orleans. This is unjust, both to the maritime community and to economic development. 

Second, the people of St. Bernard are sitting by while the Federal 

Government plays Russian roulette with our lives and our community. You have seen the destruction firsthand; you’ve heard the cry 

of the people of St. Bernard. You have heard the maritime decision, 

maritime industry. Someone has to make a decision. 

When I was Chairman of the Port of New Orleans, we built Napoleon Avenue container wharf. This had the effect of moving a 

majority of the vessel traffic on the MR-GO to the river, thus making the MR-GO’s continued use virtually obsolete. 

The MR-GO is a symbol of how poorly we have treated our wetland environment in favor of commerce. It has never developed to 

its original purpose and, once again, we are left with a situation 

no one wants to make a decision about. 

I think in fairness to everyone, someone has to come up with a 

conclusion. You have three options: One is continue with the proposed plan of $108 million of rocks, which we all know will disappear in time and accomplish nothing for the Metropolitan area 

regarding saltwater intrusion, hurricane protection and the mixed 

messages on the resolution of the MR-GO’s future. 

I want to reiterate, this is a very important project because 

something will have to be done on at least the northern shore of 

the MR-GO. That does not solve the immediate problem of saltwater intrusion. 

The second thing is to properly fund the relocation of these businesses and close the MR-GO. It could be as simple as sinking two 
15

environmentally cleaned scrap Marad vessels in the channel’s west 

end of Breton Sound, which we refer to as The Rocks, cover them 

with dredge material, in essence, creating a dam, then raise our 

levees to the Army Corps of Engineers’ required height and shoreup the break on the Northern banks of the MR-GO. 

Or Plan 3, stop dredging from The Rocks to France Road. Understand the impacts of vessel traffic on the MR-GO shoreline and 

react accordingly. Install a gate system on the east side of Bayou 

La Loutre to be opened and closed for vessel traffic. Install a shallow draft gate for the recreational and commercial fishing industry. 

Install locks at Bayou La Loutre, Shell Beach, Violet and Bayou 

Bienvenue on the MR-GO’s Northern shore just to be closed and 

protect against rising water during hurricanes or strong east 

winds. Make one more pass with a dredge from Paris Road bridge 

to The Rocks, depositing material on the Northshore of the MR-GO, 

creating a small levee and closing off all other openings. 

Limit and enforce large vessel speed limits. Properly install safety barriers around exposed piers of the Paris Road bridge which 

was once protected by land and serves as our evacuation route. 

Continue to maintain at 36 feet from the rocks to the opening of 

the MR-GO. 

So, in essence, what I’m saying is that the vessels, all except one 

company, use the MR-GO can live with 28-foot draft and under. It 

is shown that it’s estimated that it will take 30 to 50 years for the 

MR-GO to silt into 28 feet. 

A long-term draft of 28 feet satisfies every requirement of all 

businesses including—using the MR-GO but one. Lone Star Cement could be accommodated by ship-to-barge transfers at a cost 

of less than $3 million per year. We can stop or limit major saltwater intrusion. We can protect not only St. Bernard but New Orleans, Jefferson and St. Tammany Parishes from rising waters and 

storm surge. 

Last, we satisfy almost all of the needs of the current maritime 

industry. 

So Senators, I’m asking, we have to make a decision. There is no 

sense in sending the mixed signals to the maritime community and 

the people who have to live and deal with the saltwater intrusion 

with the MR-GO. 

Thank you. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much, Senator, for all your leadership. 

Now we’ll hear from President Charlotte Randolph. President, 

welcome. Thank you for your leadership, particularly to the PACE 

organization. 

STATEMENT OF MS. CHARLOTTE RANDOLPH, PRESIDENT, 

LAFOURCHE PARISH 

President RANDOLPH. Thank you, Senator Vitter, and good morning to you as well. Thank you for hosting this. Senator Landrieu, 

as well, thank you for your leadership. 

I’d like to deviate from my written statement this morning for a 

couple of reasons. First of all, there is a storm in the Gulf, which 

puts parishes such as ours on the alert very early this morning. All 

indications are from the Weather Service that it will take a dif-
16

ferent direction, perhaps head to the Florida coast. We do not wish 

that on anyone else, but, certainly it’s an opportunity again for us 

to test our system and make certain that we are ready for these 

events. 

Second, the decision this morning between you and Senator 

Landrieu is about cost share. I want people to know that Lafourche 

Parish has already absorbed much of the cost of this problem. 

The people of South Lafourche Parish first taxed themselves to 

establish a port south in the southern-most part of our parish. By 

doing so, we became a strategic point in the oil and gas industry. 

The initial money that came into Lafourche Parish came from our 

own people. 

Second, with South Lafourche Levee District, because we recognized the need to begin a levee system in 1965, we again taxed ourselves to begin this process. We have used that money to match 

State and Federal moneys, and we’re grateful for that participation, but each time we’ve taken it upon ourselves to make certain 

that the money—create the programs and projects needed to protect ourselves. 

That’s very, very important because the cost of this is the cost 

of doing business in Lafourche Parish. Drainage projects are funded by our top taxpayers and so are these major projects. We’ve 

begun to recognize that a modest cost of this is being borne by our 

own residents in this area. 

So the share must come from the other portion of this, the money we contribute to the Federal Government. That $5 billion a year 

is something that we deserve a major portion of every year, and I 

hope that’s taken into account by the Senate, by the House and by 

the President himself, because we have made much contributions 

in that level. 

We, too, have tasted salt water in our Parish, Senator Boasso. At 

one point in 2000, a drought led to saltwater creeping all the way 

up to our water intake, which is 45 miles north of the Gulf of Mexico. 

Senator Landrieu stepped in at that point and helped us set up 

a fund where we would install a structure to stop the intrusion at 

that point. We’re now considering another structure because it’s entering through many different areas. 

That water supply supplies the drinking water for 300,000 people. At that point, a major industry shut down for about a week—

a major industry, which employed about a hundred people. People 

with high blood pressure were warned not to drink our drinking 

water. This was 5 years ago. So any similar situation now would 

certainly lead to much dire circumstances as we stand now. 

We are in a desperate situation in Lafourche Parish. We are a 

significant parish because we contribute much to this Nation’s energy needs; and, therefore, we’re asking that much of it would be 

returned to us. 

The saltwater situation and pending storms all lead us to live 

each day kind of looking over our shoulder and wondering what we 

are threatened with next. 

Port Fourchon was developed by the people of Lafourche Parish 

who contribute that—much to that $5 million that goes into the 

coffers annually. 
17

Senator Vitter, you’ve introduced a series of five coastal bills 

which address near-term and long-term solutions to our problem. 

For a very long time members of our congressional delegation has 

been petitioning our Government for assistance. 

True success will be achieved when the nation’s leaders finally 

recognize the value of coastal Louisiana and fully fund the projects 

necessary to protect us. 

We are indeed grateful for the recent allocation provided in the 

recently enacted Energy bill and the Transportation bill, which will 

allow us to build a much-needed highway to Port Fourchon to continue serving the Nation with it’s energy needs. 

These funds provide for opportunities to reinforce our existing 

levee system as well as to construct that major highway to the very 

significant Port Fourchon. It’s a good start, and we thank you for 

your funds. 

I’d like to repeat a phrase that Secretary Angelle said: This is 

not out of greed that we ask for more money, it is out of need. I 

think that is an essential message that we need to send to the Federal Government. 

A guaranteed source of revenue will allow us to plan for our future, which at this point is very, very shaky. What is our future? 

Do we plan for retreat or do we continue to fight? We continue to 

fight. 

Thank you, Senator Vitter. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you very 

much. 

Now, we’ll get the questions. 

First, General Riley, just as—for many years we’ve been talking about an LCA program that comes to about $15 billion total. Now, 

the Chief’s report refers to a $2 billion program, Phase I. So, if you can, please reassure us that you have the other $13 

billion in mind; it hasn’t disappeared, and that this is the start and 

not the end. 

General RILEY. Sure, Senator. In the administration, when we 

developed that near-term plan, we thought that was the most prudent to get into action and done quickly; as Senator Landrieu said, 

bold and decisive action. 

We knew that waiting and developing a long-term comprehensive 

one might take more time, so we thought: Let’s get some good done 

now. 

We also know there’s tremendous uncertainty about the future, 

that’s why we need the science and technology program and demonstration program. We just don’t know how the system will act to 

the actions that we place into it. 

So I don’t want you to take the urgency of the situation in the 

near-term focus as a signal of a lack of commitment. Clearly the 

Administration’s commitment—I mean, I’ve come out here to demonstrate that. Clearly, the President has already spoken about this 

project and the long-term commitment of it. So this focus that we 

have initially on the—on the near-term plan is not the only piece; 

there is more to it and we have recognized that. 

We also know that the State still remains very interested in developing a more comprehensive blueprint for the future and we will 

work very, very closely with them. 
18

Senator VITTER. Thank you, General. 

General the—the statement of administration policy released by 

OMB, not the Corps, but office of management and budget for the 

House WRDA bill recognized coastal Louisiana as a ‘‘National Priority’’, however, the same statement of policy suggested that Congress should consider a 50/50 Federal/State cost share versus the 

traditional 65/35 or something above that. 

Now, obviously, that would save the Federal Government money, 

so there’s that argument from the Federal level. I understand that, 

although I don’t accept it. 

Is there any other legal or equitable argument to support a 50/

50 cost share when traditionally it’s 65/35? Many arguments can 

be made that it should be more generous than that. 

General RILEY. Well, sir, clearly, in our Chief’s report we have 

recommended—the only thing we could recommend, and that’s in 

accordance with law and policy for construction, that being 65/35. 

In the Chief’s report, we also recognize and laid it out in the table 

pretty clearly what the State’s desires were in the case of construction it was 75/25. 

In addition to that, I’m also aware that the administration has 

commented on the House WRDA bill and that in their discussions 

that they recommended the 50/50 cost share. 

So really, until the Administration works out all that, the only 

thing the Corps can do is recommend cost sharing in accordance 

with the present law and policy. 

So there are—I guess there are many other different alternatives 

that are being weighed at this time, but until that’s resolved we’ll 

stay with the present law and policy. 

Senator VITTER. OK, General. General, last year on the House 

side you testified at a hearing on the LCA. Although the event was 

cut short due to business on the House floor, just before that hearing adjournment I was surprised and intrigued to hear you state 

that you didn’t believe our coastal erosion was attributable to the 

levees installed in the lower Mississippi. 

You’ve heard that alluded to here. I certainly believe that is a 

key piece of the puzzle; not the only piece, but a key piece of the 

puzzle since Louisiana’s delta is built by the river, consisting of 

several thousand square miles of land that was growing prior to 

the insulation of levees and eroding after the installation of levees. 

Can you comment on that? 

General RILEY. Sure, Senator. Thank you. 

The question was whether or not I thought the work the Corps 

did on the levee was the primary cause of coastal loss and coastal 

erosion. My comment was that there—before we had to go to vote 

began to discuss the multitude of different actions that have taken 

place along on the coast that contribute to that. 

Clearly, levees are a very significant factor because with those 

levees there they do not allow the national regeneration of and 

sediment introduction into the system. 

As you know, back in the early 1700’s they began building levees 

here. Even before the Corps initiated the Flood Control Act in 

1928, there was already a continuous system of levees from here—

from the Gulf to Arkansas and that there’s also subsidence that 

has to do with—and—[in audible] got me here this morning he can 
19

tell you about the faults that are there, the oil and gas exploration, 

the oil and gas navigation channels, pipeline channels, the fishing 

navigation channels. Even the State has gone out and moved Barrier Islands for—road—road work. There’s the saltwater intrusion 

the storm—as the President’s mentioned that’s incoming. All those 

are very large contributing factors. 

The real important point, I guess, is that interrelationship of activities that really has an infinite combination of causes and actions and reactions. 

To answer your question, specifically, clearly the levees are a 

major contributing factor due to the loss. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, General. 

General there have been some recent questions about the ability 

of the State of Louisiana to use these Energy bill funds, which we 

just secured to match Federal funds from the Corps of Engineers 

for coastal restoration work. 

The solicitor’s office of the Department of Interior, has informed 

us that they believe the State may use these funds as a match for 

these other Federal funds, and the President actually encouraged 

Louisiana to do this in his statement. 

Is this consistent with Corps policy and from your point of view 

can the State use Energy bill funds to help meet their match? 

General RILEY. As I understand that, that program is administered by DOI; so if the DOI makes that judgment, I think the 

Corps will clearly comport with that and allow that to happen. Certainly if the President has encouraged that. I’m sure that Secretary 

Woodley would—would then go along with the DOI calling. 

Senator VITTER. Great. Thank you, General. 

Secretary Angelle, you referred extensively in your testimony to 

the cost share that is being debated right now for this program. 

Can you expand for just a minute on why you think Louisiana 

should be treated differently and why the LCA again is different 

from, say, the Florida Everglades and Chesapeake Bay? 

Secretary ANGELLE. Thank you, Senator. Certainly when you 

take a look at what everyone has said, the contributions that Louisiana has made to America, when you take a look at 34 percent 

of the oil and 30 percent of the natural gas either produced or flows 

through our wetlands, and you take a look at some of the Federal 

decisions, although, you know, made for the right reasons, had unintended consequences. 

The contributions that Louisiana has made to America and how 

important this area is, not only to the economic securities, but the 

energy security of this country. 

I think if you take a look at cost share, if we looked at how important this is, a 65/35 would not even be considered. A 75/25 is 

certainly in the right direction, but we might get into a new—a 

new number, perhaps even greater than that when you take a look 

at the value of the contribution the wetlands has made. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much. 

Secretary I’m really concerned that some people nationally have 

alleged that Louisiana is basically waiting for a sort of handout for 

the Federal Government to come in and fix this. 
20

Can you describe everything that the State and citizens in the 

State are doing in terms of laws, programs, actions, financial, and 

other commitment to doing our share? 

Secretary ANGELLE. You know, coastal restoration was cool in 

Plaquemines and St. Bernard and Lafourche and Terrebonne before anybody knew about it. It really started with the leaders from 

those areas bringing this to attention. The State, over four different 

Governors, regardless of party, made it a significant part of their 

platform and their leadership has been directed toward this. We’ve 

passed constitutional amendments. 

Since 1989, the State has put $355 million of its own resources. 

We are doing what we are asking the Federal Government to do. 

We take a portion of our mineral income from our offshore production and we dedicate it to fighting the coastal problems by a constitutional amendment that was passed. 

We have another constitutional amendment that is going to be 

scheduled here in November of 2006. 

The record is very clear that Louisiana takes this very serious. 

When you take a look at the margin of victory of constitutional 

amendments in Caddo, and Rapides, Ouachita Parish, those 

amendments are passing almost with the same level of support 

that they are passing at the epicenter of land loss in Lafourche and 

Terrebonne. 

Louisiana has done a tremendous job carrying this ball to a point 

and putting ourselves in a position. When—One of the things that 

really strikes me is there’s one constitutional amendment that 

takes away some property rights, and this is a very strong property 

right State. 

We are lining up and we are doing the things that we believe 

shows our commitment to this, again, beyond politics and beyond 

anything else that one could imagine would put a limitation on 

this. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much, Secretary. 

Senator Boasso, thank you for all of your comments and work on 

MR-GO. If you can tell us briefly what real-world on-the-ground 

impact Mississippi River Gulf Outlet has on storm surge and how 

that impacts all of Southeast Louisiana. 

Senator BOASSO. Senator, what we’re doing at this time, Secretary Angelle was very helpful in commissioning these two studies. The Army Corps of Engineers provided a study that said 

whether the MR-GO was open or closed that there would only be 

a 6-inch rise in storm surge on top of—or a 6-inch difference. 

There’s some people who had disagreement about that and so 

what we have done, we’ve got the Governor’s office and Secretary 

Angelle, the Army Corps of Engineers and some citizens and we got 

together and there is a re-look of all the studies that have been 

done to confirm whether or not if you damned off the MR-GO is 

it only a 6-inch difference. So that study will be finished by the end 

of this month. 

Also, there’s another study that Secretary Angelle commissioned, 

is that we’d want to understand the hydraulic effects on the banks 

of the MR-GO, whether you have a vessel that’s at 28-foot draft 

going 10 knots versus a vessel going 8 knots with a 32-foot draft 
21

to understand the drag and effect on the banks itself to try to determine what we can do in that case. 

So right now we have those two studies that have been going on 

now for some 7 months, and they should be brought to conclusion 

within the next 30 days. So I think that will give us a great affect 

on exactly where we stand. Everybody’s agreed that whatever these 

studies say, we’re all going to agree that this is gospel. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Senator. You touched on the current 

inadequate, and I agree with that, LCA recommendation about 

MR-GO—$170 million on rocks on riff-raft, again, I agree with you. 

Because of that, I got inserted in the Senate WRDA bill, language 

to direct the Secretary to provide Congress with a plan to fully protect and restore MR-GO area within a year and to implement those 

recommendations without the need for any further action by Congress. 

Do you support that, and what else should we be considering inserting into WRDA and MR-GO? 

Senator BOASSO. Well, I think you’d take a lot of pressure off of 

everyone if it was going to stay open or if it was going to close. 

You’re going to have to do that type of bank stabilization if you’re 

going to keep it open to maritime traffic. If you’re going to close it, 

we’ve got a whole other plan that you have to go in that direction 

with. 

As far as $100 million—billion on rocks, you’re going to need 

something there, Senator. If you really want to start, let’s go ahead 

and stop the storm surge coming in, whether it’s 6 inches above the 

normal surge or not, is that we’ve got to stop—You ought to see 

the tidal movement when we have an east wind—is that we need 

something to stop this water from coming in, because, once again, 

that water doesn’t stop in St. Bernard Parish, it, therefore, goes 

right into the lake. 

You’ve got more salt water being introduced into the lake, and 

this is where you have your potential problems for the whole Metropolitan area, not just St. Bernard in itself. So I think—and there 

is technology in Europe on gate systems like this. It’s very commonly used along the Rhine Rivers. 

It’s there, but if it’s something that we’re going to have to study 

for another 10 years we’re really just wasting our time because it’s 

just a part of a rush on the levee. Once again, I’m going to reiterate 

because someone’s got to say ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’ because it’s not fair to 

the people who live in the area and it’s not fair to the maritime 

industry. 

If you own a business and you’re going to invest money on the 

MR-GO, you don’t know if you’re going to be in business 5 years 

or 3 years or 10 years and you constantly have that drag on whether or not, so why come here? You might as well go to some other 

State where you know you’ve got some kind of longevity. 

Senator VITTER. Frank, well, I certainly agree with you. Then in 

your testimony, you alluded, I believe, to commercial traffic of lessor depth. From what you know now, do you think that is consistent with some sound policy for MR-GO in the future, or whether we really need to phaseout all commercial traffic? 

Senator BOASSO. Well, if you deauthorize to 30—if you deauthorize the channel or even go up to a 28 feet. If you left it at 36 feet, 
22

the only thing you really have to worry about is from The rocks out 

to the mouth of the MR-GO, because those are usually your problems when you have some kind of a storm. 

So if you go from The Rocks all the way to France Road, they 

estimate it will take somewhere between 30 and 50 years before it 

starts to sit at 28 feet. 

Now, you still have to do some bank enhancements, so that 

might even prolong it’s life even further. So, should we close it to 

commercial traffic? There’s a lot of theory on whether that should 

be done. Could you have a duplicate MR-GO? No, you can’t do it 

in today’s times. But there’s a solution that helps the maritime industry: Can you help us relocate all those businesses to the Mississippi River? We’ve moved most of them but you still have some 

there that you won’t be able to move. 

I think you can find a balance there. All of those businesses, except one, can live with 28 feet draft. So this way, if you can put 

some gates there, we took care of some bank stabilization, we’re 

good for 30 or 50 years. So basically everybody wins in the end 

with that. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Senator. 

President Randolph, you know, we’re talking about large commitments of Federal money, but right now there are regular, periodic, 

large confusions of Federal money through FEMA whenever we 

have a storm. 

Can you talk about the sort of money FEMA spent in Lafourche 

because of this working situation after storms? 

President Randolph. Well, with your assistance and Senator 

Landrieu’s assistance, we were recently—received disaster declaration from the President. Just yesterday we were informed that we 

not only were going to receive some assistance from FEMA—and 

Tropical Storm Cindy was something that even the meteorologist 

were dismissing as a minor storm. 

We spent over $300,000 in the aftermath cleaning up after that 

storm from the damage that it caused, and that was a very, very 

minor storm. FEMA has spent a considerable amount of money in 

our area. 

In fact, right now we are working with them to do some remapping, which is necessary. It’s also an indication that our levees are 

too low, which is a concern, and they’re going to assist us in identifying which levees need to be raised to a higher level so that we 

will be protected against storm surge. They’re going to infuse about 

half a million dollars—they are infusing that amount of money 

right now. 

So FEMA is certainly contributing greatly to our parish but as 

with anything, you wonder how much is enough and are we doing 

enough. 

If I may deviate for one moment, I’d like to recognize someone 

who is here. You mentioned PACE earlier, and Parish President 

Benny Rousselle is here from Plaquemines Parish, and he is President of PACE. So certainly he is our leader right now in this fight. 

Senator VITTER. Certainly. Thank you very much. 

Madam President, just to follow up with the FEMA issues. Is it 

fair to say that if we start doing what we need to do about coastal 
23

erosion in Lafourche, the money FEMA would otherwise spend will 

go down? 

President RANDOLPH. Oh, considerably. It’s the situation where 

you pay us on the back end or pay us on the front end. I’ve always 

asked people if we should be preparing for the rainy day or saving 

for the rainy day. I think what we need to be doing is preparing. 

If we spend the money through the assistance from OCS revenues, from the Energy bill and WRDA, then we are preparing for 

the rainy day and FEMA can respond to the other disasters in this 

country; the tornados and earthquakes that we can’t do anything 

about. 

I mean, we can run from hurricanes and certainly repair the 

damage, but if we can protect ourselves from that by reshaping 

those Barrier Islands or reshaping our protective system, then the 

loss will be a lessened and the critical damage which occurs after 

these storms will also be lessened. 

Senator VITTER. Great. As you know, a significant share of this 

money we just secured in the Energy bill, 35 percent of everything 

that comes to Louisiana will go directly to coastal parishes. I 

thought that was very important, and I certainly fought to protect 

that and the 35 percent. 

Can you talk about the importance of that, funding that work at 

the parish level and how it should be integrated with the broader 

effort? 

President RANDOLPH. This is not a per-parish fight. This is a regional fight, a State fight. We’ve already begun discussions among 

the parishes the projects where we can work regionally; whereas, 

otherwise, if we look at parochial projects, it won’t always assist 

each other. 

The examples of that is, if we start the dredge project on the 

western side of Lafourche Parish and shore up the South Lafourche 

Levee District. We’re also assisting Terrebonne Parish in their 

fight because we’re creating a protective barrier for them in the 

event of a storm approaching us. 

The same thing on the eastern side of Lafourche Parish. If we 

address projects such as—[in audible] project, we’re not only protecting Port Fourchon, we’re protecting lower Jefferson Parish, and 

in some ways Plaquemines Parish, depending on the direction of 

the storm. 

Each project reviewed is assisting another parish, and therefore, 

through PACE, we’re looking at combining much of this money to 

create the much larger projects which will help other parishes, 

with that statement, money which can come in and be a part of 

those projects. 

Orleans Parish at one time did not recognize coastal erosion as 

a problem, just the upper parts of Jefferson Parish. They are integral now to PACE because they recognize that we sit in an area 

which protects them, and putting money into Lafourche Parish 

projects will help in protecting Orleans Parish and other upper 

area parishes. 

It is now being recognized by the 19 coastal parishes that we can 

help each other, and so now this money needs to be spent in a regional way, with the assistance of the State and with further 

money coming from the Federal Government as well. 
24

Senator VITTER. Great. Thank you very much. Thanks to all for 

your testimony. I’m really happy you could be here. 

I’d now like to invite our third and final panel to take the stage, 

and I’ll be introducing them in just a minute for the same business. 

If they will come up and take their seats. 

We want to welcome our third and final panel for this Senate 

Hearing. I’m honored that all of you can be here to testify, and I’ll 

introduce everyone and we’ll get right to your testimony. 

First, we have Mr. Jerome Zeringue, Executive Director of the 

Terrebonne Levee and Conservation District; also Mr. Randy 

Lanctot, Executive Director of the Louisiana Wildlife Federation; 

Ms. Alexis Duval, Chairwoman of the Board of the HoumaTerrebonne Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Roy Francis, Executive Director of the LA1 Coalition. Unfortunately, he’s leaving that position very soon but at least it’s on a very high note. And Dr. Shea 

Penland, Director and Professor of the Pontchartrain Institute of 

Environmental Sciences, UNO chairman, Department of Geology 

and Geophysics here at UNO. 

Welcome, and thanks to you-all. We’ll begin with Mr. Zeringue. 

STATEMENT OF MR. JEROME ZERINGUE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TERREBONNE LEVEE AND CONSERVATION DISTRICT 

Mr. ZERINGUE. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I want to welcome you and everyone to 

South Louisiana where a sinking feeling is not just an emotion, but 

an unpleasant fact. 

In Terrebonne Parish, we are losing our land, our resources, and 

our communities due to coastal land loss resulting primarily from 

subsidence, sea level rise, and salt water intrusion. 

Terrebonne Parish is the largest coastal community, most exposed and vulnerable to the effects of high tides, high winds, tropical storms, and hurricanes. In any given year, we face a 60 to 65 

percent chance of a named storm making landfall and impacting 

our State, and a 25 percent to 30 percent chance of a hurricane 

making landfall or affecting Louisiana. 

Terrebonne Parish has some of the most ecologically significant 

and productive habitat in the world. We have 2 of the top 10 seafood docks in the United States in terms of dollar value and poundage harvested. We have oil and gas infrastructure that is vital to 

the State and the Federal economy. 

We have an increasing population and tax base with a healthy 

productive economy and, frankly, we have people, infrastructure, 

and wetlands that need and deserve protection. 

I have worked for Louisiana State University as a fisheries biologist. I have worked for a non-profit environmental organization, the 

Nature Conservancy, and now with the levee district, a career path 

that on the surface may appear somewhat convoluted and disconnected, but in reality, considering the problems we face, a fortunate 

series of events. 

It has afforded me an opportunity to view the issues affecting our 

State from an academic, business, and environmental perspective; 

all of which must work together to turn back current trends and 

very dire predictions. 
25

Academically, we should deal with coastal land loss with practical research, capable of complementing and enhancing desperately needed projects. The academic community must work cooperatively to implement projects and share information with a 

focus on constructive research, not conducting studies simply for 

their intrinsic scientific value. 

Projects must be put on the ground to stem the ravaging effects 

that subsidence, sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion impart continuously, even now as we discuss, debate, and study these issues. 

Fixing our problems will require the environmental community 

to accept seemingly unnatural, contrived and untested projects in 

order to establish a functioning system that will enable systemic 

long-term solutions to the problems we face; keeping in mind that 

we are in this predicament because of unnatural, insensitive, and 

unintentional events, which should not be repeated, but may be 

necessary to achieve the preferred result. 

From an economic perspective, industries that have traditionally 

relied on convenience or unfettered access must understand that 

implementing necessary fixes will require sacrifices. It will necessitate changes in ways we traditionally conducted business, and 

rely on innovation and least-damaging alternatives in oil and gas 

extraction and exploration, and adapting to changing fisheries resources that will result from habitat modifications. 

Unfortunately, our future will require a line in the sand drawn 

from a certain point. A point where we will stand and fight, retreat 

no more and do what we must to sustain ourselves. Just like the 

city of New Orleans, our coastal communities will require some 

form of protection through levees, walls, or embankments in order 

to survive. 

The line will be drawn, either by persistent degrading forces or 

through consensus. Coastal communities are retreating and we 

have lost several, and several more will not be around 20 to 40 

years from now. 

In Terrebonne Parish, we face a land loss rate of 10 square miles 

per year. We have one of the highest land loss rates in the Nation. 

Our line in the sand is the Morganza-to-the-Gulf Hurricane Protection project. The Morganza Project will provide hurricane protection for Terrebonne and Lafourche Parishes, their 200,000 residents and infrastructure. The Morganza-to-the-Gulf Project is a 

leaky system, which sounds odd if you consider this strictly as a 

flood protection system; however, leaky is the ideal way to build 

such a system in this environment. 

The obvious concern with building a project of this magnitude in 

coastal Louisiana is the potential impacts to wetlands, wetlands we 

intend to protect and restore. The Morganza Project is sensitive to 

these environmental concerns. We are designing this project in the 

most environmentally friendly way practicable. 

We will achieve this by constructing our levees, floodgates and 

environmental structures along existing hydrologic barriers, such 

as drainage levees, and adjacent roads minimizing impacts to wetlands and enhancing the existing hydrologic regime. 

In addition, the Morganza Project will provide flood protection 

capable of adaptively managing the wetlands within and around 

the system. The lynch pin of the whole project is the lock on the 
26

Houma Navigational Canal. The HNC Lock is the key feature necessary to protect, maintain, and restore wetlands within the 

Terrebonne Basin. This lock is considered a critical restoration 

component within the Coastal 2050 Plan, Louisiana Coastal Area 

Study, and by the Morganza Habitat Evaluation Team. 

These studies agree that the Houma Navigational Canal lock can 

effectively assist restoration efforts of adjacent wetlands in a systemic, comprehensive approach. The Houma Navigational Canal 

Lock is a case study of how a flood protection project feature can 

serve as an adaptive management tool. 

Initially, the Houma Navigational Canal lock was considered 

only as a Morganza Project component, designed to protect thousands of residents and businesses from a 100-year storm event, 

provide safe harbor for navigation, protect the local drinking water 

supply, and reduce saltwater intrusion. 

The lock has evolved into a significant environmental structure 

which can substantially reduce the devastating impacts of saltwater intrusion, maximize and efficiently utilize available freshwater from the Atchafalaya River to enhance, restore, and reestablish fresh and brackish water marsh within this coastal environment and oh, by the way, can protect the citizens from a Category 

3 storm event. 

The HNC lock will work collaboratively with the 12 other environmental control structures along the Morganza alignment to protect and maintain wetlands within the Terrebonne Basin. 

We are anxiously waiting WRDA authorization for remaining 

portions of this project that must be authorized. The citizens of 

Terrebonne cannot continue to wait, nor are they relying solely on 

Federal and State financing. In fact, we are the first South Louisiana community to pass a local tax to support coastal restoration. 

Our citizens have assessed themselves a quart cents sales tax 

generating over $4 million per year that can only be spent on the 

Morganza-to-the-Gulf Project. Some may say that this is not coastal restoration but flood protection, but I can assure you that from 

where I come from we do not differentiate between the two. To us 

this project is coastal restoration. 

The Morganza-to-the-Gulf Project can serve as a model for designing a system that can protect people, infrastructure, and the 

environment. The Morganza Habitat Evaluation Team, composed 

primarily of State and Federal regulatory agencies, will adaptively 

manage this project by manipulating floodgates and environmental 

structures throughout the project life. This dynamic ecosystem can 

never be managed to a one-size-fits-all solution. 

We have a sufficient amount of information to begin putting restoration projects on the ground; the question is: Do we have the political will to get it done? To put into operation these large-scale 

projects included within the LCA study, it will require a trial-anderror approach, and we must understand that there will be failures. These efforts are necessary to achieve success. 

Unfortunately, someone’s constituency or user group will be affected, which could impact one’s standing, government funding, a 

fear of legal prosecution. We must all have the courage and compassion to ensure that our efforts are successful. We are all too con-
27

fident in the consequences of doing nothing; we cannot let the fear 

of uncertainty encourage inaction. 

I appreciate the efforts of Senator Vitter, Senator Landrieu and 

our congressional delegation for funding included within the Energy bill, and I respectfully request your support and passage of 

WRDA which will enable us to protect our coast and our citizens. 

Help us to hang on to a unique national treasure, an area rich in 

diversity, culture and resources. 

It was Benjamin Franklin who said, ‘‘When a well’s dry, we know 

the worth of water.’’ Let us not have to lose this valuable resource 

before the Nation truly appreciates its worth. 

And I thank you. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much. Although I introduced 

the panel in a slightly different order, why don’t we go in the order 

that you’re seated; so we’ll next hear from Ms. Duval. 

STATEMENT OF MS. ALEXIS DUVAL, CHAIRWOMAN OF THE 

BOARD, HOUMA-TERREBONNE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 

Ms. DUVAL. Thank you Senator. 

Good morning. As Senator Vitter said, my name is Alexis Duval. 

I am the board chair of the Houma-Terrebonne area. Houma which 

is about 55 miles southwest of New Orleans, as a crow flies. 

The plight of coastal Louisiana has been a topic of lengthy discussion and much concern for Chamber members for many, many 

years. Coastal erosion crosses all barriers. It cuts through all spectrums of our society. It affects the economy, infrastructure, as well 

as the quality of our lives. These effects are far reaching. They 

cross parish boundaries. They cross State boundaries. They effect 

the entire Nation. 

We have all heard the statistics relating the amount of land lost 

over time, as well as that being lost as we sit here in this very 

room. There is no other area in this great country that is losing 

land as rapidly as the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary. 

Terrebonne Parish constitutes a large portion of that estuary system. Terrebonne Parish is unique as to both the causes of its coastal erosion problem and the solutions needed to contain that very 

erosion. Please note I said ‘‘contain.’’ We are very aware that efforts need to be focused on maintaining the land mass we have in 

place and doing everything humanly possible to minimize, if not 

eliminate any future land loss. 

The causes have been studied and are well known. Lack of sediment deposits from natural flooding events eliminated by the containment of the Mississippi River and the Atachafalya River, salt 

water intrusion, sea level rise, subsidence, the unintended affects 

from oil and gas exploration, to name a few. 

Terrebonne Parish lies between the Mississippi River to our east 

and the Atachafalya River to our west. Because we are so far removed from these two sediment sources, restorative efforts will be 

the most costly. It will take a large scale diversion project to help 

the eastern part of our parish, while smaller scale diversion 

projects have been studied for the western part. 

Due to lost land, Terrebonne Parish residents are more at risk 

from storm surge because, unlike our neighboring parish, we have 

no hurricane protection levee. 
28

The Chamber fully supports the LCA restorative plan; however, 

we recognize that any comprehensive restoration plan will take 

years to build and implement. Therefore, our greatest priority is to 

ensure that a hurricane protection levee is built which offers the 

most instant protection to life and property. 

Authorization for a hurricane protection levee, Morganza-to-theGulf, is presently contained in the WRDA bill that will be considered by Congress in the next few months. It is vital to the safety 

and well-being of the 100,000 plus citizens of Terrebonne Parish 

that the Morganza-to-the-Gulf levee system is authorized and funded. 

Efforts for coastal restoration in Terrebonne Parish will not be 

successful unless the effects of the Houma Navigational Canal, the 

HNC are addressed. Running North-South, the HNC cuts the lower 

half of our parish in two. The LCA near-term plan does not authorize any major project for Terrebonne Parish. Major projects contained in the original LCA plan include major sediment diversion 

projects from the Mississippi traveling westward and the 

Atachafalya traveling eastward and the lock for the HNC. These 

large scale projects must be addressed and funded. The HNC lock 

is presently being designed. 

My husband and I are both life-long residents of Terrebonne Parish. We raised our family in Terrebonne Parish. If I convey anything to you today, it is a plea for our safety and well-being. As 

a businesswoman who is concerned for the well-being of our infrastructure and economy of our parish, and as a mother who is concerned for the safety of her family, my goal is to impart to you the 

urgency of our situation. 

Unlike a wildfire, earthquake or tsunami, the disaster occurring 

in our parish is insidious. Since it is occurring gradually, it has not 

drawn the attention of other natural disasters and we have let the 

problem fester until it has become malignant. Without a quick and 

decisive treatment this cancer will kill our community, and in the 

event of a major hurricane, will contribute to the death of many of 

our citizens. 

Monday morning as I watched the Channel 4 Eyewitness Morning News, I was struck by comments made by President Bush. The 

comments were part of a taped segment leading to his future talk 

to the Veterans of Foreign War. ‘‘We must deal with threats before 

they fully materialize’’. 

While I understand the President’s comments were made in context of the War on Terror, I found they applied to our coastal plight 

as well. Terrebonne Parish and all of coastal Louisiana are at war 

with Mother Nature, and she has weapons of mass destruction. We 

are currently losing that war. Without large-scale Federal help, we 

are doomed. 

I applaud the efforts of our congressional delegation, and especially Senator Vitter and Senator Landrieu for the passage of the 

Energy bill with the revenue sharing provision. I know you realize 

that that passage was only the first step. I, along with members 

of the Houma-Terrebonne Chamber of Commerce, stand ready to 

help you in any way possible to ensure passage of a WRDA bill authoring both the LCA and Morganza-to-the-Gulf projects. 

Thank you. 
29

Senator VITTER. Thank you for your work. I, too, want to recognize the great work of your husband, Berwick; he’s with us in the 

audience today. He’s on the State’s Coastal Commission and he’s 

been an enormous leader in this effort for many years. Thanks. 

Now, we’ll hear from Dr. Penland. 

STATEMENT OF SHEA PENLAND, DIRECTOR AND PROFESSOR, 

PONTCHARTRAIN INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

SCIENCES, AND CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND 

GEOPHYSICS, UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS 

Dr. PENLAND. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before the committee. 

We’ve heard that coastal Louisiana has a land-loss crisis and 

hear about proposed solutions, proposed opportunities for restoring 

coastal Louisiana. We’ve heard very important comments from the 

previous panel, Senators. The important thing for us to realize is, 

in order to be successful in this battle against this restoration effort that our restoration efforts have to be proportional to our land 

loss. 

We’ve learned a lot over the last decade and a half, the CWPPRA 

Act, the State programs. One of the things we have learned is that 

we need to use the right tools; and the right tools are sediment, 

vegetation, and water. 

There are other tools, too, but those are the practical primary 

tools that have built the coastline. 

It’s important to realize that we’ve heard that coastal land loss 

is at 20–24 square miles per year currently and it’s been that way 

for a decade and a half and it continues today. 

This tells us that we need to implement larger programs, more 

effective programs. It’s the challenge to Louisiana Department of 

Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers to implement these 

large-scale programs. 

We’ve heard about causes of land loss. Causes of land loss are 

complex, very complex. The French, the Americans, you’ll see, 

began levees. We began the unintentional consequences of building 

the levee, flood control, eventually oil and gas exploration, navigation. 

It’s a very complex thing and I think the blame games are a very 

important concept that—to understand, but we need to understand 

all the contributing consequences of coastal land loss. 

Hurricanes pose a great threat right now to our coast. Hurricanes have taught us that our Barrier Islands are very important. 

The measure for coastal erosion is land loss, and the measure for 

restoration should be land gain, and we need to make a difference 

there. 

If we look at the Atachafalya, we look at nature across the seas 

and we got to figure out how we can make a dent in this portion 

at 20 square miles per year. How do we do that? How do we build 

20 square miles a year? It’s a huge challenge. How do we do that? 

We’ve learned a lot, and we’ve learned things such as social impacts cannot be ignored. Some of those are unintended consequences also. 

We’ve also learned that we need to have tools of restoration that 

produce results in scales of less than a decade. Generationally, it 
30

effects us immediately; we’ve learned that. We have to believe in 

adaptive management. We have to—Even though we’ve been 

through the process of LCA, and we’ve made a near turn list for 

LCA of five projects, we’re still learning about the projects and 

thinking about these projects. 

In LCA there are five main projects. What I’ve learned 20 years 

ago is that you should do the simplest things first. Twenty years 

ago it was recommended doing a Barataria Shoreline project. Here 

we are 20 years later recommending the same project. We are looking at doing major restoration along the headland, Lafourche Parish, Shell Island, Plaquemines Parish. So these are things we understand how to do. 

In hindsight, we should build shorelines, vegetate them, and we 

know we can do that successfully as we are challenged by MR-GO, 

as we are challenged by the large-scale freshwater diversions, as 

we’re challenged by freshwater diversions in Northern and Davis 

Pond. 

We can move large amounts of sediment more economically than 

we give ourselves credit for, pipeline slurry, moving materials that 

I think the Mississippi River had done, through a slow process 

built a building. We had to do it through a process enhanced by 

us, by man. The pipeline slurry, that’s really the key to this. 

If you look at projects built through CWPPRA, we’ve learned that 

projects that move material via pipeline build land which is a 

measure of our success. That’s what we have to look forward too. 

We also have to learn that the land ridge, Lake Pontchartrain, 

is important. We’ve learned that the coastal land loss in the Pontchartrain basin has accelerated, but it’s more important on the 

land area such as the land of region of Orleans Parish and we need 

to pay particular interest to that with the energy process. 

Last, I want to leave for people who, you know, use the academic 

community, we understand the need for practical applied science. 

We understand the need for a new style of education for a new professional workforce here in New Orleans, here in the State of Louisiana, and I want to be sure that the University of Louisiana is 

here to help the DNR, State of Louisiana Corps of Engineers to 

help with these challenges of restoration in Louisiana. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much, Doctor. 

Now we’ll hear from Mr. Randy Lanctot. 

STATEMENT OF MR. RANDY LANCTOT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

LOUISIANA WILDLIFE FEDERATION 

Mr. LANCTOT. Thank you, Senator Vitter for having the committee hearing down here in New Orleans, and other members of 

the Environment and Public Works Committee in the U.S. Senate. 

Senator, also thank you and to Senator Landrieu, and congratulations for getting the energy money (OCS), you know, those—all 

the people here that I’m sure were involved in the fight to get the 

CARA funding when we thought we really would bring it home, 

and even though what we really got was not what we originally 

hoped for, I heard the Cha-Ching when it was announced and we’re 

pleased to be on the right track with the Nation recognizing that 

that’s really our (Louisiana’s) fair share and we need to continue 

to seek our fair share and insist that we do get that. 
31

I’ve been working for Louisiana Wildlife Federation for the past 

25 years, and during that time, a lot—we’ve learned a lot about 

land loss, the causes and how to deal with it. What we learned 

most is that we’re losing ground despite our best efforts to do something about it. 

Doctor Penland hit the nail on the head: We need to do the simplest projects that protect the most and get the land out there and 

vegetation and those things that create the habitats that the members of our organization are particularly interested in, the fish and 

wildlife resources and just by coincidence that’s also important protection for our cities and our communities on the coast. 

If you have reviewed the Louisiana Coastal Area study, you 

know that much of the southern part of Louisiana was built by the 

deltas of the Mississippi River as it whipped back and forth over 

the continental shelf, and that land loss and land gain is normal 

for delta system. Under natural conditions, loss is balanced by 

gain, and that loss and gain occurs slowly over hundreds and even 

thousands of years, that’s a timeframe long enough to invite disregard for the future evolution and the inevitable loss of delta 

lands. 

The immediate concern of the European explorers and immigrants to the region that is now South Louisiana was to keep floodwaters at bay, exploit the region’s natural resources and establish 

commerce to support growing society. That familiar paradigm is 

common to communities across America. 

The delta’s remarkable abundance and dynamic and challenging 

geology sets Louisiana apart from them all. I might add that we’re 

more than happy to be different because of our lively and creative 

cultures, our great musical heritage, our wonderful cuisine, and 

carefree life view, which is all nurtured by our unique location on 

one of the world’s great deltas, but we are not so happy to be different because we are the victims of losing our land to the sea. 

Land loss on a deteriorating delta is a natural process caused by 

wind, wave, tide, compaction of organic soils, subsidence and geologic faults and a complex of other things you need to read about 

in the LCA report. That loss is dramatically accelerated, however, 

by the people effect, the dredging for access and navigation channels; removal of subsurface minerals; unenlightened engineering of 

bulkheads, channels and dredged spoil deposition; impoundments; 

leveeing, and the list goes on. 

All of these are prominent contributors to coastal land loss, but 

many of these activities, of course, have kept us dry and generated 

products and wealth that have contributed to the local and national 

economies. 

Impacts of coastal erosion are the loss of tens of thousands of 

acres of wetlands and headlands in a domino effect fashion; along 

with that, loss of real estate and its economic value; the loss of wetland-based fish and wildlife habitat and its dependent wildlife and 

fisheries productivity, and along with that the economy and employment opportunities associated with that. 

There is increased risk of flooding and associated costs of insurance and disaster relief; the disruption and relocation of communities; outmigration of Louisiana citizens; increased costs to estab-
32

lish and maintain infrastructure, including infrastructure critical 

to energy production. 

The toll is in dollars, of course, but it is much greater than that. 

The particular interest of our organization, the Louisiana Wildlife 

Federation in coastal land loss is the inevitable loss of the fish and 

wildlife as their habitats disappear. 

As an organization that represents folks who are out in the field 

using and enjoying the natural resources of the State, we have a 

big stake in halting land loss and restoring the productive ecosystem that has made Louisiana the ‘‘Sportsman’s Paradise.’’

The LCA report represents a number of approaches to dealing 

with coastal land loss; one that has been rejected is GET OUT. Another is, Do nothing and take your chances. We concur with the 

LCA on that. One consideration that deserves more emphasis is the 

need to rethink and re-engage society’s relationship with the Mississippi River Coastal Delta ecosystem to incorporate a larger 

measure of flexibility and uncertainty with respect to habitation 

and economic activity. 

We must adopt an attitude that will allow us to reconcile our expectations with the necessary changes that we will have to make, 

as individuals and as a society, to achieve a sustainable coastal 

ecosystem. To put it bluntly, we have to be willing and prepared 

to get out of the way of the projects that will be needed to accomplish that task. I think others have said that in other ways. 

In particular, as coastal restoration efforts impact coastal lands 

and waters, hunters, fishers, and other affected interests like landowners will be called upon to cooperate and accept fair consideration for any disproportionate losses that they will sustain and that 

are inevitable when the kind of coastal restoration efforts that are 

needed are applied. 

So far, that road has been a little rocky, but hopefully, the lessons learned from the past will smooth the way for the future. 

‘‘Attitude is everything,’’ as the saying goes, and assuming all attitudes are adjusted to be in sync with the coastal restoration program, the solutions proposed by the LCA and efforts to follow can 

be accomplished, especially if we follow a fundamental rule of success: First, do no harm. Activities that contribute to coastal land 

loss can be limited and/or designed and redesigned to reduce impacts. This applies particularly to dredging and navigation and 

levee work and activities that reduce stabilizing vegetative structure. Requiring that local, State, and Federal activities and 

projects, including private activities that are regulated by Federal 

and State Government, are consistent with conserving and restoring the coast also falls under the do-no-harm concept. 

The LCA report contains an impressive statement of objectives 

and principles in Section 3.2 that is consistent with that concept 

in most respects, and we commend the Corps for including that in 

the report and making that commitment. 

There are many solutions as the LCA report articulates in Coast 

2050 Plan. With a little informed contemplation, stating the solutions to coastal erosion is easy. Getting the political and financial 

support to do the work is a little more challenging. So in an effort 

to inform and educate the people from all around the United States 

about Louisiana and our coastal land loss challenge, Governor 
33

Blanco and the America’s Wetland Campaign initiated a new outreach effort this week—‘‘Save America’s Wetland: Write Now’’ to 

encourage all of us to let our friends and colleagues throughout 

America know about what is at stake here and how we all are 

bonded to the outcome. 

So it is the intent of our remarks and our efforts to engage the 

members of the Environment and Public Works Committee and 

citizens throughout the country in hope that you will pitch in and 

lend a hand. I thank you for the opportunity to speak with you 

today. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much, Randy. 

Now we’ll hear from Mr. Roy Francis. 

STATEMENT OF MR. ROY FRANCIS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

LA1 COALITION 

Mr. FRANCIS. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate the opportunity 

to be present today. I’m OK with being last; I’ve been last my 

whole life. 

I also want to thank you, the delegation, for being so successful. 

As you, I’m going on with another position and I’ve been telling 

people that, ‘‘I got the money’’ and I appreciate this new job offer 

based on you-all’s success. 

As mentioned, my name is Roy Francis, and I am the Executive 

Director of LA1 Coalition, Inc. The Coalition is a non-profit organization created in 1997 by community leaders that has one goal—

improve the infrastructure servicing Port Fourchon, LA. The founding members realized the threat to this critical energy infrastructure due to coastal land loss. 

I have worked in coastal zone management, flood protection and 

coastal infrastructure since I obtained my degree in geology in 

1992. I feel I have come to understand the ripple effect of coastal 

land loss to infrastructure and the industries associated with oil 

and gas production. 

Coastal land loss is not only threatening our environment, but 

our very existence as a community. One of the greatest threats to 

infrastructure is to Louisiana Highway 1, a two-lane, winding road 

that is the only means of land access to Port Fourchon, a port 

which currently services about 16 percent of this Nation’s energy 

supply. LA1 is only 3 feet above sea level, Senator, and is subject 

to 8- to 10-foot storm surge. The highway provides access for 6,000 

offshore workers and their equipment to support 75 percent of all 

deepwater activities in the Federal waters. 

The Leeville Bridge, the weakest link of this highway system was 

built in 10 feet of water. It now stands in 40 feet of water. It is 

the most scoured bridge in the State due to the water exchange between the Barataria and Terrebonne basins. All the land that surrounded the bridge is gone; it has disappeared. 

There is now a real threat to the oil and gas structures built on 

land that is no more. Hundreds of structures producing energy 

every single day, thousands of miles of pipeline buried underground are now exposed to open water. The pipelines are threatened by wave energy and impact of marine vessels every single 

day. 
34

One of the major oil and gas companies that operates at Port 

Fourchon transports over 600,000 barrels of oil per day through 

pipelines in coastal Louisiana. They spend nearly $5 million per 

year reacting to coastal erosion, repairing bulkheads, relation of 

pipelines and marking pipeline crossings. Another company’s main 

offshore support base is in Leeville, an area that has sank 14 

inches in the last 20 years. 

Not only is the country’s domestic supply threatened, but 13 percent of this United States’ imported crude oil is offloaded at Louisiana Offshore Oil Port. It is based in coastal Louisiana and serviced through Port Fourchon. The 48-inch pipelines are connected to 

35 percent of all United States’ refinery capacity; and remember, 

this country has not built a refinery in decades and they are at 96 

percent capacity. 

The impact of LA1 affects more then the Nation’s energy production. The highway was built on the Bayou Lafourche Ridge and 

now is the dividing line between the Nation’s two most productive 

estuaries, the Barataria and Terrebonne basins. About 20 percent 

of the State’s total catch goes to market by way of LA1, in a State 

that leads the lower 48 in fisheries production as you mentioned. 

The loss of these wetlands is a loss to fisheries production. 

Another impact, as our parish president mentioned, is the impact 

to our water supply. In 2000, salt water intruded into Lafourche 

Parish’s water pumping system about 50 miles inland via a channel in a neighboring parish. For the first time, the people of South 

Louisiana did have a taste of coastal land loss. The paper mill had 

to shut down, the oil and gas industry which uses over 20 percent 

of the parish’s water supply was affected. We couldn’t drink the 

water, and the children bathed in salt water. 

All of this could have been avoided with a lock and floodgate on 

that channel of that neighboring parish. 

Our flood protection, as Jerome mentioned, are also at risk. Historically, these marshes would act as buffers around the levees, 

holding back the energies of the waves against the base of the levees. Today, open water now surrounds those earthen ring levees 

and wave action erodes at them every single day. The floodgates 

on the levees have to be closed earlier, more often, trapping marine 

vessels outside, trying to get out of the way of storms. 

The Louisiana coast is a blue collar coast, unlike many of its 

State’s coastal areas. It is not a place that we just visit, it’s a place 

where we live, work and play. It is no longer just about the birds 

and the plants; it’s about coastal land loss affecting every aspect 

of our lives. 

I thank you, Senator. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you very much, Roy. Sorry to make you 

last to testify, but it was either that or putting you last in the highway——

Mr. FRANCIS. I always go with the money, sir. 

Senator VITTER. I have a few question to round up the hearing. 

Mr. Zeringue, thank you again for being here. You touched on a 

very important project that we’re working on in the WRDA, 

Morganza. Could you again explain briefly the direct concrete complications to that project caused by the coastal erosion? 
35

Mr. ZERINGUE. Thank you, Senator. The problems that we face, 

obviously, is constructing a project of this magnitude, it’s going to 

take a substantial amount of investment and it’s going to require 

sensitivity, and much to the credit of the Corps of Engineers and 

our partners, the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development have gone a long way to address the need, the obvious 

need for flood protection in the areas to protect the citizens. 

But also keeping in mind the environmental concerns and need 

to protect the resources that are there. So what we are doing is developing the flood protection system and those structures that work 

in concert to protect the people but also the environment. 

Again, much of the credit to the Corps, unlike other projects that 

Federal law provides, the highway habitat evaluation teams to get 

the project passed and the environmental impact statement, and it 

means going to another project. The habitat evaluation team for 

the Morganza-to-the-Gulf Project will survive throughout the life, 

the 50-year life of the project, which we hope will last even past 

50 years but will provide, will be there to serve and work with the 

Corps and the Levee District to operate those gates. 

Because, as I mentioned, you know, this is a dynamic system and 

there’s no way we can just put up a levee or put up a structure 

or build a few acres of marsh and expect it to be there. We are 

going to have to manage it, and as Dr. Penland said, we’re going 

to have to continuously maintain those structures, and we hope to 

achieve that. 

Senator VITTER. Great. Thank you. As I mentioned to Secretary 

Angelle, it really irks me whenever it’s suggested, particularly at 

the Federal level, that somehow we’re involved in demanding handouts here. 

With respect to Morganza-to-the-Gulf and activity, particular in 

your area, could you explain the funding commitments of citizens 

on the ground in Lafourche and Terrebonne. 

Mr. ZERINGUE. It wasn’t that much of a hard sell. I mean, obviously when you tax someone, no one favors tax but the problem is 

so immediate and so apparent. Right now, we have to close floodgates. High tides and southeast winds puts water on roads. The 

title prism, because of the loss of the levee, has moved so much further in, so we’re feeling the effects from not so much storms but 

just different tidal events much sooner and much quicker. 

So people are recognizing that and they feel that they’re—obviously something needs to be done and they just took it upon themselves, fortunately, to tax themselves to apply that money to meet 

our portion of the cost share. I know we had 65/35 percent cost 

share. Ideally, we could get it to 75/25, we’d appreciate that as 

well, but we believe that this project is so important to the economy and for their—our ability to live down there in Terrebonne 

Parish, that the citizens, much to their credit, have agreed, and 

we’re applying that. 

It can only be used, and there’s no sunshine, perpetuity, this 

money will be applied. We believe that we can, with our help from 

our State Delegation, meet our amount of Federal cost share. 

So you’re right, we’re not asking for a handout. We recognize a 

commitment. We recognize that we need to do our part in terms 
36

of funding this project, and we are capable and stand ready to do 

that, but we can’t fund the whole thing. 

Senator VITTER. Great. 

Ms. Duval, as one of the chief economic development officers of 

your region, could you explain how these issues have a direct impact on economic development job creation efforts? 

Ms. DUVAL. Certainly. Thank you. 

As our parish becomes more susceptible to flooding and not just 

from major storm events, as Jerome has alluded to, but just from 

day-to-day south winds or a storm perhaps going way to the west 

of us—I know we were flooding tremendously when Tropical Storm 

Allison went into Texas several years ago. But these day-to-day 

flooding events are undermining the goals to keep our business to 

obtain affordable insurance or insurance at all for their infrastructure and equipment. 

That just has a spiraling effect. If you don’t have insurance, it’s 

hard to get financing; the real estate market begins to collapse, the 

economic of the base of your community begins to collapse, it starts 

with one little thing but it has a spiraling effect that runs through 

the whole spectrum of our economy. 

Senator VITTER. In terms of those economic job effects, how 

would you describe the trends of the impacts in your region over 

the last, say, 20 years? 

Ms. DUVAL. Well, we have been very fortune that the oil and gas 

exploration is still so vital and even though we had a downturn, 

you know, back in the 1980’s, it wells up again and oil and gas exploration is the No. 1 economy of our parish. 

We still have people coming in but you have them doing a lot 

more investigatory work today than they would have 20 years ago. 

There has to be a lot of profit made upfront to be able to absorb 

the added expenses that doing business in South Louisiana generate. 

One thing I didn’t—and we also, the commercial and the recreational, that is a huge industry for Terrebonne Parish. While it 

is very good right now, the scientist at LSU have told us that the 

miles of our estuary, this will change that and, you know, everybody is catching fish where you never caught fish before, you know. 

I just recently built a home off of the Intercoastal Canal in 

Houma, which is in Northern Terrebonne Parish. You can catch 

redfish and speckled trout in my backyard, and that’s supposed to 

be freshwater. So I mean, it just—it just spirals, Senator. 

Senator VITTER. Great. Thank you. 

Doctor Penland, you’re very focused on the science of this effort. 

What are the greatest uncertainties in the science, broadly speaking, as we move forward with this effort that we need to resolve? 

Dr. PENLAND. I think that, Senator, with the uncertainties, we 

need to resolve any near-term, short-term gaps information that 

will prevent limitation of LCA projects and moving forward with 

successful completion of those. Sediment resources, do we have 

enough material? We do. But we need to get that message out to 

the planners and engineers that we do. They’re going to have to 

make greater use of the river, use the material offshore, but the 

material there is to move forward which is not—project, thinking 

that we have a material deficit out there. 
37

Senator VITTER. All right. 

Can you describe the relationship between the channelization 

uppercoast and the lower Mississippi and coastal land loss? 

Dr. PENLAND. Well, one of the challenges is trying to understand 

the cause of land loss. Regionally, in terms of centuries, we have 

been leveeing the river, be it with the French, be it with early exploration, birth of our country, we have been altering the hydrology 

of the levees; this is how it’s been. 

Superimposed upon that are things such as navigation, such as 

oil and gas, hurricanes. It’s a very complex problem. But, fundamentally, river-controlled levees, stopping the delta, which is the 

process involved, is playing havoc on our landscape. 

Senator VITTER. Final question, because this is a central question 

that comes up in the national debate with uncertainties, with various factors. Fundamentally, do you believe coastal restoration is 

truly possible? 

Dr. PENLAND. Coastal restoration is truly possible using the right 

tools, using them in proportion to the land loss. We need to accept 

through our learning experiences through the Breaux Act, the LCA 

planning that pipeline slurry, us getting out there and basically 

mimicking Mother Nature much more rapidly than she did naturally, that we can do that. We’ve demonstrated that. 

We have rebuilt barrier islands. We have built marshes for a variety of Federal programs. The issue is about being—[in audible] 

fortunate to the magnitude of the loss. All we need now is—with 

your support, is to move forward with division regional restoration 

that will be successful with this implementation. 

Senator VITTER. All right. Thank you, Doctor. 

Randy Lanctot, broadly speaking, does the LCA program have 

the support of the environmental community? 

Mr. LANCTOT. Well, certainly I think that the environmental 

community in the State of Louisiana; nationally they may have 

some trouble with the change in cost share that we would advocate 

and that sort of thing. I think, by and large, they do support the 

LCA plan. I think you can look forward to that as it moves forward. 

Senator VITTER. What do we have to do to even broaden that 

support nationally so this is properly recognized as a national priority in terms of environment concerns? 

Mr. LANCTOT. I think that’s really a grassroots effort. The Governor, as I mentioned in my presentation, kicked that off the other 

day to let folks around the country know what’s going on down 

here. If they have a stake in it, just tell them a little bit about our 

State that—I’m not from Louisiana. Please don’t whip me for it. 

Senator Chabert, Leonard Chabert used to give me ‘‘what for’’ 

every time I testified before his committee down at the Capital in 

Baton Rouge. He’d ask me, ‘‘Where are you from, Boy?’’

But anyhow, you know, we give ourselves a bad wrap. One of the 

terrible things we do is flog ourselves in public over: ‘‘We’re not 

doing this right, we’re not doing that right.’’ That’s a shame. I’ve 

been around the country and we’re no worse than any place else. 

Most people around the country don’t really have a thought about 

Louisiana. 

They think we’re like Mike Fink, riverboat pilot and all that, and 

Errol Flynn movies and things like that, and they know about 
38

Mardi Gras, but they don’t really know about Louisiana. They’re 

fascinated by it. So we have an entre to explain a little bit about 

our culture and what’s going on here, and I think the rest of the 

country will be very receptive to that and will support the programs down here and will support the funding to get it done, but 

we have to take more of an initiative and not have such an inferiority complex. That’s ridiculous, and shame on us. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you. Thank you for your group’s efforts 

in terms of that national education campaign in conjunction with 

your partners around the country. 

I can tell you from personal experience, you know, Mary and I 

talk to our colleagues all the time in the Senate about this, and 

that’s a fact. But there is one thing that is even more effective, is 

when they hear from folks in their State, voters who vote for or 

against them, about this and how it’s a national environmental 

issue. That’s beginning to happen through national networks and 

national organizations, so I certainly want to encourage that. 

Thank you. 

Finally, Roy Francis, thank you again. Of course you’ve been 

working hard on the LA1 project. What’s the total cost of that 

project? Although it can’t be quantified precisely, what might the 

total cost be without coastal erosion, say, the last 30 years? 

Mr. FRANCIS. Basically, we’re having to build a bridge so that the 

entire highway system will be an elevated 22 feet above sea level 

and built to withstand a Category 4 hurricane; so that will add additional costs based on that. 

Senator VITTER. So basically, instead of building a highway, you 

build a bridge. 

Mr. FRANCIS. Because you look at what’s happening in coastal 

erosion. Basically at some point it may just be the ring levee at 

South Lafourche and another bridge tying into Port Fourchon as 

that marsh continues to erode. The cost for the elevated highway 

or bridge from the ring levee to Port Fourchon will be about $650 

million. To build a highway from—all the way up to US 90 is total 

$850 million and the first phase will be about $200 million for construction. 

It’s not—you’re dealing in a harsh environment and the oil and 

gas companies need to be on the coast. That’s what they have, 

there’s probably no better place geographically, environmentally 

than Port Fourchon to service this industry, and that’s where they 

need to be at. 

Senator VITTER. Correct. How many times has LA1 been impassable, say, south of Golden Meadow? 

Mr. FRANCIS. It varies from the year. For example, with Ivan, it 

flooded twice. When Ivan came around the first time and when it 

came back as a depression, it doesn’t take a storm to flood LA1; 

just a bad southeasterly wind now will inundate the water—the 

road with flood waters. 

It may average three, four or five times per year, depends upon 

just the systems in the Gulf of Mexico. But storms in Mississippi 

or even Florida affect LA1 now; it just doesn’t have to be a storm 

that impacts the Louisiana directly. 

Senator VITTER. To tie this into something the Nation definitely 

does care about, what does the closure, any closure of LA1, and 
39

this is happening four or five times a year, what does that do to 

gasoline prices, oil and gasoline prices? 

Mr. FRANCIS. You’re going to pay more at the pump. We use 

this—We’re the first to create this effort. Hats off to all the people 

of South Lafourche; they created this effort. They put their money 

where their mouth was, and they saw what was at risk. This is 

when gas was at about 97 cents, and we would say, ‘‘Just imagine 

gas being $3 a gallon.’’

When you look at 16 percent of the United States’ energy supply 

being supported by this one port, that’s significant. The Gulf of 

Mexico is one of the top geological regions in the world. And we 

talk about the Persian Gulf, that supplies 23 percent of our crude 

oil. Well, we supply domestic and imported crude oil and natural 

gas through these facilities. You would see a significant impact to 

the price with heating oils along the east coast and also the country and also the gas price. This port, if you lose the highway, you 

know, there will be a shutdown in the activities at the port. If you 

look at just what happened with Ivan and the impact of a barrel 

of oil, the price for that period of time, that those structures were 

impacted in the Gulf of Mexico. 

The Leeville Bridge, we sent a diver down a year and a half ago 

to do a survey. He was actually able to swim underneath the pile 

that supports the bridge. I was in the paper the other day as saying, ‘‘It was like a telephone pole being held up by the wires itself.’’

The bridge is at risk for what engineers call ‘‘critical failure.’’ To 

us down the bayou, the thing is going to fall into the water. If you 

lose that structure you’re going to have to carry a thousand 18-

wheelers to the port. I don’t know how that’s going to happen. 

We’re in trouble. 

Senator VITTER. That is the only access to the port, which is 20 

percent of our energy needs. 

Mr. FRANCIS. You have no other choice. I think, you know, when 

people are filling up their SUV, they don’t realize what it takes for 

that to happen. I know we need to look at alternative sources of 

fuel, you know, how much we need to conserve, but until we, you 

know, really put some programs where it hits them—and we have 

to have this resource. 

Other people want to be furious and think that, you know, I don’t 

want this off my coast, but everybody wants to use it. I hate to say 

it like this, but nobody really road a bicycle here. 

Audience Member. I walked. 

Mr. FRANCIS. You walked? 

Audience Member. Yeah. 

Mr. FRANCIS. That’s 1 percent out of 120 people. 

Senator VITTER. Well, again, I think it’s important to tie up to 

any legitimate national concern of gasoline pump prices. We’re 

talking about a service port that helps account for 20 percent of our 

needs. 

Mr. FRANCIS. Correct. That’s the thing. As this gentleman mentioned, he walked, but if you look at what’s going on in the country 

and the need and what’s happening in other countries, you know, 

there’s going to be more and more of a demand on this resource 

with China coming on-line, developing nations; that’s just the world 

that we live in. 
40

Senator VITTER. Final question, and my staff thought it was very 

important to get this on the record of the U.S. Senate, and that’s: 

What type knot would you tie to connect a rope to a boat? 

That’s an inside joke. I think Roy has—

Mr. FRANCIS. This goes into the record? When you say, ‘‘staff,’’ 

I think I know the individual you made reference to. Senator 

Vitter, all I can say is that I was in the vehicle, I launched the boat 

and I looked back in my rearview mirror and there was a gentleman, who represents you, holding both ends of the rope. 

Now, as I understand, he was born and raised in Baton Rouge, 

not quite on the coast, but when I asked him to ‘‘hold the rope,’’ 

I did not mean take it off the boat and hold both ends. But he did 

as he was told, sir. 

Senator VITTER. I’ll be very careful to phrase my instructions to 

him very carefully. 

I want to thank you-all for all your leadership. I want to in particular thank our host today, the University of New Orleans led by 

Chancellor Tim Ryan. With that, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., the committee adjourned.] 

[Additional statements submitted for the record follow:]

STATEMENT OF MAJOR GENERAL DON T. RILEY, DIRECTOR OF CIVIL WORKS, U.S. 

ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

INTRODUCTION

I am Major General Don T. Riley, Director of Civil Works, U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers. I am pleased to be here today and to have the opportunity to speak to 

you about the Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA), Louisiana-Ecosystem Restoration Program. My testimony today will provide a brief background and update the Committee on progress made to date by the Corps of Engineers and the State of Louisiana in addressing the serious degradation and loss of this nationally significant 

ecosystem. 

BACKGROUND

The loss of Louisiana’s coastal wetlands has been ongoing since at least the early 

1900s with commensurate deleterious effects on the ecosystem. There have been 

several separate investigations of the problem and a number of projects constructed 

over the last 30 or so years that provide localized remedies. For example, since 

1990, under the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act 

(CWPPRA), Federal agencies and the State of Louisiana have completed projects 

that we estimate will result in the creation or restoration of a total of 66,000 acres 

as well as enhancing 321,000 acres of coastal wetlands. Under this Act, the principal Federal wetlands agencies and the State use a competitive process for allocating funds to potential wetlands restoration projects. They select the best individual projects on the merits, but lacked an overall strategy to identify integrated 

groups of projects that could yield greater environmental benefits by acting in concert on a watershed basis. It has become apparent that a more systematic approach 

can be more effective in restoring natural processes. In recognition of this, in 1998 

the CWPPRA Task Force developed ‘‘Coast 2050: Toward a Sustainable Coastal Louisiana’’ which detailed a set of strategies for addressing the needs of this complex 

ecosystem more holistically. 

In March 2002, Louisiana and the Corps jointly decided to undertake development 

of a comprehensive plan, and signed an amendment to the original Barataria Basin 

study cost sharing agreement to initiate a broader ecosystem restoration study. 

Building on the Coast 2050 plan, the LCA Study team produced an internal, preliminary draft report in October 2003. Guidance from the Assistant Secretary of the 

Army (Civil Works) and in the President’s fiscal year 2005 Budget identified the 

need to refocus this study’s effort to address the most critical ecological needs of the 

Coastal Area over the next 10 or so years. The Corps and the State have worked 

together to develop a restoration program consistent with this guidance. Our recent 
41

study is a multi-agency achievement reflecting the partnership of both the Corps of 

Engineers and the State of Louisiana through its Department of Natural Resources. 

Based upon data and lessons learned from similar projects initiated in past years, 

the report proposes to address ecological needs through a series of projects targeted 

to the parts of the ecosystem that require the most immediate attention. Further 

detailed analysis and site specific design for these projects will ensure that the selected projects are highly cost-effective and represent the best way to use the available funds. In short, we will focus our efforts on the parts of the ecosystem that 

require the most immediate attention, and will address these needs through features that provide the highest return in net environmental and economic benefits 

per dollar of cost. The report also calls for studies of potentially promising, longterm ecosystem restoration concepts, with the objective of determining whether they 

would provide a highly cost-effective way to create coastal wetlands. In addition, the 

report underscores the need to address the key scientific uncertainties and engineering challenges associated with coastal restoration, and to otherwise lay the groundwork to improve the cost-effectiveness and likelihood of success of restoration efforts 

undertaken during, and beyond, the immediate 10-year period of the current plan. 

CURRENT STATUS

Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco and LTG Carl A. Strock, Chief of Engineers, signed a partnership agreement on Monday, Jan. 31, 2005, dedicating their 

‘‘combined efforts towards a common goal of reversing the current trend of degradation of Louisiana’s coastal ecosystem.’’

In addition, LTG Strock signed his Chief of Engineer’s Report, on the Louisiana 

Coastal Area Ecosystem Restoration Study. The Chief’s approval reflects his commitment to an integrated approach, which targets the available resources in highly 

cost-effective ways to meet the most immediate ecological needs. This approach 

builds upon, and will advance, the ongoing restoration effort that is already underway. It is the next logical step in this effort. 

As noted in LTG Strock’s Chief’s Report, the challenge of creating a program that 

can rapidly put structures in place means that we cannot simply proceed with business as usual. This of course presents a number of policy issues about how the LCA 

Program is to be structured and funded. Those policy issues are beyond the purview 

of the Corps of Engineers and must be decided by Congress and by the Administration. I know, however, from their interest and participation in our work so far that 

the Administration strongly supports the effort to help protect and rebuild this ecosystem, and recognizes the urgency of addressing this challenge. 

In accordance with guidance from the Secretary of the Army and consistent with 

the Chief of Engineers Report, we look forward to working with the State of Louisiana to develop streamlined approaches and efficient ways to effectively address 

these issues in the most cost-effective and timely manner. We are committed to putting a program in place that will enable the State and the Nation to make significant progress towards protecting and rebuilding this nationally significant coastal 

ecosystem. 

This concludes my statement. Again, I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. 

I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. 

STATEMENT OF SCOTT ANGELLE, SECRETARY, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF

NATURAL RESOURCES

Mr. Chairman—I am honored to sit before you today to testify on behalf of the 

pending WRDA bill and a provision that is of critical importance to my state of Louisiana-the Louisiana Coastal Area Ecosystem Restoration Plan (LCA). 

As you well know, Senator, Louisiana’s coast—America’s Wetland—provides benefits to our nation that are unrivaled by any other coastal area in the United 

States—benefits that include the hosting of 80 percent of the Nation’s offshore oil 

and gas supply, a third of the Nation’s fisheries’ landings, wildlife habitat for the 

second largest flyway in the United States, and the nursery ground for marine life 

for the entire Gulf of Mexico. These working wetlands also provide protection from 

storm surge for the world’s largest port system and for the two million citizens who 

live and work in Louisiana’s coastal zone. 

As these wetlands continue to disappear at the alarming rate of 24 square miles 

a year, the Nations economic and energy security is put at great risk. As energy 

pipelines are exposed to open Gulf conditions and protected wetland areas become 

open bays, the national environmental and economic implications are unthinkable. 

The loss of America’s Wetland has reached crisis proportions and the Congress 

must address it as a ‘‘special circumstance’’ through both funding and speed of ac-
42

tion. The restoration needs of this area cannot be compared with the Everglades or 

with any other ecosystem in this country. No place else on the planet is experiencing this magnitude of land loss and no place else will the impacts to the United 

States be so severe. 

There are many causes of Louisiana’s land loss, both natural and man-made, not 

the least of which is the leveeing of the Mississippi River—done for the best of reasons to protect citizens from flooding and for the Nation’s navigation needs. But the 

unintended consequences of this Federal action prevented the natural flooding of the 

river from depositing sediment and fresh water in this great delta so that the wetlands replenish and rebuild. 

Oil and gas pipeline canals and east/west navigation channels have exacerbated 

the loss by allowing saltwater intrusion and wave action to further degrade the system. 

The natural subsidence of the land and sea level rise also play a part in the destruction. 

This is not about blame, but about all of us pulling together to save this strategic 

area and to sustain its values for future generations of Americans. 

Because of the special circumstances surrounding Louisiana’s unique situation, I 

would like to point out certain elements of the proposed LCA plan that we consider 

crucial to our success in saving this ecosystem:

• Louisiana is proposing a 35 percent State/65 percent Federal cost share match, 

not just because ours is a poor State and will find it difficult to achieve even that 

level of matching funds. Because of the Federal actions associated with the loss and 

the national benefits derived from this area, we feel the cost share is more than justified. Unless and until there is a permanent and steady stream of revenues like 

those tied to the sharing of Outer Continental Shelf revenues, Louisiana would not 

have the ability to carry a greater cost share burden. 

Our citizens are serious about using such funds for the purpose of restoring our 

coast. In our legislative session that just ended, enabling legislation was passed 

unanimously that would allow our people to vote on a constitutional amendment to 

dedicate the first $600 million a year to this purpose. We have reason to believe 

such an amendment will pass a vote of the people overwhelmingly, as three others 

have passed in recent years that would help prepare us to fund this massive effort. 

• The recent passage by Congress of the Energy bill is the first major step in this 

direction and on behalf of all of us in Louisiana, I thank you Senator and our entire 

delegation for your great victory. We consider it a tremendous down payment for 

the work ahead. We refer to it as a down payment, not out of greed, but out of critical need of a permanent funding source. 

The President has stated that Louisiana and the other coastal producing States 

should use the revenues to draw down further Federal funds. Because of this, we 

would like to see language in WRDA that states that these and future such revenues can be accepted to match other Federal dollars, such as through a WRDA bill. 

• As we embark on our plans for spending the Energy Bill funds, we will be jumpstarting scientific modeling for projects included in the LCA and accelerating the design and construction of these projects. Therefore, we feel it is absolutely necessary 

for this work to be accepted as in-kind credit by the Corps of Engineers. 

• I spoke of the urgency and need for swift action to address this devastating land 

loss. Ironically, it will probably not be the lack of funding that prevents us from 

achieving our goal, but the cumbersome, protracted Corps of Engineers process we 

must endure. By the Corps’ own admission, it takes an average of 11 years from 

authorization to completion of a Corps project. That’s an average. We have a river 

diversion that took twice that length of time to complete. 

Louisiana does not have the luxury of that kind of ‘‘business as usual’’. Sounds 

good on paper, but the reality is we will have very little land to save if the LCA 

is not treated as a ‘‘special circumstance’’ and urgent changes to the present Corps 

process are not made. 

• The question has been raised about the need to continue the CWPPRA program 

in light of an authorization of the LCA. Louisiana’s response is a resounding ‘‘yes’’. 

A job this big requires more than one tool and since Congress enacted the Coastal 

Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act in 1990, the program has played 

a key role. 

A large-scale restoration program, even a near term program as envisioned by the 

LCA, is fundamentally different in scale and approach. CWPPRA is a program that 

can roll out projects in less than 5 years in response to critical, local needs. It fills 

the gaps through its flexibility and comparatively quick turn-around time and addresses smaller, yet critical projects that buy us time as we tackle the larger, 

longer-term solutions. 
43

CWPPRA has forged valuable partnerships, not only between the State of Louisiana and its five Federal partners led by the Corps of Engineers, but with our local 

parishes, who depend on the program 

The CWPPRA program must remain active if we are to protect key national assets and ensure the safety of our citizens. The crisis will not wait while the more 

massive projects are fine-tuned. In short, CWPPRA is responsive, fiscally prudent, 

complementary of the LCA plan, community-supported, well established and science 

based. (I have included a document with my written testimony entitled ‘‘The Case 

for CWPPRA’’ that details the critical role CWPPRA plays in our restoration efforts.) 

• Finally, I would like to address an element of the proposed LCA plan that the 

state of Louisiana considers imperative to its success-the Science and Technology 

Program. The design of the LCA plan is based on the continued need for sound 

science and engineering to guide the effort. The value of an independent, yet inclusive science and tech program is undisputed by state and Federal agencies, NGOs 

and our coastal stakeholders. 

I have included with my written testimony a short document that outlines the 

S&T Program proposed in the LCA plan. It includes a science advisory board-named 

by and given oversight by the USGS, a science coordination board, and other elements that ensure the coordination of all appropriate Federal and state agencies, 

as well as front-line scientists from academic institutions in and out of the state. 

It has taken the work of many people more than a year to design the proposed 

S&T program and the result has been buy-in at every level. We feel it would be 

unacceptable for the program to be turned over to any one Federal agency to direct 

and implement. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to stress to the committee that Louisiana 

is a land in crisis. There is no excuse for business as usual. We are experiencing 

an emergency. Because of the national benefits provided by this coastal area and 

the national impacts associated with this crisis, Congress should recognize it as a 

special circumstance and address efforts to save it accordingly. 

Thank you for taking the time to hear the views of the State of Louisiana today 

on this issue so critical to our survival and to the future of our Nation.
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61

STATEMENT OF CHARLOTTE RANDOLPH, PRESIDENT, LAFOURCHE PARISH

Lafourche Parish was built by the force of the Mississippi River. That force took 

the soils from 41 percent of the United States and reassembled that sediment into 

a natural platform for 2 million people to live in southeast Louisiana. Plainly stated, 

the Mississippi River system has built a platform of ridges, swamps, marshes, estuaries, rivers and bayous which serve the Nation through navigation, gas and oil supply, and fisheries production. The need for navigation and flood control has caused 

the natural cycle of building land to change so that wetlands, beaches and ridges 

are now being lost at 25 to 35 square miles a year. The continued degradation of 

one of the most important environmental and monetarily valuable deltas in the 

world should be addressed seriously on the Federal level. There is no other place 

in the United States that has provided the function of this delta. The Federal Government has finally recognized that damage in South Louisiana was in the pursuit 

of national interest. Because of national interest, we insist that the damage be mitigated. Louisiana has 30 percent of the Nation’s coastal wetlands. Of the Nation’s 

total wetlands’ loss, Louisiana is experiencing an astonishing 90 percent of that loss. 

We are also losing elevation in the range of one foot in 20 to 30 years in an area 

where most of the dry land is no more than seven feet above sea level. 

These land loss factors not only threaten an important environmental area, it 

places 2 million people at greater risk from hurricane storm surge. Major pipelines 

and other infrastructure for oil and gas are now exposed to more extreme hazards. 

This oilfield infrastructure was constructed in protected waters of coastal Louisiana. 

Much of the area is transitioning into an open water marine environment. This directly affects the working condition of this infrastructure to contain the oil and to 

deliver it to its markets nationwide. Surface water used for industry and drinking 

has been contaminated on several occasions by increased salinity at the raw water 

intake 45 miles inland. This has made the water source unusable for thousands of 

people and several industrial plants during these events. We tasted salt in our 

drinking water; people with high blood pressure were advised to boil their water. 

This system we use serves 300,000 people. Senator Mary Landrieu stepped in with 

emergency funds to build a structure that would help alleviate this problem. We’re 

investigating building another. To solve these challenges from the Gulf, we must enhance our natural protection such as barrier islands and marshes, and protect our 

increasingly threatened communities. For our communities it is necessary to build 

tidal and hurricane levees, and increase the elevation of the levees in communities 

which already have protection. Although we have retreated from the most threatened communities, we can justify protection for the remaining areas. These communities support people and businesses which work to provide 25 percent of the Nation’s oil and gas, supply five (5) of the top 15 ports in the country, and produce 

30 percent of the fisheries of the lower 48 States. To abandon these communities 

is to abandon over $100 billion in public infrastructure. Studies indicate that for $10 

billion to $15 billion, this environmentally and economically productive area, and its 

communities, can be maintained. Re-introduction of Mississippi River water and 

sediments will allow us to maintain, and possibly regain thousands of acres of wetlands. Re-nourishment of our uninhabited barrier islands with quality offshore sand 

through pipeline sediment delivery would re-establish much of the tidal protection 

which has been lost. It will reduce the tidal prism which has increasingly invaded 

marshes, 30 miles from the coast. A comprehensive plan of lateral barriers would 

protect us in the near term, while we implement the long—term sediment recovery 

processes. These projects would, in effect, keep the wetlands wet and the dry lands 

dry. The marriage of structural flood protection for the communities and re-establishment of the environment functions of our barrier islands and marshes is what 

we term Comprehensive Hurricane Protection. A substantial portion of the levee 

work has been accomplished through the Congressional authorizations in 1965. 

However, new authorizations are necessary, along with financial support for completion of the ongoing projects. To some degree the erosion problems of South Louisiana 

are attributed to international trade, and domestic onshore and offshore oil development. When one realizes that $5 billion of royalties and lease payments go to the 

Federal treasury only through the support of coastal Louisiana and the infrastructure it provides, it is obvious that this source of money should fund the repairs of 

the impacts its production causes. Louisiana has virtually no direct share of those 

revenues, according to agreements with the Federal Government. Other States, 

which are impacted by oil and gas development on Federal Government lands and 

waters, receive 50 to 90 percent share of the revenues from that development. No 

American argues the fairness of that sharing to the States that accept this burden. 

The Federal Government is receiving this revenue through the support of coastal 

Louisiana and the fragile platform on which it sits. We ask that the Federal Govern-
62

ment reinvest the revenue necessary to protect the communities which work to 

produce the energy. It should reinvest the revenue necessary to maintain the most 

biologically productive ecosystem in the lower 48 States. If the Federal Government 

takes care of protecting its interest, Louisiana will not need funding since protection 

of the Federal interest protects our unique corner of America. We do not ask for 

money from other States. Only reinvest in the place which is producing this revenue. As this is written, we monitor another tropical system. Last year, we narrowly 

escaped the devastation of Hurricane Ivan, which, save for a slight jog to the north, 

would have presented our worst case scenario as to storm surge. A minor system, 

Tropical Storm Matthew followed, causing over $1 million in water damage to a facility owned by Lafourche Parish’s top tax payer, among others. How do we implement an effective drainage system? We must get the water out, yet there’s no place 

for the water to go. We spend millions annually on drainage projects against rising 

tides and lower elevations. 

Senator Vitter has offered a series of five coastal bills which addressed near-term 

and long term solutions to our problem. For a very long time, members of our Congressional delegation have been petitioning our government for assistance. True success will be achieved when the Nation’s leader fully recognize the value of coastal 

Louisiana and fully fund the projects necessary to protect us. We are indeed grateful 

for the recent allocations provided in the recently enacted Energy bill and the 

Transportation bill. These funds provide for opportunities to reinforce our existing 

levee systems as well as to construct a major highway to the very significant Port 

Fourchon. It’s a good start and we thank you for these funds. Louisiana’s Governor 

Kathleen Blanco said it best when she noted that we are not asking for more money 

out of greed but for need. A guaranteed annual source of revenue will allow us to 

plan for the future, which at this point is very, very difficult. Our shrimp fishermen 

recently took on imports and won. Yet they also face the loss of the estuaries which 

allow for the breeding and spawning of their valued catch. Lafourche Parish is also 

home to many sugar cane farms, which become the reservoirs during heavy rains. 

What is our future? Do we plan for retreat or do we continue to fight? Of course 

we will fight for Lafourche and southeast Louisiana. We have formed an organization with the acronym PACE-Parishes Against Coastal Erosion, comprised of parish 

presidents from 19 coastal parishes. Together we represent one half of the population of Louisiana. The National Association of Counties has participated in one of 

our meetings and recommended that the Federal Government recognize the concerns erosion is causing. The Breaux Act has funded numerous projects on our coast. 

We have allies in our fight, including other States which share our plight. But the 

most important relationship must be with the Federal government. Our parish and 

our State cannot fund the needed projects. We must use the funds derived from our 

coast to win this battle and keep us viable. 

STATEMENT OF JEROME ZERINGUE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TERREBONNE LEVEE AND

CONSERVATION DISTRICT

Members of the committee, my name is Jerome Zeringue, I live in Houma, LA, 

and I am the Executive Director of the Terrebonne Levee & Conservation District. 

I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today, and I welcome you to south 

Louisiana where a sinking feeling is not just an emotion but also an unpleasant 

fact. 

In Terrebonne Parish, we are losing our land, our resources, and our communities 

due to coastal land loss resulting primarily from subsidence, sea level rise, and salt 

water intrusion. Terrebonne Parish is the largest coastal community most exposed 

and vulnerable to the effects of high tides, high winds, tropical storms, and hurricanes. In any given year, we face a 60-65 percent chance of a ‘named’ storm making 

landfall and impacting our State, and a 25-30 percent chance of a hurricane making 

landfall or affecting Louisiana. 

Terrebonne Parish has some of the most ecologically significant and productive 

habitat in the world. We have two of the top ten seafood docks in the United States 

in terms of dollar value and poundage harvested. We have oil and gas infrastructure 

that is vital to the State and the Federal economy. We have an increasing population and tax base with a healthy and productive economy. Frankly, we have people, infrastructure, and wetlands that need and deserve protection. 

I have worked for Louisiana State University as a fisheries biologist, I have 

worked for a non-profit environmental organization, the Nature Conservancy, and 

now with the levee district, a career path that on the surface may appear somewhat 

convoluted and disconnected, but in reality, considering the problems we face, a fortunate series of events. It has afforded me an opportunity to view the issues affect-
63

ing our State from an academic, business, and environmental perspective; all of 

which must work together to turn back current trends and very dire predictions. 

Academically, we should deal with coastal land loss with practical research, capable of complementing and enhancing desperately needed projects. The academic 

community must work cooperatively to implement projects and share information 

with a focus on constructive research, not conducting studies simply for their intrinsic scientific value. Projects must be put on the ground to stem the ravaging effects 

that subsidence, sea-level rise and salt water intrusion impart continuously, even 

now as we discuss, debate, and study these issues. 

Fixing our problems will require the environmental community to accept seemingly unnatural, contrived, and untested projects in order to establish a functioning 

system that will enable systemic long-term solutions to the problems we face; keeping in mind that we are in this predicament because of unnatural, insensitive, and 

unintentional events, which should not be repeated, but may be necessary to achieve 

the preferred result. 

From an economic perspective, industries that have traditionally relied on convenience or unfettered access must understand that implementing necessary fixes will 

require sacrifices. It will necessitate changes in ways we traditionally conducted 

business, and rely on innovation and least damaging alternatives in oil and gas extraction and exploration, and adapting to changing fisheries resources that will result from habitat modifications. 

Unfortunately, our future will require a ‘‘line in the sand’’ drawn from a certain 

point. A point where we will stand and fight, retreat no more and do what we must 

to sustain ourselves. Just like the city of New Orleans, our coastal communities will 

require some form of protection through levees, walls, or embankments in order to 

survive. The line will be drawn, either by persistent degrading forces or through 

consensus. Coastal communities are retreating and we have lost several, and several 

more will not be around 20-40 years from now. 

In Terrebonne Parish, we face a land loss rate of 10 square miles per year. We 

have one of the highest land loss rates in the Nation and our line in the sand is 

the Morganza to the Gulf Hurricane Protection project. The Morganza Project will 

provide hurricane protection for Terrebonne and Lafourche Parishes, their 200,000 

residents and infrastructure. The Morganza to the Gulf Project is a leaky system, 

which sounds odd if you consider this strictly as a flood protection system; however, 

leaky is the ideal way to build such a project in this environment. The obvious concern with building a project of this magnitude in coastal Louisiana is the potential 

impacts to wetlands, wetlands we intend to protect and restore. The Morganza 

Project is sensitive to these environmental concerns. We are designing this project 

in the most environmentally friendly way practicable. We will achieve this by constructing our levees, floodgates and environmental structures along existing hydrologic barriers, such as drainage levees, and adjacent roads minimizing impacts to 

wetlands and enhancing the existing hydrologic regime. 

In addition, the Morganza Project will provide flood protection capable of adaptively managing the wetlands within and around the system. The lynch pin of the 

whole project is the lock on the Houma Navigational Canal. The HNC Lock is the 

key feature necessary to protect, maintain, and restore wetlands within the 

Terrebonne Basin. This lock is considered a critical restoration component within 

the Coastal 2050 Plan, Louisiana Coastal Area Study, and by the Morganza Habitat 

Evaluation Team. These studies agree that the Houma Navigational Canal lock can 

effectively assist restoration efforts of adjacent wetlands in a systemic, comprehensive approach. The Houma Navigational Canal Lock is a case study of how a flood 

protection project feature can serve as an adaptive management tool. 

Initially, the Houma Navigational Canal lock was considered only as a Morganza 

Project component, designed to: protect thousands of residents and businesses from 

a 100-year storm event, provide safe harbor for navigation, protect the local drinking water supply, and reduce salt-water intrusion. The lock has evolved into a significant environmental structure which can substantially reduce the devastating impacts of salt water intrusion, maximize and efficiently utilize available freshwater 

from the Atchafalaya River to enhance, restore, and reestablish fresh and brackish 

water marsh within this coastal environment and oh, by the way, can protect the 

citizens from a category 3 storm event. The HNC lock will work collaboratively with 

the 12 other environmental control structures along the Morganza alignment to protect and maintain wetlands within the Terrebonne Basin. 

We are anxiously waiting WRDA Authorization for remaining portions of this 

project that must be authorized. The citizens of Terrebonne cannot continue to wait, 

nor are they relying solely on Federal and State financing. In fact, we are the first 

south Louisiana community to pass a local tax to support coastal restoration. Our 

citizens have assessed themselves a cents sales tax generating over $4 million per 
64

year that can only be spent on the Morganza to the Gulf Project. Some may say 

that this is not coastal restoration but flood protection, but I can assure you that 

from where I come from we do not differentiate between the two. To us this project 

is coastal restoration. 

The Morganza to the Gulf project can serve as a model for designing a system 

that can protect people, infrastructure, and the environment. The Morganza Habitat 

Evaluation Team composed primarily of State and Federal regulatory agencies, will 

adaptively manage this project by manipulating floodgates and environmental structures throughout the project life. This dynamic ecosystem can never be managed by 

a one size fits all solution. 

We have a sufficient amount of information to begin putting restoration projects 

on the ground; the question is do we have the political will to get it done. To put 

into operation these large-scale projects included within the LCA study, it will require a trial and error approach, and we must understand that there will be failures. These efforts are necessary to achieve success. Unfortunately, someone’s constituency or user group will be affected which could impact one’s standing, government funding, and fear of legal prosecution. We must all have the courage and compassion to ensure that our efforts are successful. We are all too confident in the consequences of doing nothing; we cannot let the fear of uncertainty encourage inaction. 

I appreciate the efforts of Senator Vitter, and our Congressional delegation for 

funding included within the Energy bill, and I respectfully request your support and 

passage of WRDA, which will enable us to protect our coast and our citizens. Help 

us to hang on to a unique national treasure, an area rich in diversity, culture and 

resources. 

Benjamin Franklin said, ‘‘When the well’s dry, we know the worth of water.’’ Let 

us not have to lose this valuable resource before the Nation truly appreciates its 

worth. 

STATEMENT OF ALEXIS DUVAL, CHAIRWOMEN OF THE BOARD, HOUMA-TERRBONNE

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Good Morning. My name is Alexis Duval. I am the board chair of the HoumaTerrebonne Chamber of Commerce. Thank you for the opportunity to be here this 

morning speaking on a topic of critical importance to all citizens of Terrebonne Parish. My comments this morning will be directed to the coastal situation affecting the 

Houma-Terrebonne area. I live in Houma which is about 55 miles southwest of New 

Orleans, as the crow flies. 

The plight of coastal Louisiana has been a topic of lengthy discussion and much 

concern for chamber members for many, many years. Coastal erosion crosses all barriers. It cuts through all spectrums of our society. It affects the economy, infrastructure, as well as the quality of our very lives. These effects are far reaching, they 

cross parish boundaries, they cross state boundaries, they effect the entire Nation. 

We have all heard the statistics relating the amount of land lost over time, as 

well as that being lost as we sit here in this very room. There is no other area in 

this great country that is losing land as rapidly as the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary. Terrebonne Parish constitutes a large portion of that estuary system. 

Terrebonne Parish is unique as to both the causes of its coastal erosion problem 

and the solutions needed to contain that very erosion. Please note I said contain. 

We are very aware that efforts need to be focused on maintaining the land mass 

we have in place and doing everything humanly possible to minimize, if not eliminate any future land loss. 

The causes have been studied and are well known. Lack of sediment deposits from 

natural flooding events eliminated by the containment of the Mississippi River and 

the Atachafalya River, salt water intrusion, sea level rise, subsidence, the unintended affects from oil and gas exploration, to name a few. 

Terrebonne Parish lies between the Mississippi River (to our east) and the 

Atachafalya River (to our west). Because we are so far removed from these two sediment sources, restoration efforts will be the most costly. It will take a large scale 

diversion project to help the eastern part of our parish, while smaller scale diversion 

projects have been studied for the western part of the parish. 

Due to lost land, Terrebonne Parish residents are more at risk from storm surge 

because unlike our neighboring parishes we have no hurricane protection levee. The 

chamber fully supports the LCA Restoration Plan, however, we recognize that any 

comprehensive restoration plan will take years to build and implement. Therefore, 

our greatest priority is to ensure that a hurricane protection levee is built which 

offers the most instant protection to life and property. Authorization for a hurricane 
65

protection levee, Morganza to the Gulf, is presently contained in the WRDA bill that 

will be considered by Congress in the next few months. It is vital to the safety and 

well being to the 100,000 plus citizens of Terrebonne Parish that the Morganza to 

the Gulf levee system is authorized and funded. 

Efforts for coastal restoration in Terrebonne Parish will not be successful unless 

the effects of the Houma Navigational Canal (‘‘HNC’’) are addressed. Running 

North-South the HNC cuts the lower half of our parish in two. The LCA near term 

plan does not authorize any major project for Terrebonne Parish. Major projects contained in the original LCA plan include major sediment diversion projects from the 

Mississippi traveling westward and the Atachfalya traveling eastward and a lock for 

the HNC. These large scale projects must be addressed and funded. The HNC lock 

is presently being designed. 

My husband and I are both life long residents of Terrebonne Parish. We raised 

our family in Terrebonne Parish. If I convey anything to you today, it is a plea for 

our safety and well being. As a business woman who is concerned for the well being 

of the infrastructure and economy of our parish, and as a mother, who is concerned 

for the safety of her family, my goal is to impart to you the urgency of our situation. 

Unlike a wildfire, earthquake, or tsunami, the disaster occurring in our parish is 

insidious. Since it is occurring gradually it has not drawn the attention of other natural disasters and we have let the problem fester until it has become malignant. 

Without a quick and decisive treatment this cancer will kill our community, and in 

the event of a major hurricane, will contribute to the death of many of our citizens. 

Monday morning as I watched the Channel 4 Eyewitness Morning News, I was 

struck by comments made by President Bush. The comments were part of a taped 

segment commenting on the President’s scheduled talk to the Veterans of Foreign 

War. I quote, ‘‘we must deal with threats before they fully materialize’’ While I understand the President’s remarks were made in context of the War on Terror, I 

found they applied to our coastal plight as well. Terrebonne Parish and all of coastal 

Louisiana are at war with Mother Nature and she has weapons of mass destruction. 

We are currently losing that war. Without large scale Federal help, we are doomed. 

I applaud the efforts of our congressional delegation, and especially Senator 

Vitter, for the passage of the Energy bill with the revenue sharing provision. I know 

you realize that that passage was only the first step. I, along with members of the 

Houma-Terrebonne Chamber of Commerce stand ready to help you in any way possible to ensure passage of a WRDA bill authorizing both the LCA and Morganza to 

the Gulf projects. 

STATEMENT OF SHEA PENLAND, DIRECTOR AND PROFESSOR, PONTCHARTRAIN INSTI- TUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, AND CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY

AND GEOPHYSICS, UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS

THE LOUISIANA LAND LOSS CRISIS IN AMERICA’S COASTAL HEARTLAND

Coastal Louisiana lost more than 1500 square miles of land in the 20th century 

and the rate of loss has averaged 20 square miles per year since the 1990’s. Coastal 

land loss threatens the existence of Louisiana’s natural framework, its resource base 

and the human fabric of the United States in the Gulf of Mexico. Without the implementation of coastal restoration efforts in Louisiana proportional to the magnitude 

of loss, the largest river delta in America, the Mississippi, will erode and subside 

away beneath the waters of the Gulf. Without putting a massive program of land 

creation and ecological restoration into effect immediately, the existence of the Mississippi River’s fertile crescent is threatened and endangered for generations to 

come. 

THE CAUSES OF LOUISIANA’S COASTAL LAND LOSS

The causes of coastal land loss in Louisiana are complex. In order to implement 

a successful regional coastal restoration program in Louisiana we must understand 

the causes of land loss. Regionally, hundreds of years of flood control, hydrologic 

modification, subsidence and storms are the overriding causes for the environmental 

collapse and loss of land in coastal Louisiana. Locally, on the time-scale of decades, 

oil/gas activities, navigation, and hurricanes have had the most devastating impact 

on Louisiana’s coast. 

COASTAL LAND LOSS SOLUTIONS

Since 1990 we have engaged in the use of a variety of restoration tools through 

the Coastal Wetland Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) of 1990. 

Concurrently, the State of Louisiana and other federal agencies have built site spe-
66

cific projects that have furthered our understanding and insight into our coastal restoration capabilities. From my perspective, we must practice Adaptive Management 

now as we move forward from coastal restoration projects of local-scale to a vision 

of regional coastal restoration in Louisiana.Our existing, future, and proposed coastal restoration programs must be integrated and synchronized. If the metric of our 

state’s coastal crisis is land loss then our metric of success should be land gain. Between the 1980’s and 1990’s our federal partners measured the rate of coastal land 

loss at 20 square miles a year. After 15 years of CWPPRA and other Federal/State 

restoration projects, these agencies indicate the rate of land loss continues at a rate 

of 20 square miles per year. 

Our restoration experience has demonstrated that some restoration tools were 

very effective and some did not perform as expected. An important lesson we 

learned from the implementation of these projects is that their social impacts cannot 

be ignored. Another important lesson learned is that the restoration tools we select 

must produce benefits on a generational or decadal time-scale. Diversions and other 

solutions using large-scale delta switching processes work on time-scales of multiple 

decades or centuries, just as the Mississippi River built it’s delta naturally over the 

last several millenniums. Dedicated dredging and pipeline slurry offer us the capabilities to build land quickly on a decadal scale without the adverse effects of large 

volumes of freshwater. Small diversion iversions offer the opportunity to sustain 

newly created landscapes after they are built. 

For the LCA ecosystem restoration plan proposed for authorization through the 

Water Resources Development Act of 2005, the Near-Term Critical Ecosystem Restoration Features provide the combined opportunity of dedicated dredging/pipeline 

slurry and diversions from the Mississippi River. Of particular interest is the LCA 

Barataria Basin Barrier Shoreline Restoration Feature NO. 3 which will provide our 

greatest opportunity to implement a regional pipeline slurry restoration project and 

to learn from this effort. The Fourchon Regional Restoration Initiative (FRRI), a 

consortium of the Wisner Land Donation, Chevron, Greater Lafourche Port Commission, Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary Program, 

Lafourche Parish, the City of New Orleans, and the University of New Orleans, has 

organized to support the implementation of this important project and to remove 

any scientific uncertainty that the LCA Barataria Barrier Shoreline Restoration 

Feature NO. 3 should be the first step in Louisiana’s vision of regional ecosystem 

restoration through the WRDA of 2005. 

UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS SCIENCE AND EDUCATION SUPPORT

UNO is supporting these State and Federal coastal restoration initiatives through 

the establishment of the Center for Hazards Assessment, Response, and Technology 

(CHART) and the Pontchartrain Institute for Environmental Sciences (PIES). 

CHART and PIES provide expert science support for planning, project assessment, 

and adaptive management. Through UNO’s Academic Departments new focused degree programs are being implemented to provide the critically needed education and 

training for the professional work force necessary to restore coastal Louisiana. 

STATEMENT OF RANDY LANCTOT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LOUISIANA

WILDLIFE FEDERATION

Mr. Chairman and Members of the committee: 

Thank you for your interest in the daunting problem of coastal land loss that confronts our State and Nation, and for taking the time to learn more about ongoing 

and proposed efforts to halt that loss and restore some of it back to functioning, productive coastal barriers and wetlands. My name is Randy Lanctot. I have been privileged to serve as executive director of the Louisiana Wildlife Federation, the state’s 

oldest and one of its largest organizations of sportsmen and citizen conservationists, 

for more than 25 years. During that time, a lot of progress has been made in understanding the causes of coastal land loss and implementing strategies to combat it. 

But mostly what we have learned is that we are losing ground despite effective efforts, and that more and larger efforts must be applied to reverse the loss. 

If you have reviewed the Louisiana Coastal Area study (LCA), you know that 

much of the southern part of Louisiana was built by the deltas of the Mississippi 

River as it whipped back and forth over the continental shelf, and that land loss 

and land gain is normal for a delta system. But under natural conditions, loss is 

balanced by gain, and that loss and gain occurs slowly over hundreds and thousands 

of years—a time frame long enough to invite disregard for the future evolution and 

inevitable loss of delta lands. The immediate concern of the European explorers and 

immigrants to the region that is now South Louisiana was to keep floodwaters at 
67

bay, exploit the region’s natural resources and establish commerce to support a 

growing society. That familiar paradigm is common to communities across America. 

But the Delta’s remarkable abundance and dynamic and challenging geology sets 

Louisiana apart from them all. I might add that we are more than happy to be different because of our lively and creative cultures, our great musical heritage, our 

wonderful cuisine, and carefree life view—all nurtured by our unique location on 

one of the world’s great deltas, but we are not so pleased to be different because 

we are the victims of losing our land to the sea. 

Land loss on a deteriorating delta is a natural process caused by wind, wave, tide, 

compaction of organic soils, subsidence and geologic faults. That loss is dramatically 

accelerated by the ‘‘people effect’’—dredging for access and navigation channels; removal of subsurface minerals; unenlightened engineering of bulkheads, channels 

and dredged spoil deposition; impoundments, leveeing that impairs natural, deltasustaining hydrology and sediment delivery; sea level rise and vessel traffic—all of 

which are prominent contributors to coastal land loss. Many of these activities, of 

course, have kept us dry and generated products and wealth that have contributed 

to the local and national economies. 

I mentioned a ‘‘deteriorating’’ delta. It is important to keep in mind that we have 

settled in a delta whose river by now would have shifted its channel to a new and 

shorter route to the Gulf were it not for levees and water control structures that, 

along with channel maintenance, have directed the sediments that built the delta 

into the deep waters off the continental shelf. Understanding that informs the 

thinking behind many of the projects and concepts in the LCA. 

The impacts of coastal erosion are the loss of tens of thousands of acres of wetlands and headlands in a domino effect fashion; loss of real estate and its economic 

value; loss of wetland-based fish and wildlife habitat and its dependent wildlife and 

fisheries productivity, along with the related social and economic impacts of those 

losses (seafood, recreational hunting and fishing and other wildlife related recreation, tourism,) including employment opportunities; increased risk of flooding and 

associated costs of insurance and disaster relief; disruption and relocation of communities; outmigration of Louisiana citizens; increased costs to establish and maintain infrastructure, including infrastructure critical to energy production. 

The toll is in dollars, of course, but it is much greater than that. The particular 

interest of the Louisiana Wildlife Federation in coastal land loss is the inevitable 

loss of the fish and wildlife as their habitats disappear. As an organization that represents folks who are out in the field using and enjoying the natural resources of 

the state, we have a big stake in halting land loss and restoring the productive ecosystem that has made Louisiana the ‘‘Sportsman’s Paradise.’’

The LCA report presents a number of approaches to dealing with coastal land 

loss. One that has been rejected is GET OUT. Another is: Do nothing and take your 

chances. We concur with the LCA on that. But one consideration that deserves more 

emphasis is the need to rethink and reengage society’s relationship with the Mississippi River Coastal Delta ecosystem to incorporate a larger measure of flexibility 

and uncertainty with respect to habitation and economic activity. We must adopt 

an attitude that will allow us to reconcile our expectations with the necessary 

changes we will have to make, as individuals and as a society, to achieve a sustainable coastal ecosystem. To put it bluntly, we have to be willing and prepared to get 

out of the way of the projects that will be needed to accomplish that task. In particular, as coastal restoration efforts impact coastal lands and waters, hunters, fishers, and other affected interests like landowners, will be called upon to cooperate 

and accept fair consideration for any disproportionate losses that they will sustain 

and that are inevitable as the kind of aggressive coastal restoration efforts that are 

needed are applied. So far, that road has been a little rocky, but hopefully, the lessons learned from the past will smooth the way for the future. 

‘‘Attitude is everything’’ as the saying goes, and assuming all attitudes are adjusted to be in sync with the coastal restoration program, the solutions proposed by 

the LCA and efforts to follow can be accomplished, especially if we follow the fundamental foundation of success: ‘‘First, do no harm.’’ Activities that contribute to coastal land loss can be limited and or re/designed and re/engineered to reduce impacts. 

This applies particularly to dredging/navigation and levee work and activities that 

reduce stabilizing vegetative structure. Requiring that local, state, and federal activities/projects, including private activities that are regulated by Federal/State Government, are consistent with conserving and restoring the coast also falls under the 

‘‘do no harm’’ category. The LCA report contains an impressive statement of objectives and principles in Section 3.2 that is consistent with that concept in most respects and we commend the Corps for making that commitment. 

Other solutions are to remediate problems where feasible (backfilling/plugging canals, terracing and sediment accumulation [Christmas tree] projects to reduce ero-
68

1The Mississippi River has created and supports more coastal wetlands than occur anywhere 

else in the contiguous 48 States. World rank of the Mississippi River/tributaries in volume of 

discharge-6th, sediment discharge-3rd, length-2nd, aerial extent of drainage basin-3rd (receiving 

surface water runoff from 31 States and 3 Canadian provinces or 41 percent of contiguous 

United States). 

sion and rebuild shoreline and marshland); armor shorelines as a temporary fix to 

buy time to implement a systemic solution; armor channel banks and regulate vessel traffic to prevent bank erosion; apply all material dredged to establish or maintain navigation in a beneficial way to restore eroded vegetated wetlands; enhance 

stabilization of newly restored or created land with plantings of suitable native species of grasses and shrubs; strategically preserve/restore (assuming the availability 

of a safe and an economic source of sand) barrier islands that serve as the scaffolding for interior marsh restoration; within the water and sediment budget of the 

Mississippi River sufficient to support river-borne commerce, divert as much river 

water and sediment as possible to establish vegetated wetlands in shallow coastal 

lakes and bays and sustain or restore freshwater flows in the most efficient manner 

(such as pulsing) to maintain wetlands along the isohaline line. 

With a little informed contemplation, stating the solutions to coastal erosion is 

easy. Getting the political and financial support to do the work is a little more challenging. So, in an effort to inform and educate the people from all around the United 

States about Louisiana and our coastal land loss challenge, Governor Blanco and 

the America’s WETLAND Campaign initiated a new outreach effort this week—

‘‘Save America’s Wetland: Write Now’’ to encourage all of us to let our friends and 

colleagues throughout America know about what is at stake here and how we all 

are bonded to the outcome. So, here is our effort to engage the members of the committee and citizens throughout the country in the hope that you will pitch in and 

lend a hand. Thank you for the opportunity to make this presentation. 

Close your eyes and imagine this beautiful, wonderful country of—ours ocean to 

ocean, border to border. Imagine you are a drop of rain or flake of snow gathering 

a little bit of prairie soil, of Rocky Mountain granite, of piney woods’ sand, or a tiny 

piece of golden leaf born deep in a hardwood cove at the foot of the Appalachians, 

caught in a torrent, rollercoastering down to the Ohio, the Tennessee, the Wisconsin, Illinois, Des Moines or Arkansas, the Missouri, the Red—on to the Big River 

as it bends and curls back on itself, down to the Gulf of Mexico. 

When you arrive on the Delta you join pieces and parts of the rest of America, 

nourishing a landscape that is more waterscape, thronging with birds and fish and 

wetlands as far as you can see. Someone says Comment ca va, mon cher? (How are 

you, my friend?), and you are home—home to the coastal delta of the Mississippi 

River, an ecosystem so immense it is difficult to know and comprehend by experience so vast, productive, and unique in America that it only can be compared to 

itself.1

People have always come to the Delta to experience the bounty—the food, fun, 

revelry—to unwind. They know it by ‘‘Laissez les bon temps rouler’’, by the good 

times. It’s no accident, or merely a consequence of aggressive tourism promotion. It’s 

the cultural manifestation of the natural abundance served up by the River and the 

wetlands. 

To experience this immense ecosystem, you have to get in a boat, maybe a pirogue, and get out in it; but it can be rough going. This is no ‘‘prairie pothole’’. It 

goes on for thousands of acres and scores of miles as far as you can see. The first 

thing you notice, after the aroma of flatsedge and marsh grass and mudflats and 

brine (depending on where in the complex you happen to be) is the life; the birds—

rails, stilts, waterfowl, herons/egrets, seagulls, terns, pelicans and masses of other 

waders and shorebirds. There’s gators aplenty in the fresh and intermediate wetlands, more than anywhere else in the world. And bugs, of course—the food chain 

has to have its underclass. And, in season, there’s solitude, serenity, sunrise and 

sunset punctuated with the often silent trading of the delta’s dependent creatures. 

When its extent and biological productivity is considered, it is very apparent that 

this is an ecological engine of enormous proportions, a ‘‘bread and butter ecosystem 

with no match in the ‘‘Lower 48’’—and it’s fading away—inexorably, insidiously, 

sometimes radically when the gulf gets nasty. 

The continuing loss of MRCD wetlands presents a severe threat to the infrastructure necessary to develop and transport energy resources. Pipelines traversing the 

wetlands supply 30 percent of the Nation’s refining capacity and serve as the onshore base that provides logistical support for 75 percent of the oil/gas prospects in 

the Gulf of Mexico. Roads, domestic water supplies and communities that are home 

to two million people are threatened by the loss of MRCD wetlands. 
69

The navigation capacity of waterways currently carrying 16 percent of the Nation’s waterborne commerce and the viability of four ports that, combined, handle 

more tonnage than any single port in the world is jeopardized by the loss of MRCD 

wetlands. 

There are over 500,000 acres of State and national wildlife refuges in Louisiana’s 

coastal zone; five million migratory waterfowl winter in Louisiana —50 percent of 

the waterfowl using the Mississippi Flyway and 20 percent of waterfowl using all 

flyways. (In past years, up to 84 percent of Mississippi Flyway migratory waterfowl 

have wintered in Louisiana.) The ongoing massive disintegration of MRCD wetlands 

threatens this world class habitat for migratory birds and the nursery for coastal 

and Gulf of Mexico fish that supports the entire Gulf region. Estimates of the value 

of the natural resources that will be lost over the next 50 years due to coastal wetland loss range up to $100 billion. 

The loss of Mississippi River coastal delta wetlands is due primarily to the alteration of the natural geology and hydrodynamics that created the ecosystem. Channels and levees for navigation and flood protection have disrupted the capability of 

the system to maintain itself. The River, which once overflowed its banks on a routine basis, now is confined to a channel all the way to the deep water at the edge 

of the continental shelf where its load is discharged and lost to the fathoms of the 

Gulf and therefore, the freshwater and sediment that built the MRCD wetlands are 

no longer available to sustain them, to offset their natural erosion and subsidence. 

These facts make coastal restoration using the River and its freshwater and sediment doable. 

That’s the plan. Will you help? 

STATEMENT OF ROY FRANCIS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR LA1 COALITION

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Roy Francis, and I am 

the Executive Director of the LA1 Coalition, Inc. The Coalition is a non-profit organization created in 1997, by community leaders with one goal—improve the infrastructure servicing Port Fourchon, LA. The founding members realized the threat 

to this critical energy infrastructure due to coastal land loss. 

I have worked in coastal zone management, flood protection and coastal infrastructure since I obtained my degree in geology in 1992. I feel I have come to understand the ripple effect of coastal land loss to infrastructure and the industries associated with oil and gas production. Coastal land loss is not only threatening our environment, but our very existence as a community. 

One of the greatest threats to infrastructure is to Louisiana Highway One, a twolane winding road that is the only means of land access to Port Fourchon, which 

currently services approximately 16 percent of this Nations energy supply. LA1 is 

only three feet above sea-level and is subject to 8 to 10 foot storm surges. The highway provides access for 6,000 offshore workers and their equipment to support 75 

percent of Federal OCS activities in the Gulf of Mexico. 

The Leeville Bridge, the weakest link of LA1, was built in 10 feet of water. It now 

exists in 40 feet of water. It is the most scoured bridge in the State due to the water 

exchange between the Barateria and Terrebonne basins. All the land that surrounded the bridge has disappeared. 

There is now a real threat to the oil and gas structures built on land that is no 

more. Hundreds of structures producing energy everyday and thousands of miles of 

pipeline buried underground are now exposed in open water. The pipelines are 

threatened by wave energy and impact from marine vessels everyday. 

One of the major oil and gas companies that operates at Port Fourchon, transports over 600,000 barrels of oil through pipelines in coastal Louisiana. They spend 

nearly $5 million per year reacting to coastal erosion; repairing bulkheads, relocating pipelines and marking pipeline crossings. Another company’s main offshore 

support base is in Leeville, an area that has sank 14 inches in the last 20 years. 

Not only is the country’s domestic supply threatened, but 13 percent of this nation’s imported crude oil is offloaded at Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP) located 

in the coastal area of Lafourche Parish. The 48 inch pipelines are connected to 35 

percent of United States’ refinery capacity. Remember, a refinery has not been built 

in this country in decades and today are operating at 96 percent capacity. 

The impact to LA1 affects more then the Nation’s energy production. This highway was built on the Bayou Lafourche Ridge and is the now the dividing line between the Nation’s two most productive estuaries—the Barataria and the 

Terrebonne basins. About 20 percent of the state’s total catch goes to market by way 

of LA1—in a State that leads the lower 48 in fisheries production. The loss of these 

wetlands is a loss to fisheries production. 
70

Another impact is to our water supply. In 2000, saltwater intruded into Lafourche 

Parish’s water pumping system 50 miles inland via a channel in a neighboring parish. For the first time, the people of South Louisiana had a taste of coastal land 

loss. The paper mill had to shut down, and the oil and gas industry which uses over 

20 percent of the parish’s water supply for drilling activities was affected. We 

couldn’t drink the water, and the children bathed in saltwater. All of this could have 

been avoided with a lock/floodgate on this channel. 

Our flood protection levee systems are also at risk. Historically, the marshes 

would act as buffers for wave energy against the base of the levees. Today, open 

water surrounds parts of the levees, and daily wave action is eroding the earthen 

ring levees. The flood gates on the levees have to be closed earlier and more often, 

trapping marine vessels outside of levee systems. 

The Louisiana coast is a blue collar coast. It is not a place we visit. It is the place 

were we live, work and play. It is no longer just about the birds and the plants. 

Coastal land loss is now affecting every aspect of our lives. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN LOPEZ, DIRECTOR OF COASTAL SUSTAINABILITY, LAKE

PONTCHARTRAIN BASIN FOUNDATION, METAIRIE, LOUISIANA

Good Morning and thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony to this esteemed committee. My name is Dr. John Lopez and I’m director of coastal Sustainability for the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation. The Lake Pontchartrain Basin 

Foundation is a private, non-profit organization whose mission is to restore and protect the Lake Pontchartrain Basin in Southeastern Louisiana. My comments today 

are a summary of our draft Comprehensive Habitat Management Plan for the Pontchartrain Basin. 

The greater Pontchartrain Basin includes a watershed extending southward from 

central Mississippi to the distant wetlands at the mouth of the Mississippi River 

in southern Louisiana. The Pontchartrain Basin in Louisiana was analyzed to establish the habitat baseline conditions, historical impairments and future restoration 

needs. The objective of the Comprehensive-Habitat Management Plan is to present 

a blueprint for restoration that will direct progress toward restoring the historic 

form and function of the Pontchartrain Basin habitats in Louisiana. 

The Pontchartrain Basin ecology is dominated by an estuarine system that is essential to the future of southeast Louisiana. The Pontchartrain Basin is 19 percent 

(9,700 square miles) of Louisiana’s area and has within it 46 percent of the State’s 

population (or 2.1 million people). Based on imagery from 1992 to 1995, the entire 

basin was estimated to hold 2,100 square miles of marshes and swamps (including 

the Pearl River alluvial swamps) (Handley and others, 2001). If you include open 

water lakes with the wetlands that altogether compose the Pontchartrain Basin estuary, the extent of the estuary is 5,800 square miles. From 1932 to 2001, 415 

square miles of these wetlands were converted to open water or upland habitat, and 

we have discovered that the rate of loss has dramatically increased in the last decade (1990-2001). Because the Pontchartrain Basin contains the great port cities of 

New Orleans and Baton Rouge, the fate of the Pontchartrain Basin is of national 

significance. Decades of poor stewardship of the region’s natural resources triggered 

the founding of the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation (LPBF) in 1989, which 

was given the mission to restore and preserve the Pontchartrain Basin. 

In 2004, a Comprehensive Habitat Management Plan (CHMP)-Draft Committee 

was created to evaluate impairments and restoration alternatives for habitats in the 

Pontchartrain Basin. This included representation from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency, LSU Ag 

Center, University of New Orleans, Southeastern Louisiana University and Louisiana Department of Natural Resources along with the Foundation. 

The committee began deliberations in January 2004 and submitted a draft report 

to 11 expert 3rd party reviewers in July 2005. The reviewers individually reviewed 

the CHMP draft report or appropriate sections related to their expertise. Their comments were reviewed and appropriate changes were made by the CHMP Draft Committee. Public meetings are to be held, in which the draft report will be presented. 

The Pontchartrain Basin habitats range from pine upland to estuarine to marine. 

For purposes of CHMP plan development, the Basin was divided into four Sub-basins including: Upland Sub-basin (north of Interstate 12), Upper Sub-basin (Lake 

Maurepas region), Middle Sub-basin (Lake Pontchartrain region) and Lower Subbasin (St. Bernard and Plaquemines Parishes). The following section summarizes 

the proposed restoration for each of the four Sub-basins. 
71

UPLAND SUB-BASIN FOREST RECOMMENDATIONS (NORTH OF INTERSTATE 12)

The overall goal in the Upland Sub-basin is to expand the current range of longleaf pine upland forests, flatwood savannahs and associated habitats while expanding the awareness of these lost habitats to a public which has never known the 

park-like virgin pine forests. Specific goals call for expansion of existing conservation areas to a minimum of 5,000 acres each and creation of one or two large conservation areas (ca. 50,000 acres each) where landscape-scale, fire-dependent ecosystems can be re-established with indigenous flora and fauna. Establishment of a 

prescribed fire council is recommended as a key means to facilitate and expand effective use of prescribed fire. The red-cockaded woodpecker and other rare, threatened or endangered species warrant additional efforts to reestablish long leaf pine 

and associated habitat and expand their populations. 

UPLAND SUB-BASIN RIVERINE RECOMMENDATIONS (NORTH OF INTERSTATE 12)

The rivers and streams of the north shore are highly degraded and their history 

of environmental impacts is poorly documented. A primary recommendation is to 

document historical and ongoing impacts from mining activities in particular. Many 

mine sites (sand and gravel dredging) should be targeted for remediation to improve 

riverine habitats and water quality. Freshwater mussels have been significantly reduced and further protection and habitat restoration is necessary to re-establish the 

range of mussels including the endangered inflated heelsplitter mussel (Potamilus 

inflatus). In addition to mining, the Bogue Chitto and Pearl Rivers have been impacted by the Pearl River Navigation project. Hydrologic restoration is recommended to re-establish the natural migration of fish, including the threatened 

Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi). 

UPPER SUB-BASIN (LAKE MAUREPAS AND ADJACENT WETLANDS)

It is recommended that the area of wetlands in the Upper Sub-basin, which lies 

on or adjacent to the natural levee of the Mississippi River, be reestablished with 

its natural connection to the river by spring reintroductions into the wetlands. 

These alluvial river swamps would be sustained by several small diversions recommended between Baton Rouge and Garyville where the Hope Canal project is to 

be constructed. The reintroductions are intended to increase plant growth (primary 

productivity) and rebuild a mature Bald cypress—Tupelo (Taxodium distichumNyssa aquatica) swamp. The benefited areas should be in conservation. Breaching 

of the bank of the Amite River Diversion Canal is recommended to increase circulation into the adjacent swamp. It is recommended that the wetlands north of lake 

Maurepas be optimally managed using treated sewage or stormwater runoff, where 

appropriate, to introduce nutrients and freshwater. 

Several position statements are also included for the Upper Sub-basin. Key statements are the continued ban on shell dredging and any commercial dredging within 

Lake Maurepas. The continued use of pipeline/powerline corridors is supported. The 

policies recommended by the state’s Science Working Group for Coast Wetland Forests are supported, but it is also recommended that through acquisitions or other 

means cypress logging is discontinued in non-sustainable ‘‘relic’’ forests and that a 

moratorium is placed on other areas of cypress logging in the Pontchartrain Basin 

until BMP’s are implemented assuring sustainable harvest of cypress forests. Avoidance, BMP’s and local mitigation are recommended to prevent further loss of wetland habitat by urbanization. 

MIDDLE SUB-BASIN (LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN AND ADJACENT WETLANDS)

The wetlands positioned between Lake Pontchartrain and the Mississippi River 

are considered vital to sustaining the ecology of lake Pontchartrain because it is 

through these wetlands that river reintroductions may occur most beneficially to 

Lake Pontchartrain. Re-establishment of the detrital food base for Lake Pontchartrain can be accomplished by freshwater reintroductions into these wetlands to 

stimulate primary productivity and detrital export. As a result, the Lake is expected 

to increase in secondary productivity and fisheries. Several small diversions are recommended, including three local wetland reintroductions, which use the Bonnet 

Carre’ Spillway corridor. 

Segments of Lake Pontchartrain’s natural shoreline (littoral) habitat should be restored along the south, southeast and northwest shorelines. This recommendation 

includes marsh creation and re-expansion of SAV extent. Some other key local 

projects are the restoration of estuarine fisheries in Bayou St. John and an interim 

project to construct a sill in the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal (IHNC) or Lake 

Pontchartrain, which would reduce the 100 square-mile dead zone and restore envi-
72

ronmental benefit provided by clams. Avoidance of wetlands, BMP’s to reduce wetland impact, and local mitigation when wetlands are impacted are the recommended 

order of priority to prevent further loss of wetland habitat by urbanization. 

Several position statements are also included for the Middle Sub-basin. Key statements are the continued ban on shell dredging and any commercial dredging within 

Lake Pontchartrain. The continued use of existing pipeline/powerline corridors is 

supported for justified expansion of these facilities. The continued ban on new oil 

and gas leasing in Lake Pontchartrain is supported as is the limited use of gill nets 

as currently legislated. Continued improvements to sewage treatment and 

stormwater systems are strongly endorsed for both the north and south shores of 

Lake Pontchartrain. Beneficial use of treated sewage and stormwater should be pursued wherever wetlands and water quality may be enhanced. The Coastal Wetlands 

Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) has a successful nutria bounty 

program and is supported. However, more vigorous efforts are recommended to reduce other invasive species such as the Chinese tallow (Sapium sebiferum). 

LOWER SUB-BASIN (ST. BERNARD AND PLAQUEMINES PARISHES)

The single greatest man-induced impact to the Pontchartrain Basin estuary was 

the construction of the federally authorized and operated, deep-draft navigation 

channel known as the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO). The MRGO has triggered major shifts in habitats and fisheries, caused wetland loss, increased salinity 

intrusion and created a 100 sqare mile dead zone in Lake Pontchartrain. The total 

area affected by the MRGO is estimated to be 618,000 acres. 

Therefore, the paramount restoration feature of the Lower Sub-basin is to restore 

the integrity of the Bayou la Loutre ridge by reducing the Mississippi River Gulf 

Outlet (MRGO) navigation channel dimensions to Intracoastal Waterway width and 

depth at the Bayou la Loutre ridge. Contraction of the MRGO channel would directly improve the environment by reducing ship wakes and reducing the dead zone 

in Lake Pontchartrain, but also allows the essential opportunity to manage the 

marshes east of the MRGO with river reintroductions. A larger river diversion is 

recommended at Violet which, along with the contraction of the MRGO channel, will 

be designed to reestablish historic habitats of Lake Borgne, Biloxi marsh and, (if 

supported by Mississippi) Mississippi Sound. Discharge from the Caernarvon freshwater diversion may be increased slightly to achieve habitat goals. All reintroductions are recommended to mimic the natural spring flooding with maximum flow 

from April to June. 

The ecologic function of the Chandeleur-Breton barrier island chain should be 

maintained. The role of these islands in reducing wave energy and protecting interior marsh, such as the Biloxi marsh, from wave erosion should be considered in 

the need and design of barrier island restoration. 

The delta region of the Lower Sub-basin should be restored through natural and 

cost effective projects due to the historic and ongoing high rates of wetland loss. 

Crevasse projects and sediment diversions are recommended. The proposed Sediment Trap project (CWPPRA) in the Mississippi River should be moved upriver to 

target areas of need and to be where the soil foundation is superior. If a large scale 

study of the delta is undertaken to examine alternatives such as ‘‘hang-a-left’’ or 

‘‘hang-a-right’’, which would remove navigation from the lower river by a new 

dredged channel located east or west of the Mississippi River, the alternative of selectively closing passes should be evaluated. 

RESEARCH AND DATA NEEDS

Critical research and data needs have been identified for the Pontchartrain Basin. 

This list of 23 items is not meant to be all inclusive but contains significant apparent deficiencies that were identified during discussions and analyses by the draft 

committee. This list is intended to guide research to further the understanding of 

the nature of the Pontchartrain Basin habitats and how these habitats might be restored and sustained. The list includes: Annual mapping of the Lake Pontchartrain 

dead zone; Economics of coastal wetland forests; Fish assemblage research; Acquisition of bathymetry of lakes and passes; Barrier island ecology; Rangia clams in St. 

Bernard and Plaquemines Parishes; Natural oyster reefs; MRGO habitat quality; 

Analysis of accelerated wetland loss; Non-commercial species in St. Bernard and 

Plaquemines Parishes; blue crab (Callinectes sapidus) in Lake Pontchartrain; West 

Indian Manatee (Trichechits manatus); Rio Grande Cichlid (Cichlasoma 

cyanoguttatum) threat, Striped Bass (Morone saxatilis) and Gulf sturgeon 

(Acipenser oxyrinchus), Sea turtles on barrier islands; Hydrologic modeling for habitat restoration; Impact of poorly planned growth; Identification of biotic hotspots; 

Copper contamination in Lake Pontchartrain; Sand and gravel mine impact; Subsid-
73

ence and relative sea-level rise; Mississippi River Delta management study: and a 

10-year reoccurring comprehensive habitat inventory. 

Thank You. That completes my formal comments.

Æ