oastal Wetlands Planning, Protection 

 and Restoration Act (CWPPRA)

The 2012 Evaluation Report to the U.S. Congress

on the Effectiveness of Coastal Wetlands

Planning, Protection and Restoration Act Projects

C

 oastal Wetlands Planning, Protection 

 and Restoration Act (CWPPRA)

The 2012 Evaluation Report to the U.S. Congress

on the Effectiveness of Coastal Wetlands

Planning, Protection and Restoration Act Projects

C

Suggested Citation

Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force. 2012. The 

2012 Evaluation Report to the U.S. Congress on the Effectiveness of Coastal Wetlands 

Planning, Protection and Restoration Act Projects.

Map images provided by the USGS National Wetlands Research Center. Document 

direction and review provided by the 2012 CWPPRA Report to Congress Workgroup.
Documentation

This report is submitted by the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force in accordance with the 

Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA), Title III of Public Law 101-646. This report fulfills 

the CWPPRA mandate, which requires a report to the U.S. Congress every 3 years on the effectiveness of Louisiana’s coastal 

wetland restoration projects.

CWPPRA Task Force Member Agencies

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (represented by the New Orleans District): contact 504–862–2204 or at

http://www.mvn.usace.army.mil/pd/cwppra_mission.htm.

• U.S. Department of the Interior (represented by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service): contact 337–291–3100 or at

http://www.fws.gov/coastal/CoastalGrants/; www.fws.gov/lafayette.

• U.S. Department of Agriculture (represented by the Natural Resources Conservation Service): contact 318–473–7751 or at 

http://www.la.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/cwppra/index.html.

• U.S. Department of Commerce (represented by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine 

Fisheries Service): contact 225–389–0508 or at http://habitat.noaa.gov/restoration/index.html.

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (represented by the Water Quality Protection Division of EPA Region 6): contact 

214–665–7275 or at http://www.epa.gov/region06/6wq/at/cwppra.htm.

• Louisiana’s Governor’s Office (represented by the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority chairman): contact

225–342–3968 or at http://www.coastal.la.gov/.

Web sites

LaCoast, the official CWPPRA Web site, has a complete project listing and technical documents at http://lacoast.gov.

The CWPPRA program is administered through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The CWPPRA organizational chart, standard 

operating procedures, annual Priority Project List (PPL) reports, and administrative proceedings documentation are publicly 

available on the New Orleans District Web site at http://www.mvn.usace.army.mil/pd/cwppra_mission.htm.

Acknowledgments

The Louisiana CWPPRA Task Force wishes to thank Governor of Louisiana Bobby Jindal and the State and Federal Louisiana 

Delegations for their support of this crucial program.

Louisiana currently faces an unprecedented collapse of its entire coastal ecosystem and the vital economic activity 

and unique culture that it supports. 

After 20 years, the Task Force continues to fulfill its role under CWPPRA by implementing a science and 

engineering-based program that extensively engages the public and serves as the Nation’s model for effective and 

efficient coastal restoration. In order to secure the future of Louisiana’s coast, the Task Force and stakeholders 

must share a common vision, one that aligns with State and national priorities.

CWPPRA Mission Statement

ii 
Contents

Executive Summary...................................................................................................................v

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1

CWPPRA Overview................................................................................................................... 4

Louisiana Coastal Restoration Techniques .................................................................... 6

CWPPRA Project Planning and Implementation.................................................................. 8

Barataria Basin Landbridge Shoreline Protection

Project Phase 3 (BA-27c[4]) Construction Unit 8 ................................................. 10

Bayou Dupont Ridge Creation and Marsh Restoration (BA-48)....................... 10

Coastwide Reference Monitoring System (CRMS) ............................................................. 12

Need for a Comprehensive Monitoring System.......................................................... 12

Approach and Design of the CRMS .............................................................................. 12

The CRMS Web Site......................................................................................................... 12

AT-02 Atchafalaya Sediment Delivery (PPL 2) ........................................................... 15

Project Description and Goals................................................................................ 15

Project Assessment................................................................................................... 15

TE-24 Isles Dernieres Restoration Trinity Island (PPL 2)........................................... 17

Project Description and Goals................................................................................ 17

Project Assessment................................................................................................... 17

TV-04 Cote Blanche Hydrologic Restoration (PPL 3)................................................ 19

Project Description and Goals............................................................................... 19

Project Assessment................................................................................................... 19

MR-09 Delta Wide Crevasses (PPL 6) ........................................................................... 23

Project Description and Goals................................................................................ 23

Project Assessment................................................................................................... 23

CS-28 Sabine Refuge Marsh Creation Cycles 1, 2, and 3 (PPL 8)............................. 25

Project Description and Goals................................................................................ 25

Project Assessment................................................................................................... 25

BA-37 Little Lake Shoreline Protection/Dedicated Dredging

Near Round Lake (PPL 11)......................................................................................... 27

Project Description and Goals................................................................................ 27

Project Assessment................................................................................................... 27

Current CWPPRA Program Developments......................................................................... 31

Louisiana State 2012 Coastal Protection and Restoration Master Plan.................... 31

CWPPRA Projects Reaching Their 20-Year Life .......................................................... 31

Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Safety Trust Fund.............................................. 31

Coastal Wetlands Planning Protection and Restoration Act Reauthorization........ 31

CWPPRA Conclusion.............................................................................................................. 32

References ................................................................................................................................. 34

Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................... 34

Appendix 1. CWPPRA Project Types ................................................................................... 35

Appendix 2. Complete List of CWPPRA Projects Authorized Since 1990 ..................... 36

Appendix 3. CWPPRA Educational Videos........................................................................ 36

iii 

xecutive E

Summary:

The 2012 Evaluation Report to the U.S. Congress on the 

Effectiveness of Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection 

and Restoration Act Projects

Louisiana wetlands host a diverse and vibrant ecosystem that serves as a vital environmental, 

economic, and cultural asset for the United States. Wetlands act as a buffer against hurricanes and 

storms. They also store excess floodwater during high rainfall (much like a sponge). Wetlands replenish 

aquifers, and they purify water by filtering out pollutants and absorbing nutrients.

Approximately 30 percent of coastal marshes and 45 percent of all intertidal coastal marshes of the 

lower 48 States are located in Louisiana. Unfortunately, this fragile environment is disappearing at an 

alarming rate. Louisiana has lost up to 40 square miles of marsh per year for several decades—that’s 80 

percent of the Nation’s annual coastal wetland loss. To date, coastal Louisiana has lost a land area equal 

to the size of the State of Delaware. A USGS report (Barras and others, 2008) estimates the 1983 to 2008 

Louisiana coastal average land loss rate at 16.4 square miles per year. This loss rate would equal an acre 

of wetland loss every 50 minutes. If the current rate of loss is not slowed by the year 2040, an additional 

294,000 acres of wetlands will disappear. Louisiana has already lost more than 1,883 square miles (1.2 

million acres) of land in the last 80 years with a potential 1,756 square miles (1.1 million acres) at risk in 

the next 50 years if nothing is done. 

Wetlands provide habitat for a variety of wildlife. Louisiana coastal wetlands are the breeding 

grounds and nurseries for thousands of species of aquatic life, land animals, and birds of all kinds—

including our national bird, the bald eagle. It is estimated that over five million waterfowl migrate to 

coastal Louisiana each year.

Our national economy also benefits from Louisiana’s coastal wetlands. Economic activity in 

Louisiana includes oil and gas production, shipping commerce, commercial fisheries, oyster production, 

and fur harvesting. This accounts for over 55,000 jobs and billions of dollars in revenues. Additionally, 

wetlands are wonderful recreational resources and are part of Louisiana’s growing ecotourism business.

The Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) has been essential 

to advancing the cause of coastal restoration in Louisiana. Nevertheless, it has long been recognized 

that at current funding levels CWPPRA alone is not sufficient to address Louisiana’s coastal crisis. The 

Water Resources Development Act of 2007 established the Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA) program to 

address restoration needs that were not included within the scope of CWPPRA. The 2012 Louisiana 

Comprehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast (Master Plan) also addresses restoration and 

protection needs beyond the authorization of CWPPRA.

In the wake of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the Federal government joined with the five 

Gulf States to form the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (GCERTF). The resulting Gulf of 

Mexico Regional Ecosystem Restoration Strategy charts a path for a sustainable Gulf of Mexico. The 

subsequent enactment of the RESTORE Act in July 2012 establishes a structure and funding mechanism 

which could complement CWPPRA and further enhance coastal restoration in Louisiana and the other 

Gulf States. With the emergence of these complementary programs and policies, CWPPRA is well 

poised to continue its role as a highly collaborative and expeditious program for implementing targeted 

coastal restoration projects. Additionally, CWPPRA has the experience necessary for success with 

broader and more ambitious restoration efforts. Given limited CWPPRA funding, the project selection 

process generates more construction-ready projects than the program can afford to build. Although 

Congress in 2004 reauthorized CWPPRA through 2019, the program is expected to reach its capacity to 

fund new projects within the next few years. 

If fully funded, CWPPRA could complement the aforementioned programs by quickly developing 

and implementing projects in high priority areas while more comprehensive and complex coastal 

v 
vi 

restoration measures are being developed. Thus, CWPPRA helps “hold the line” in critical parts of 

the landscape, pending implementation of more systemic and large-scale solutions. CWPPRA serves 

as a model for interagency collaboration and decisionmaking. The interagency decisionmaking and 

public involvement processes established by CWPPRA could be utilized by other restoration programs. 

Moreover, the CWPPRA program could serve as a vehicle for advancing the GCERTF Strategy and (or) 

for administering restoration funds from sources such as the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

CWPPRA has and will continue to be the primary source of practical experience, learning, and 

agency expertise regarding coastal restoration in Louisiana. In addition to its ecosystem benefits, 

CWPPRA has provided “hands-on” experience with the practical challenges of bringing restoration 

projects from concept to reality. CWPPRA has been a training academy in which staff and management 

from Federal and State agencies have gained invaluable experience in administering a coastal 

restoration program and implementing a range of different types of projects. Much of the expertise 

needed to effectively implement the GCERTF Strategy, the 2012 Master Plan, and (or) other restoration 

efforts in Louisiana comes directly or indirectly from CWPPRA. Thus, whether in its current form 

or an expanded role, CWPPRA can be a cornerstone for the effort to restore sustainability to coastal 

Louisiana; however, without reauthorization by Congress, this would not be possible. 

The path to a more sustainable gulf is not easy, but bold action is essential if we wish to secure 

for future generations the vast ecological and economic benefits that coastal Louisiana provides to the 

Nation. Now more than ever, we need to collaboratively cooperate at all levels of government and with 

every interested stakeholder as one Louisiana community. The time to act is now.

The CWPPRA Task Force authorized 13 new projects between 2010 (Priority Project List [PPL] 

19) and 2012 (PPL 21) for Phase 1—Engineering and Design, which if constructed would result in 

an estimated net benefit of approximately 6,440 acres of wetlands. During this period, the Task Force 

also authorized Phase 2—Construction of 10 projects that are expected to result in an estimated net 

benefit of approximately 2,858 acres of wetlands. These 10 proposed construction projects include four 

marsh creation projects, one barrier headland project, two shoreline protection projects, one freshwater 

diversion project, and two vegetative planting projects. The Louisiana coast is separated into four 

ecologic regions that cover nine hydrologic basins. Besides the four ecologic regions, a coastwide 

category is also considered for the purpose of project planning. Below is the list of the projects that were 

authorized to begin Phase 2—Construction during this reporting period (2010–12).

Region 2 (Breton Sound, Barataria, and Mississippi River Delta hydrologic basins): Barataria 

Basin Landbridge (BA-27c[4]) Phase 3, Construction Unit 8; Bayou Dupont Ridge Creation and 

Marsh Restoration (BA-48); Grand Liard Marsh and Ridge Restoration (BA-68); and South Lake 

Lery Shoreline and Marsh Restoration (BS-16). These projects will have a combined net benefit of 

approximately 1,072 acres of wetlands.

Region 3 (Atchafalaya, Terrebonne, and Teche/Vermilion hydrologic basins): West Belle Pass 

Barrier Headland Restoration (TE-52), North Lake Boudreaux Basin Freshwater Introduction (TE-32a), 

and Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Bank Restoration of Critical Areas (TE-43), with a combined net benefit 

of approximately 636 acres of wetlands.

Region 4 (Calcasieu/Sabine and Mermentau hydrologic basins): Cameron Creole Freshwater 

Introduction, Construction Unit 1 (CS-49[CU1]) and Sabine Refuge Marsh Creation Cycles 4 and 

5 (CS-28), with a combined net benefit of approximately 371 acres of wetlands.

Coastwide: Coastwide Vegetative Planting Project (LA-39) will have a net benefit of approximately 

779 acres of wetlands.

Although projects are authorized and constructed individually, they often work synergistically with 

one another. For example, the barrier island projects are collectively rebuilding Louisiana’s first line of 

defense that can extend ecosystem benefits beyond just the sum of their individual projects. This type 

of synergy is also seen within the Barataria Basin, where constructed projects are working together 

to restore the structural integrity of a critical landform that is undergoing high land loss rates. These 

projects are demonstrating how small- to mid-scale projects are working collectively to generate largescale results.

Most of the CWPPRA projects are located within one of the four specific regions. During the 

2010–12 period, the Task Force authorized four projects in Region 2, three in Region 3, two in Region 4, 

and a comprehensive coastwide vegetative planting project. A map that illustrates these coastal regions 

with PPL 1–20 is at http://www.lacoast.gov/maps/allregions_ppl1-20(web).pdf.
The traditional image of Louisiana’s wetlands depicts 

a grassy expanse of vegetation with trawling shrimp 

boats and sea birds dotting the horizon. The image is 

accurate, but its serenity can be misleading. Louisiana’s 

coastal zone contains approximately 30 percent of coastal 

marshes and 45 percent of all intertidal coastal marshes 

in the lower 48 States, but it is suffering 80 percent of 

the entire Nation’s annual coastal wetland loss. Since the 

1930s, coastal Louisiana has lost more than 1,883 square 

miles, an area more than 25 times larger than Washington, 

D.C. In 2008, Barras and others estimated the average 

annual Louisiana coastal land loss rate to be 16.4 square 

miles. Although the causes are a combination of complex 

human-induced and natural factors, this rate of loss is 

largely attributable to channelization of the Mississippi 

River for flood protection, natural subsidence, petroleum 

exploration and navigation channels, storms, and pressures 

from human-related land uses. As a result, the wetlands 

are rapidly converting to open water. 

Congress recognized the ongoing severe coastal 

wetland losses in Louisiana and the increasing impacts 

on locally, regionally, and nationally important 

resources when it established the Coastal Wetlands 

Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) 

in 1990 (Public Law 101–646, Title III). Over the last 

two decades, it has been clearly established and well 

documented that there is an imminent need to restore and 

protect Louisiana’s coastal wetlands in order to sustain 

the ecological and economic health of the Louisiana 

coastal zone. Louisiana’s wetlands provide a variety of 

benefits that serve the Nation across an array of economic 

sectors. Because of this, the coastal wetland loss crisis in 

Louisiana is considered a matter of national concern.

The Gulf of Mexico is a natural resource of vital 

importance which provides immeasurable benefits and 

services to citizens throughout the United States. The 

Gulf Coast has been and continues to be subject to a 

number of ongoing environmental challenges that have 

attracted significant attention from State and Federal 

natural resource managers and conservation interests.1

These challenges were further compounded in 2010 by 

the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which released more 

than 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf affecting 

thousands of miles of shoreline, bayous, and bays. 

Coastal Louisiana received and continues to receive the 

majority of the ecological impacts from the spill. Efforts 

to assess natural resource injuries resulting from the 

spill are ongoing and will continue until the full extent 

of damages is determined, restoration plans are designed 

and implemented, and the environment and public are 

made whole for injuries to natural resources and services 

resulting from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Some 

CWPPRA project areas near the oil spill received oiling, 

and natural resource trustee agencies are continuing to 

analyze BP oil spill effects on CWPPRA project sites and 

other coastal habitats in Louisiana. Ongoing issues include 

the following:

Introduction

1

This paragraph and the subsequent bulleted items were taken from information included in a report published in September 2010 

titled America’s Gulf Coast: A Long Term Recovery Plan After the Deepwater Horizon Spill.
• The loss of coastal wetlands, barrier islands, and 

other habitats of the Mississippi River Delta. 

While an issue in every Gulf State, the loss of 

coastal habitat is most dramatic in Louisiana. 

Since the 1930s, the coast of Louisiana has lost 

more than 1,883 square miles of wetlands (an 

area roughly the size of Delaware). This loss 

is due to a combination of both natural and 

human factors including storms, subsidence, 

dredging of navigation channels and oil and 

gas canals, and disruption of the natural deltaic 

processes of the Mississippi River. Climate 

change (particularly sea-level rise) threatens to 

accelerate the loss of these habitats. 

• Erosion of barrier islands and barrier shorelines. 

The continued erosion of the coastal barrier 

island and barrier shorelines system undermines 

storm protection for coastal communities, 

threatens the beaches that support the local 

tourism economy, and affects numerous species 

that rely on these barrier islands for habitat.

• Loss and degradation of estuarine habitat. 

Estuaries of the Louisiana’s coast—such as 

Breton Sound, Barataria Bay, and others—

provide nursery habitat for most of the fishery 

resources and support a nationally important 

oyster industry. These estuaries are impacted 

by a variety of stressors, including pollution, 

coastal development, energy development, 

erosion, hydrologic alteration, and changes in 

freshwater inflow.

• Imperiled fisheries. Several major commercially 

and recreationally important fish species 

are currently experiencing pressures from 

overfishing or have been overfished. In some 

cases, these conditions have persisted for many 

years. Additionally, contaminants such as 

methyl-mercury in fish, and red tide organisms 

and human pathogens in shellfish, reduce 

fishery values and endanger human health. 

• Hypoxia (low oxygen) in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Hypoxia occurs when the concentration of 

dissolved oxygen in the water column decreases 

to a level that reduces the quality of habitat, 

resulting in death of aquatics or their migration 

away from the hypoxic zone. The northern Gulf 

of Mexico adjacent to the Mississippi River is 

the site of the largest hypoxic zone in the United 

States and the second largest hypoxic zone 

worldwide. This Gulf of Mexico “Dead Zone” 

is caused by input of excess nutrient pollution to 

the gulf—most of which comes from upstream 

through Mississippi River drainage. Freshwater 

and sediment diversions from the Mississippi 

and Atchafalaya Rivers may help reduce the 

hypoxic zone off Louisiana’s coast.

• Climate change. Our changing climate 

is already altering, perhaps irreversibly, 

the physical, chemical, and biological 

characteristics of our oceans, coasts and 

adjacent watersheds. Increasing air and water 

temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, 

rising sea level, and ocean acidification will 

increasingly confound efforts to restore or 

sustain the Louisiana coastal ecosystem. 

Plausible sea-level rise may be from 0.39 to 2.1 

feet (0.12 to 0.65 meter) in the next 50 years, or 

0.78 to 4.2 feet (0.24 to 1.28 meters) in the next 

100 years (LA CPRA, 2012). 

• Vulnerability of communities. Loss of coastal 

habitats may also increase the vulnerability of 

communities that lie further inland with respect 

to flooding from storm surge and heavy rain. 

The presence of barrier islands have been shown 

to reduce wave heights by 0.98 to 2.28 feet (1 

to 2 meters), and coastal wetlands can reduce 

wave heights by an additional 0.98 to 3.28 feet 

(0.3 to 1 meter). Without these coastal habitats, 

coastal communities are increasingly vulnerable 

to storms. This vulnerability is likely going to 

intensify in coming years, as storm events are 

predicted to become more frequent and intense.

As part of CWPPRA, Congress established and 

directed the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation 

and Restoration Task Force (hereafter referred to 

as the “Task Force” or “CWPPRA Task Force”) to 

prepare, annually update, and implement a list of 

coastal wetland restoration projects in Louisiana to 

provide for the long-term conservation of wetlands 

and dependent fish and wildlife populations. In 

addition, Congress directed the Task Force to 

provide a scientific evaluation every 3 years on the 

effectiveness of the projects as required by Section 

303 (b) (7) of CWPPRA. The purpose of this report 

is to meet this requirement. The following sections 

summarize projects selected for implementation 

since 2009 and demonstrate the effectiveness of the 

program to date and the relevancy of CWPPRA to 

address land loss in Louisiana’s coastal wetlands.

2 
3 
CWPPRA Overview

CWPPRA was initially authorized 

by Congress in 1990. Three additional 

authorizations have extended the program until 

the year 2019. This act provides approximately 

80 to 90 million in Federal dollars per year to 

partially restore coastal wetlands. The Fiscal 

Year 2012 funding amount was $79.2 million. 

Total Federal funding since 1990 has been $1.2 

billion.

The Sport Fish Restoration and Boating 

Safety Trust Fund (Trust Fund) is the funding 

source supported by excise taxes on fishing 

equipment, small engine, and motorboat 

fuel taxes. This Trust Fund contributes 18.5 

percent of its annual revenues to CWPPRA 

appropriations and that amount is divided as 

follows:

• 70 percent Louisiana CWPPRA program

• 15 percent Coastal Wetland

Conservation Grants 

• 15 percent North American Wetlands 

Conservation Act (to coastal States only) 

Funding for Louisiana CWPPRA projects 

is cost shared: a split of 85 percent Federal and 

15 percent State of Louisiana. Congress has 

postponed renewing the Sport Fish Restoration 

and Boating Safety Trust Fund, and the fund 

is currently extended until March 27, 2013, by 

Congressional continuing resolution.

Five Federal agencies work with the State 

of Louisiana in planning and implementing 

projects for coastal wetlands restoration. 

The federal agencies are: Department of 

the Army—U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE), U.S. Department of Interior—Fish 

and Wildlife Service (FWS), U.S. Department of 

Agriculture—Natural Resources Conservation 

Services (NRCS), U.S. Department of 

Commerce—National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration—National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NOAA-NMFS), and the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—

Region 6. 

CWPPRA operates on an annual cycle to 

identify and select projects for engineering and 

design through what is called the Priority Project 

List (PPL). The PPL planning process starts with 

project concepts that are developed by Federal, 

State, and local government representatives and 

public stakeholders. All proposed projects have a 

designated Federal and local sponsor (Louisiana 

Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority 

[CPRA]). After initial planning meetings, the five 

Federal agencies, the State, and local parishes 

select the top 20 projects for consideration. The 

CWPPRA Technical Committee then votes to 

recommend 10 of those 20 projects as candidate 

projects for detailed evaluation of costs and 

benefits. At the end of the annual PPL planning 

cycle, the Task Force typically approves four of 

these candidate projects for detailed engineering 

and design.

Upon completion of engineering and 

design, projects are selected through a Technical 

Committee and Task Force voting process, and 

the number of projects recommended to be 

funded is based upon availability of construction 

funds. Projects compete annually for limited 

construction funds.

4 
Public Outreach 

Committee

Planning & Evaluation 

Subcommittee 

Environmental 

Workgroup

Economic 

Workgroup

Engineering 

Workgroup

Monitoring 

Workgroup

Academic Advisory

Workgroup

Technical Advisory

 Workgroup

Task Force

Technical 

Committee

5 

Organization chart for the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force.
ouisiana Coastal LRestoration Techniques

6 

The techniques used in various projects depend on the 

problems being addressed and other site-specific factors, 

including project area landscape, substrate, wave climate, 

habitat type, and proximity to sediment and freshwater 

resources, major waterways, and open water.

Most projects employ one or more of the 

following restoration techniques:

Barrier Island Restoration

Barrier island restoration projects are designed to 

protect and restore the features unique to Louisiana’s 

barrier island chains. This type of project may incorporate 

a variety of restoration techniques, such as the placement 

of dredged material to increase island height and width, the 

placement of structures to protect the island from erosive 

forces, and the placement of sand-trapping fences, used in 

conjunction with vegetative plantings to build and stabilize 

sand dunes.

Marsh Creation

Marsh creation uses dredged material to restore marsh 

or nourish existing marsh. The dredged material is placed 

in a deteriorated wetland at specific elevations so that 

desired marsh plants will colonize and grow to form new 

marsh. For projects that are long distances from available 

sediment sources, the dredging technique involves the use 

of booster pumps to transport sediment greater distances.

Freshwater and Sediment Diversions

Freshwater diversions use gates or siphons to regulate 

the flow of water. Freshwater is channeled from a nearby 

river or water body into surrounding wetlands. This 

infusion of water, sediment, and nutrients helps slow 

saltwater intrusion, slows the loss of marsh, and promotes 

the growth of new marsh. Sediment diversions promote 

the creation of new marsh in shallow open-water areas. A 

gap (called “crevasse”) is cut into a river levee, allowing 

river water and sediment to flow into nearby wetlands 

to mimic natural wetland-building processes. The above 

picture exhibits a crevasse and receiving area of the Delta 

Wide Crevasses CWPPRA project taken during the 2009 

annual inspection.
7 

Shoreline Protection

Shoreline protection projects involve various 

techniques designed to decrease or halt shoreline 

erosion. Some techniques, such as rock berms or 

revetments, are applied directly to the eroding 

shoreline. Other techniques, such as segmented 

breakwaters and wave-damping fences, are placed in 

the adjacent open water in order to decrease a wave’s 

energy before it hits the shoreline and to promote the 

buildup of sediment.

Hydrologic Restoration

Hydrologic restoration projects involve 

restoring natural drainage patterns in an attempt to 

address problems associated with artificially altered 

hydrology. On a larger scale, this technique may 

involve locks or gates on major navigation channels; 

on a smaller scale, it may involve blocking canals 

or cutting gaps in levee banks that were created 

by canal dredging. Other hydrologic restoration 

techniques maximize the benefits of freshwater 

diversions to ensure that water and sediment 

reach needed areas. These techniques can involve 

regulating water levels and direction of water flow 

to increase the dispersion and retention time of 

freshwater, nutrients, and sediment in the marsh.

Sediment and Nutrient Trapping

Sediment and nutrient trapping projects create 

new land and protect nearby marshes by means of 

structures that are designed to slow water flow and 

promote the buildup of sediment. For example, 

shallow bay terraces involve dredging sediment from 

a shallow bay and constructing low ridges in patterns 

that enclose open water areas to slow waterflow and 

help trap sediment to rebuild and protect marsh.

Vegetative Planting

Vegetative planting projects are used both alone 

and in conjunction with shoreline protection, barrier 

island restoration, marsh creation, and sediment 

and nutrient trapping restoration techniques. This 

technique involves the use of flood-tolerant native 

marsh plants that will hold sediments together and 

stabilize the soil with their roots as they become 

established in a new area.

On average, a CWPPRA project can go from 

concept to construction in 3 to 5 years. This ability is 

largely a result of the congressional authority that has 

been delegated to the Task Force to both authorize 

and fund restoration projects without having to seek 

additional authorization, which could delay projects 

for many more years. Moreover, the project selection 

process quickly culls projects that have the highest 

construction feasibility and public support, which 

ultimately streamlines project implementation. 

Additionally, the interagency model of CWPPRA 

provides for multiple agencies to have a divide and 

conquer approach, which distributes the project load 

and can lead to faster construction.

Given the limited funding for CWPPRA, 

the project selection process also generates more 

construction-ready projects than the program can 

afford to build. This is compounded by the fact that, 

although Congress in 2004 reauthorized CWPPRA 

through 2019, the program is expected to reach its 

capacity to authorize new projects within the next 

few years. This is due to the current commitment 

of future funding needed to construct existing 

authorized projects and to fund operations and 

maintenance of all constructed projects. The backlog 

of construction-ready projects developed through 

the CWPPRA program has provided opportunities 

to transfer some projects to other funding authorities 

for rapid implementation. The synergy thus created 

between authorities stretches restoration dollars, 

reduces redundancy, and implements projects faster 

since CWPPRA has already designed, prioritized, 

and publicly vetted all of its projects. 

Notwithstanding the significant ecologic, 

economic, and political changes that have occurred 

in south Louisiana since Hurricanes Katrina and 

Rita (2005) and Gustav and Ike (2008), and more 

recently the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill (2010), 

CWPPRA has continued to stay the course and 

effectively serve as the largest coastal wetlands 

restoration program in the State’s history in terms 

of total projects constructed and environmental 

benefits accomplished. The present-day relevance 

of CWPPRA lies in its unique ability to construct 

near-term, small- to mid-scale projects that meet 

local immediate restoration needs and its ability to 

work seamlessly with other authorities to implement 

ecosystem-level restoration. Projects constructed 

through CWPPRA are either complementary to 

projects being planned through other authorities or 

addressing land loss in critical areas that have no 

other resources for restoration.
In 1990, the U.S. Congress enacted CWPPRA 

in response to the growing awareness of Louisiana’s 

land loss crisis. CWPPRA was the first Federal, 

statutorily mandated program with a stable source of 

funds dedicated exclusively to the short- and longterm restoration of the coastal wetlands of Louisiana. 

Between 1990 and 2012, 106 restoration projects have 

been constructed or are currently under construction. 

Additionally, there are 50 projects undergoing 

engineering and design (Phase 1). These projects include 

diversions of freshwater and sediments to improve 

marsh vegetation; dredged material placement for marsh 

creation; shoreline protection; sediment and nutrient 

trapping; hydrologic restoration through outfall, marsh, 

and delta management; and vegetative planting on barrier 

islands.

The Task Force authorizes projects to be 

implemented under CWPPRA by using a systematic 

approach that starts with an annual planning cycle 

to select new projects. All projects undergo detailed 

engineering and design before they get final approval 

to proceed to construction and long-term operations, 

maintenance, and monitoring.

The Task Force authorized 13 new projects 

between 2010 (PPL 19) and 2012 (PPL21) for Phase 

1—Engineering and Design, which if constructed would 

result in an estimated net benefit of approximately 

6,440 acres of wetlands. These 13 new projects 

included Lost Lake Marsh Creation and Hydrologic 

Restoration (TE-72), Freshwater Bayou Marsh Creation 

(ME-31), LaBranche East Marsh Creation (PO-75), 

Cheniere Ronquille Barrier Island Restoration (BA-76), 

Bayou Bonfuca Marsh Creation (PO-104), CameronCreole Watershed Grand Bayou Marsh Creation 

(CS-54), Coastwide Planting (LA-39), Kelso Bayou 

Marsh Creation and Hydrologic Restoration (CS-53), 

Terrebonne Bay Marsh Creation-Nourishment (TE-83), 

Oyster Bayou Marsh Restoration (CS-59), LaBranche 

Central Marsh Creation (PO-133), Northwest Turtle Bay 

Marsh Creation (BA-125), and Cole’s Bayou Marsh 

Restoration (TV-63) (table 1).

In this 2010–12 period, the Task Force also 

authorized 10 projects for Phase 2—Construction that 

are expected to result in an estimated net benefit of 

approximately 2,858 acres of wetlands (table 2). These 

10 proposed construction projects include four marsh 

creation projects, one barrier headland project, two 

8 

WPPRA Project Planning Cand Implementation
 

9

Table 1. CWPPRA Projects authorized from 2010 to 2012 (PPL 19–PPL 21) for Phase 1—Engineering and Design.

Project 

number

Project Priority

List (PPL) Project name Date authorized Total net acres (reestablished and protected) Region

TE-72 19 Lost Lake Marsh Creation & Hydrologic Restoration 20-Jan-10 749 3

ME-31 19 Freshwater Bayou Marsh Creation 20-Jan-10 279 4

PO-75 19 LaBranche East Marsh Creation 20-Jan-10 715 1

BA-76 19 Cheniere Ronquille Barrier Island Restoration 20-Jan-10 308 2

PO-104 20 Bayou Bonfouca Marsh Creation 19-Jan-11 424 1

CS-54 20 Cameron-Creole Watershed Grand Bayou Marsh Creation 19-Jan-11 534 4

LA-39 20 Coastwide Vegetative Planting 19-Jan-11 779 Coastwide

CS-53 20 Kelso Bayou Marsh Creation 19-Jan-11 274 4

TE-83 20 Terrebonne Bay Marsh Creation-Nourishment 19-Jan-11 353 3

CS-59 21 Oyster Bayou Marsh Restoration 19-Jan-12 489 4

PO-133 21 LaBranche Central Marsh Creation 19-Jan-12 731 1

BA-125 21 Northwest Turtle Bay Marsh Creation 19-Jan-12 407 2

TV-63 21 Cole’s Bayou Marsh Restoration 19-Jan-12 398 3

Total = 13 Projects Total Net Acres = 6,440

 9
shoreline protection projects, one freshwater diversion project, 

and two vegetative planting projects. The Louisiana coast is 

separated into four ecologic regions along with a coastwide 

category for the purpose of project planning. These ecoregions 

are Region 1 (Pontchartrain Basin), Region 2 (Breton 

Sound, Mississippi River, and Barataria Basins), Region 3 

(Terrebonne, Atchafalaya and Teche/Vermilion Basins), and 

Region 4 (Mermentau and Calcasieu-Sabine Basins). Below is 

the list of the projects that were authorized to begin Phase 2—

Construction during this reporting period (2010–12).

Region 2: Barataria Basin Landbridge (BA-27c[4]) Phase 

3, Construction Unit 8; Bayou Dupont Ridge Creation and 

Marsh Restoration (BA-48); Grand Liard Marsh & Ridge 

Restoration (BA-68); and South Lake Lery Shoreline and 

Marsh Restoration (BS-16), which will have a combined net 

benefit of approximately 1,072 acres of wetlands.

Region 3: West Belle Pass Barrier Headland Restoration 

(TE-52), North Lake Boudreaux Basin Freshwater 

Introduction (TE-32a), and Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Bank 

Restoration of Critical Areas (TE-43), which will have a net 

benefit of approximately 636 acres of wetlands.

Region 4: Cameron-Creole Freshwater Introduction, 

Construction Unit 1 (CS-49[CU1]) and Sabine Refuge Marsh 

Creation Cycles 4 and 5 (CS-28), which will have a combined 

net benefit of approximately 371 acres of wetlands.

Coastwide: Coastwide Planting Project (LA-39) will have 

a net benefit of approximately 779 acres of wetlands.

In general, projects are authorized and constructed 

individually, but they often work synergistically with 

one another. For example, the barrier island projects are 

collectively rebuilding Louisiana’s first line of defense that 

can extend ecosystem benefits beyond just the sum of their 

individual projects. This type of synergy is also seen within 

the Barataria Basin, where constructed projects are working 

together to restore the structural integrity of a critical landform 

that is undergoing high land loss rates. These projects are 

demonstrating how small- to mid-scale projects are working 

collectively to generate large-scale results.

Most of the CWPPRA projects are located within one of 

the four specific regions. During the 2010-12 period, the Task 

Force authorized four projects in Region 2, three in Region 3, 

two in Region 4, and a comprehensive coastwide vegetative 

planting project. A map that illustrates these coastal regions 

with PPL 1-20 is located in the Web site http://www.lacoast.

gov/maps/allregions_ppl1-20(web).pdf.

The following two (BA-27c and BA-48) projects 

represent examples of shoreline protection and marsh 

restoration through CWPPRA. Tables 1 and 2 exhibit all 23 

projects (13 in Phase 1 and 10 in Phase 2) authorized during 

this 2010–12 reporting period.

Barataria Basin Landbridge Shoreline 

Protection Project Phase 3 (BA-27c[4])

Construction Unit 8

•	 http://lacoast.gov/reports/gpfs/BA-27c.pdf

•	 Approved Date: 2000

•	 Project Area: 589 acres

•	 Approved Funds: $16.6 million

•	 Total Est. Costs: $20.5 million

•	 Net Benefit after 20 Years: 107 acres 

•	 Status: Completed 

•	 Project Type: Shoreline Protection 

•	 PPL#: 9 

•	 Sponsoring Agency: NRCS

•	 Restoration Strategy: The project’s objective is to 

reduce or eliminate shoreline erosion along 14,811feet of 

shoreline along the west bank of Bayou Perot and north 

shore of Little Lake. To reach this goal, a rock revetment 

was constructed, incorporating four openings to allow the 

exchange of water, nutrients, and organisms. With the 

available funding, the project will be maintained for the 

full 20-year project life, with the effects lasting beyond.

Bayou Dupont Ridge Creation and Marsh 

Restoration (BA-48)

•	 http://lacoast.gov/reports/gpfs/BA-48.pdf

•	 Approved Date: 2007

•	 Project Area: 309 acres

•	 Approved Funds: $37.9 million

•	 Total Est. Costs: $38.5 million

•	 Net Benefit after 20 Years: 186 acres

•	 Status: Engineering and Design

•	 Project Type: Marsh Creation

•	 PPL#: 17

•	 Sponsoring Agency: NMFS

•	 Restoration Strategy: Project goals include (1) creating 

and nourishing approximately 300 acres of marsh through 

pipeline sediment delivery from the Mississippi River and 

(2) creating a ridge along a portion of the southwestern 

shoreline of Bayou Dupont. Sediment from the river will 

be hydraulically pumped to the project site to construct 

both the marsh and ridge features. The ridge is being 

designed to mimic the configuration of other natural 

ridges within the watershed. The ridge will include a 

constructed elevation conducive for the growth of native 

vegetation such as live oak, hackberry, and Yaupon. The 

ridge will help redefine the limits of Bayou Dupont and 

reestablish the natural bank that once flanked the bayou 

and protected adjacent marshes. 

10 
Table 2. CWPPRA projects authorized from 2010 to 2012 (PPL 19–PPL 21) for Phase 2—Construction.

Project number Project Priority List (PPL) Project name Date authorized

Total net 

acres 

(reestablished and 

protected)

Region

CS-49 18 Cameron-Creole Fresh Water Introduction—Construction Unit 1 20-Jan-10 40 4

BA-27c(4) 9 Barataria Basin Landbridge, Phase 3—Construction Unit 8 20-Jan-10 107 2

TE-52 16 West Belle Pass Barrier Headland Restoration 20-Jan-10 305 3TE-43 10 GIWW Bank Restoration of Critical Areas in Terrebonne 20-Jan-10 65 3

BA-48 17 Bayou Dupont Marsh & Ridge Creation 19-Jan-11 186 2

CS-28 8 Sabine Refuge Marsh Creation, Cycles 4 and 5 19-Jan-11 331 4

TE-32a 6 North Lake Boudreaux Basin Freshwater Introduction & Hydrologic Management 19-Jan-11 266 3

BS-16 17 South Lake Lery Shoreline and Marsh Restoration 19-Jan-12 409 2

BA-68 18 Grand Liard Marsh & Ridge Restoration 19-Jan-12 370 2

LA-39 20 Coastwide Vegetative Plantings 19-Jan-12 779 Coastwide

Total = 10 Projects Total Net Acres = 2,858

 11
12 

 oastwide Reference CMonitoring System (CRMS)

Need for a Comprehensive 

Monitoring System

To evaluate project-specific effectiveness 

and inform future project designs, most CWPPRA 

projects are regularly monitored. At the coastwide 

level, resource managers must also assess 

cumulative project effects as they work towards 

achieving a sustainable coast. In 2003, CPRA 

and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) received 

approval from the CWPPRA Task Force to 

implement the Coastwide Reference Monitoring 

System (CRMS) as a mechanism to monitor and 

evaluate the effectiveness of CWPPRA restoration 

and protection efforts at the project, region, 

and coastwide scales. The CRMS network is 

currently funded through CWPPRA and provides 

data for a variety of user groups, including 

resource managers, academics, landowners, 

and decisionmakers.

Approach and Design

of the CRMS

Prior to CRMS, CWPPRA projects and 

unmanaged reference areas were monitored 

in a paired design to assess project effects. 

Although this approach worked well initially, 

finding appropriate paired reference sites became 

increasingly difficult, and significant challenges 

began to surface when scaling up to assess the 

entire coastal zone. Additionally, the introduction 

of large scale restoration efforts reemphasized the 

need for a coastwide monitoring approach.

The CRMS approach gathers information 

from a suite of sites that encompass a range of 

ecological conditions across the coast. Resource 

managers can compare the trajectories of changing 

conditions within both CRMS reference sites and 

CWPPRA project sites to better understand the 

performance of their projects. The CRMS design 

not only allows for monitoring and evaluating 

project-specific effectiveness but also supports 

large-scale evaluation of the cumulative effects 

of all CWPPRA projects throughout the coastal 

ecosystems of Louisiana.

The CRMS network covers the entire 

Louisiana coast and comprises 391 sites. Peer 

reviewed standard operating procedures for data 

collection and data quality assurance guarantee 

consistency of CRMS data across habitat types. 

The CRMS network monitors swamp, fresh, 

intermediate, brackish, and saline marsh habitats. 

Monitoring parameters include salinity, water level, 

emergent and forested vegetation, surface elevation 

and vertical accretion, soil characteristics, and 

land-to-water ratios. Data collection intervals range 

from hourly for hydrologic data to every 5 years 

for landscape assessments of land-to-water ratios. 

Site construction and data collection began in 2005, 

with the entire network operational by 2008. The 

active CRMS sites generate large amounts of data 

which, in turn, are used by the CRMS program to 

develop assessment tools and products for project 

evaluation, model improvement, scientific research, 

and adaptive management.

The CRMS Web Site

To efficiently deliver the large number and 

diverse sets of data-driven products developed by 

the CRMS program, a Web site (http://lacoast.gov/

crms) was designed as the “one-stop shop” for 

CRMS informational products, assessment tools, 

and data. Through a data-sharing partnership with 

the Louisiana CPRA, all raw ecological data are 

available for download from the official CPRA 

online database (http://coastal.louisiana.gov/index.

cfm?md=pagebuilder&tmp=home&pid=92) and 

may be categorized by project name, CRMS site, or 

station number. 

Louisiana coastal habitats monitored 

through CRMS are expansive and dynamic, thus 

warranting a public interface which exposes the 

data and information products in a spatial context. 

The CRMS web mapping interface allows for 

visualizations from site to landscape scales and 

a suite of information products developed for 

multi-scale analyses and assessments. The userfriendly interface allows for viewing information 

on specific sampling sites, including photos and 

data summaries, along with a mechanism for data 
downloads of derived analytical datasets, single- or multi-site 

graphics, and report carding (fig. 1). 

The CRMS report card uses data-derived ecological 

indices to assess trajectories of change for CRMS sites 

relative to other sites within the same marsh type, hydrologic 

basin, and CWPPRA project. Four primary indices are 

used in the report cards: hydrologic, floristic quality, 

submergence vulnerability, and landscape. Several of the 

project summaries which appear in the next section of this 

report use a hydrologic index (HI) for project evaluation. The 

HI was developed by using 4 years of baseline CRMS data 

and evaluates how salinity and percentage of time flooded 

may influence vegetation productivity. The HI and other 

CRMS report card features allow CWPPRA project managers 

to evaluate and visualize how specific projects are faring 

through time.

Given the substantial monetary investments in 

restoration and protection by the CWPPRA program, CRMS 

provides a robust monitoring system that enables multiple 

temporal and spatial scale evaluations for a variety of 

user groups.

To ascertain the science behind the CRMS monitoring 

data, and the overall effectiveness of CWPPRA restoration 

program, the following six CWPPRA projects have been 

chosen to be further evaluated:

• AT-02 Atchafalaya Sediment Delivery (PPL2)

• TE-24 Isles Dernieres Restoration Trinity

Island (PPL 2)

• TV-04 Cote Blanche Hydrologic Restoration (PPL 3)

• MR-09 Delta Wide Crevasses (PPL 6)

• CS-28 Sabine Refuge Marsh Creation Cycles 1, 2, and 

3 (PPL 8)

• BA-37 Little Lake Shoreline Protection/Dedicated 

Dredging Near Round Lake (PPL 11)

Figure 1. CRMS Web site visualizations 

of the Cote Blanche Hydrologic Restoration 

(TV-04) project area, project information 

summary, and project report card.

 13
Atchafalaya River

Atchafalaya Bay

CRMS6304

AT02-34

AT02-33

AT02-31

AT02-30

AT02-26

AT02-25

AT02-24 AT02-23

AT02-22

AT02-21

AT02-19

AT02-17

AT02-16

AT02-14

AT02-07

AT02-05

AT02-04 AT02-03

Data Accurate as of March 15, 2012

Map Date: March 15, 2012

Atchafalaya Sediment Delivery

(AT-02)

Louisiana

Project

Location

Scale 1:35,000

Image Source:

2010 NAIP Photography

0.5 0 0.5

Miles

0.5 0 0.5

Kilometers

CRMS Site

Vegetation Station

Dredge Channel

Containment Dike

Disposal 

Project Boundary

The Atchafalaya Sediment Delivery (AT-02) project area in relation to the eastern lobe of the 

Atchafalaya Delta.

14 
AT-02 Atchafalaya Sediment Delivery (CWPPRA PPL 2)

Figure 2. Areas where post-construction 

delta growth has occurred (identified 

from photography obtained in 2008). 

Green represents growth to existing preconstruction delta. Brown represents 

conversion of shallow submerged flat 

to emergent marshland. Blue represents 

conversion of open water to shallow 

submerged flat.

15 

Project Description and Goals

The Atchafalaya River serves as one of the major 

outlets for the Mississippi River flood plain. Unlike the 

mouth of the Mississippi River (the “birdsfoot delta”), 

which lies at the edge of the continental shelf, the mouth 

of the Atchafalaya lies well within the outlines of the 

continental shelf. Sediment deposited at the mouth of the 

Atchafalaya River, thus, has significant delta-building 

potential. The creation of the Atchafalaya Delta in 1952 

was followed by two decades of rapid growth. In the late 

1970s, growth of the delta slowed, and shoaling began in 

channels that formerly fed sediment to the delta’s edges. 

The objective of the Atchafalaya Sediment Delivery project 

is to enhance growth of the eastern delta by restoring 

through dredging two arteries for sediment delivery (Natal 

Channel and Castille Pass; fig. 2). Since its construction 

in 1997, this project has had three specific goals: (1) 

create approximately 230 acres of delta by using dredged 

material; (2) increase, or at least maintain, the historical 

growth rate of the delta as it was measured in 1956; and 

(3) increase the distributary potential of Natal Channel and 

Castille Pass.

Project Assessment

Analysis of high-resolution photography shows that 

restoration of Natal Channel and Castille Pass successfully 

created 249 acres of emergent marshland and mudflats, 

exceeding the project goal of 230 acres. In addition to 

delta created through the use of dredged material, the 

Atchafalaya Sediment Delivery project area experienced 

natural delta growth through both conversion of shallow 

submerged flat to emergent marshland and addition to 

existing pre-project delta. Submerged delta was also 

created through conversion of open water to shallow 

submerged flat. 

Since project completion, 16 acres/year have 

converted from shallow submerged flat to emergent 

marshland and mudflats (brown areas in fig. 2). The area 

just north of Natal Channel is particularly impressive, 

as here a large region that was formerly mudflats and 

submerged aquatic vegetation has converted to freshwater 

marsh. The existing pre-project delta has grown at a rate 

of 4 acres/year (green areas in fig. 2), most of which has 

occurred on the eastern bank of the East Pass Channel. 

Vegetative species colonizing this newly developed land 

(particularly arrowhead and coco yam) are indicative of 

delta marsh. The total delta growth rate of 20 acres/year 

far exceeds the historical rate of 9 acres/year, thereby 

realizing project goal 2. In addition, the flood event of 

2011, the largest since 1973 (the only previous time the 

Morganza Spillway was opened), is expected to have 

resulted in substantial additional growth.

As seen in figure 2, the distributary potential of Natal 

Channel and Castille Pass has been increased, thereby 

fulfilling goal 3. Lastly, 12 acres/year have converted 

from open water to shallow submerged flat (blue areas in 

fig. 2). The most noteworthy area is the mid-channel bar 

forming on the eastern edge of the delta at the East Fork 

of Natal Channel. This bar suggests that flow has been 

restored to this area and natural delta building processes 

are contributing to growth on the eastern delta edge.
16 

Gulf of Mexico

Data Accurate as of March 15, 2012

Map Date: March 15, 2012

Isle Dernieres Restoration Trinity Island

(TE-24)

Louisiana

Project Location

Scale 1:50,000

Image Source:

2010 NAIP Photography

Plantings

Sediment Fences

Bulkhead

Disposal/Fill

Project Boundary

Vegetation Station

0.5 0 0.5

Miles

0.5 0 0.5

Kilometers

The Isles Derniers Restoration Trinity Island (TE-24) project area boundary and features.
17 

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

1890's 1934 1996 2004 2005

Area (Acres)

Date

Figure 3. Barrier Island Comprehensive 

Monitoring Program (BICM) land area 

change analysis for the Isles Dernieres 

indicating reduced land change post 

CWPPRA project implementation.

Project Description and Goals

Rapid land loss in the Isles Dernieres barrier island 

chain is a consequence of a complex interaction among 

global sea-level rise, subsidence, wave and storm 

processes, inadequate sediment supply, and significant 

anthropogenic disturbances. Currently, the Isles 

Dernieres island chain is exhibiting some of the highest 

rates of erosion of any coastal region in the world. 

The specific goals of the Isles Dernieres Restoration 

Trinity Island (TE-24) project are (1) to increase the 

height and width of Trinity Island and close breaches 

by using dredged sediments and (2) to reduce loss of 

sediment through vegetative plantings, thus increasing 

the island’s stability.

Project Assessment

Results indicate that the TE-24 project has been 

successful in increasing elevation and volume of 

sediment in the project area and maintaining sediment 

through vegetative plantings and sand fencing, despite 

setbacks induced by storm- and major hurricane-related 

damage since construction.

Completion of the TE-24 restoration project in 

1999 increased island acreage by 45 acres. The 2002 

habitat analysis from the Barrier Island Comprehensive 

Monitoring Program (BICM), funded by CPRA, 

showed that Trinity Island consisted of 663 acres. 

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita reduced the 2004 pre-storm 

acreage from 651 acres to 581 acres. Consequently, the 

2005 acreage is 6 percent below the pre-project land 

area reported in 1996.

Interpretation of elevation data gathered postconstruction shows that the TE-24 project fill area has 

retained more sediment than other projects constructed 

in the Isles Dernieres barrier island chain. Initial postconstruction data collection efforts indicated that the 

average elevation of the project area increased by 6 

feet. Eight years post-construction, the mean elevation 

remains 3 feet higher than average pre-construction 

elevations. Furthermore, no breaches have formed as of 

2011 in the project area, and the only noticeable land 

loss has been because of erosion of approximately 1,500 

feet at the western end of the island.

Shoreline change analysis was performed along 

Trinity Island as well as the entire Louisiana coastal 

shoreline through the BICM program. Post-construction 

shoreline change rates show that Trinity Island has 

eroded in the short term (1996–2005) an average of 41 

feet/year. This is a slight increase from the historical 

erosion rate (from the 1890s to 2005) of 37 feet/year but 

is a much lower increase in the short-term erosion rate 

compared to other areas of the coast. The Isle Dernieres 

is experiencing lower and stable erosion in the shortterm period since 1996, as shown in figure 3, which 

could likely be a direct result of sediment additions 

from barrier island projects such as the TE-24 project. 

BICM habitat mapping data indicate that the 

restoration efforts have increased the size of the island 

and created vegetated habitats consistent with project 

goals. Initial post-project analysis (2002) showed that 

there was a 97 percent increase in bare land habitat 

following construction. By 2004, however, there was an 

89 acre reduction in the bare land classification, whereas 

the barrier vegetation class increased by 118 acres. 

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused major disturbance, 

and areas that were classified as bare land and barrier 

vegetation in 2004 have been mostly converted to beach 

and bare land habitats. 

It has been predicted that the Isles Dernieres of 

1988 would disappear by 2017; however, the CWPPRA 

barrier island projects have increased the life span of 

this barrier island chain by approximately 16 years, with 

the island persisting until the year 2033 if current trends 

continue (fig. 3).

TE-24 Isles Dernieres Restoration Trinity Island (CWPPRA PPL 2)
18 

West Cote

Blanche Bay

East Cote

Blanche Bay

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW)

Humble Canal

CRMS5992

CRMS0543

CRMS0545

CRMS0488

CRMS0551

CRMS0544

CRMS0490

CRMS0517

CRMS0496

CRMS6008

CRMS0489

TV04-22 TV04-02

TV04-01R

Data Accurate as of March 15, 2012

Map Date: March 15, 2012

Cote Blanche Hydrologic Restoration

(TV-04)

Louisiana

Project

Location

Scale 1:120,000

Image Source:

2010 NAIP Photography

Shoreline Protection

Project Boundary

Weir

Continuous Recorder Station

CRMS Site

1 0 1

Miles

1 0 1

Kilometers

Cote Blanche Hydrologic Restoration (TV-04) project area boundary and features. 
TV-04 Cote Blanche Hydrologic Restoration (CWPPRA PPL 3)

19 

Project Description and Goals

The installation and unrestricted enlargement 

of numerous oilfield access canals since the mid1930s has increased water exchange between the Cote 

Blanche Bays of the Teche/Vermilion (TV) Basin and 

vulnerable, organic interior marsh. Marsh degradation 

has been evident in aerial photography since 1952 as the 

increased water exchange easily eroded fragile soils in 

the interior marshes. In order to fulfill the main goal 

of reducing marsh loss by reducing water exchange, the 

Cote Blanche Hydrologic Restoration (TV-04) project 

installed seven boat-bay weirs across openings of three 

oil-field access canals and four enlarged bayous in 1999 

to reduce and maintain channel cross-sections while 

maintaining access to oilfield infrastructure (fig. 4). In 

addition, to reduce shoreline erosion at select reaches 

of the TV-04 shoreline along East Cote Blanche Bay, 

foreshore structures were installed (PVC sheet pile wall 

in 1999 and rock dike in 2007).

Project Assessment

The TV-04 project has been successful. The lowlevel weirs across the large pipeline canal openings 

have reduced water exchange, and the land-loss rate 

has decreased as the marsh interior has been allowed 

to recuperate following storm surge disturbances. 

Following installation of the weirs in 1999, water-level 

ranges relative to East Cote Blanche Bay (TV04-01R) 

were reduced by 12.5 percent in the project area (TV02/22) from 1999 to 2004, which included impacts from 

Hurricane Lili in 2002. After a breach in the project area 

shoreline was repaired and two additional weirs were 

installed in 2007, water-level ranges were reduced by 20 

percent in the project area (CRMS station CRMS0544) 

from 2007 to 2010, which included impacts from 

Hurricane Gustav in 2008. The CRMS hydrologic index 

(HI) shows that the TV-04 project area, as monitored by 

CRMS sites, provides good hydrologic conditions for 

plant production potential based on flood duration and 

salinity thresholds and has maintained higher HI scores 

than non-CWPPRA project (reference) sites among 

fresh and intermediate marsh sites in the TV Basin. 

Coastwide, the TV-04 sites ranks within the top 50 

percent of all CRMS sites (fig. 5).

The project’s shoreline protection measures have 

significantly reduced erosion relative to unprotected 

shorelines along East Cote Blanche Bay. The reach that 

was protected by the PVC wall, constructed in 1999, 

actually gained shoreline until a string of hurricanes 

began in 2002. The rock dike greatly reduced shoreline 

loss after construction in 2007, as compared to 

previous time intervals when the shoreline had been 

unprotected (fig. 6). 

The TV-04 project area’s historical (1957–1990) 

land-loss rate based on aerial photography was 0.24 

percent per year (Britsch and Kemp, 1990), which 

is similar to the TV Basin’s historical land-loss rate 

(adapted from Couvillion and others, 2011). After 

project construction, land loss decreased in the project 

area and, conversely, increased in the TV Basin. Much 

of the marsh loss in the TV Basin has been attributed 

to exacerbation of hurricane impacts (Barras, 2009), 

which the project features in the TV-04 project area, in 

contrast, have buffered.

Figure 4. Low-level weir 

with boat bay (80 feet wide 

and 8 feet deep) at opening of 

Humble Canal (400 feet wide 

and 20 feet deep) reduces 

water exchange between 

East Cote Blanche Bay (West 

Cote Blanche Bay is in the 

background) and marshes 

between the Cote Blanche 

Bays. Note the wide and 

straight access canal.
20 

-11

-10

-9

-8

-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

1998-2001

Post PVC Wall

2001-2004

Hurricane Lili

2004-2007

Pre SBB Rock Dike

Hurricane Rita

2007-2010

Post SBB Rock Dike

Hurr Gustav & Ike

S

horeline C

han

ge Rate (feet per year)

* * *

Unprotected

PVC Wall (Const'd 1999)

Rock Dike (Const'd 2007, *Unprotected)

Figure 6. Shoreline change rates for 3-year intervals from protected and unprotected shoreline reaches along 

East Cote Blanche Bay (negative values are loss; positive values are gain). The PVC wall was constructed in 

1999, and the rock dike was constructed in 2007.

Figure 5. Hydrologic Index scores of Coastwide Reference Monitoring System (CRMS) sites (mean ± 1 standard 

error [SE]) within TV-04 (blue star, n=7) are shown over time relative to all other CRMS sites (within Coastal 

Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act [CWPPRA] projects and references for CWPPRA projects) in 

fresh and intermediate vegetation types within the Teche/Vermilion Basin. The green, tan, and blue background 

represents the distribution of all coastwide CRMS sites from 2006 to 2010.

100

80

60

40

20

0

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

CRMS average within project

CRMS reference sites

CRMS project sites

> 75th percentile

25th–75th percentile

< 25th percentile

Hydrologic index score

Year
21 
22 

South Pass

Southeast Pass

Pass a Loutre

Pass a Loutre

Wildlife Management Area

Delta

National Wildlife Refuge

Southwest Pass

Mississippi River

Main Pass

CRMS2608

CRMS4626 CRMS2614

CRMS0161

CRMS2634 CRMS2627

CRMS4448

CRMS0163

CRMS0156 CRMS0162

CRMS0157

CRMS0153

CRMS0159

Data Accurate as of March 15, 2012

Map Date: March 15, 2012

Delta Wide Crevasses

(MR-09)

Louisiana

Project

Location

Scale 1:270,000

Image Source:

2010 Landsat Thematic Mapper 5 Mosaic

Band Combination: 4, 5, 3

Fill Area for Crevase Dredging

Project Boundary

Plug

Crevase

CRMS Site

4 0 4

Miles

4 0 4

Kilometers

Delta Wide Crevasses (MR-09) location and project features.
23 

MR-09 Delta Wide Crevasses (CWPPRA PPL 6)

Figure 8. Mean percent cover of selected species 

across all 4-square-meter plots within the Delta Wide 

Crevasses (MR-09) project area during August 1999 

(n=46 plots), August 2002 (n=49 plots), and August 

2007 (n=50 plots). Vegetation was sampled by using the 

Braun-Blanquet method.

Figure 7. View of one of the MR-09 crevasses 

(center) during the November 2009 annual 

inspection. The crevasse was constructed off 

of Pass a Loutre at a width of over 150 feet and 

allows sediment to travel through and settle out 

into the receiving area. 

Project Description and Goals

Rapid wetland deterioration that has occurred in 

the Mississippi River Delta Basin is likely due to a 

combination of anthropogenic factors such as levee 

and canal construction and natural processes such as 

subsidence. Sediment carried in water that passes through 

newly created crevasses quickly settles out of the water 

column and accumulates in receiving areas, eventually 

forming new land, which serves as a foundation for 

colonization by marsh vegetation. The MR-09 project 

is a series of small, uncontrolled crevasses (sediment 

diversions) located in the southeastern portion of the 

Mississippi River Delta on Delta National Wildlife 

Refuge and Pass a Loutre Wildlife Management Area. 

The project, completed in phases (Phase 1 in 1999 

and Phase 2 in 2005), involved the creation of new 

crevasses (fig. 7), maintenance of existing crevasses, 

and the plugging of an existing crevasse to enhance flow 

downstream. The following goals were established to 

evaluate project effectiveness: (1) increase or maintain 

the land to open-water ratios, (2) increase the mean 

elevation, and (3) increase the mean percent cover of 

emergent fresh and intermediate marsh type vegetation.

Project Assessment

The MR-09 project has been successful in 

increasing land to open-water ratios and sediment 

elevation in the project area. Land-water analysis 

conducted on post-construction aerial photography 

indicates a land gain of 59.4 percent (499 acres) across 

all crevasse receiving areas within the MR-09 project 

from construction to 2007, with an average gain of 23 

acres per crevasse. In fact, 21 of 22 crevasses in the 

MR-09 project area have shown an increase in land 

to water ratios. Land-water analysis at CRMS2627, 

a monitoring station that is directly influenced by an 

MR-09 crevasse, showed a gain of 6 percent (15 acres) 

between 2005 and 2008.

Analysis of elevation survey data in 12 of the 

MR-09 crevasse receiving areas shows a positive trend 

in elevation for 11 of the 12 crevasses since construction. 

Much of the elevation gain occurred in the years 

immediately following crevasse construction. There has 

been a mean elevation gain of 0.91 foot in the crevasse 

receiving areas from construction to 2008. 

Project specific vegetation surveys show that the 

percent cover of species such as bulltongue, broadleaf 

arrowhead, elephant ear, and Olney’s bullrush, which 

dominated the 1999 and 2002 surveys, decreased in the 

2007 survey (fig. 8). Meanwhile, percent cover of other 

typical Louisiana deltaic marsh species such as common 

reed, hairypod cowpea, and cattail has increased from 

1999 to 2007. Mean percent cover at Crevasse 20, a 

crevasse that was newly created in 1999, went from 0 

percent in 1999 to 82 percent in 2007. The Crevasse 20 

vegetation surveys were dominated by species such as 

bulltongue, broadleaf arrowhead, and cattail, which are 

early colonizing species expected on newly formed land.

0 5 10 15 20 25

Alligatorweed

Bulltongue

Broadleaf Arrowhead

Common Reed

Cattail

Hairypod Cowpea

Elephant Ear

Olney's Bullrush 2007

2002

1999
24 

Sabine Refuge Marsh Creation (CS-28) Project area showing areas of dredged material placement for 

Cycles 1-5. In this 2010 imagery, Cycles 1, 2, and 3 were constructed.
25 

CS-28 Sabine Refuge Marsh Creation Cycles 1, 2, and 3 (CWPPRA PPL 8)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

CRMS6301

Total Cover %

Reference Cycle 1 Cycle 3

Figure 9. Northeast corner of Cycle 1 of the Sabine 

Refuge Marsh Creation (CS-28) project, October 2008. 

Densely vegetated area is the dredge cell, and clumps 

of vegetation are on the delta formation area. The area 

recovered quickly from Hurricane Rita and continued to 

fill in areas that did not become immediately vegetated 

after project construction in 2001. By 2009, the area was 

86 percent vegetated.

Figure 10. Vegetative cover in Cycles 1 and 3 of Sabine 

Refuge Marsh Creation (CS-28) project over time. Note 

the impact of and recovery from Hurricane Rita in 2005. 

Coastwide Reference Monitoring System (CRMS) site 

replaced project specific monitoring in Cycle 1 in 2009.

Table 3. Dredge cycle construction dates and acreages from U.S. Geological Survey aerial 

photography analyses conducted in 2002 and 2009.

Dredge cycle Year 

constructed

Acres 

2002

Acres 

2009 Total acres cycle

Cycle 1 2001 139 (mudflat) 171 (marsh) 200

Cycle 2 2010 approx. 150 + 100 outside 

cell (mudflat)1 230

Cycle 3 2007 133 (mudflat) 230

1

State only. No monitoring.

 Project Description and Goals

The Sabine Refuge Marsh Creation (CS-28) project 

area suffered extensive land loss caused by hurricanes 

and canal building in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s and by 

saltwater intrusion through the Calcasieu Ship Channel and 

the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. Dredged material from the 

Calcasieu Ship Channel has been placed into three of five 

planned marsh creation cycles in the Brown Lake area in 

the northeast corner of Sabine National Wildlife Refuge. 

A permanent pipeline for transferring dredged material 

to the area has been constructed to take advantage of the 

Army Corps of Engineers Maintenance Dredging for the 

Calcasieu Ship Channel. The project cycles are designed 

to create marsh, prevent saltwater intrusion, reduce wave 

energy, and nourish the existing marsh in the project area. 

Project Assessment

The three dredged cycles constructed to date have 

created at least 550 acres of emergent marsh and mudflat 

(table 3). Most of the Cycle 1 area quickly converted from 

bare mudflat to vegetated emergent marsh within the first 

few years and then slowly continued to convert from water 

to land where elevations allowed (fig. 9). The project is 

achieving its goals of creating land in each cycle.

Emergent vegetation coverage in all cycles has 

increased over time (fig. 10). Hurricane Rita impacted 

vegetation in Cycle 1 in 2005, but the area recovered 

quickly. Hurricane Rita came during a drought when 

water levels were very low, and the salty storm surge was 

absorbed by the soil. The impact of Hurricane Ike in 2008 

was negligible, most likely because of higher water levels 

prior to the storm. Hurricane Ike came in on the tails of the 

flooding rains from Hurricane Gustav, so the surface was 

already flooded, and the storm surge was not absorbed. 

 Each of the cycles has a small delta formation 

element where the containment dikes are gapped to allow 

dredged material to flow out, create additional mudflat, 

and nourish existing marsh. By 2009, an additional 47 

acres of land had been created outside the dredged material 

Cycles 1 and 3, some of it directly adjacent to Cycle 1 and 

some of it in the previously existing marsh. A permanent 

pipeline is in place, and Cycles 4 and 5 will be constructed 

via this pipeline. Cycles 4 and 5 are planned to be 230 

acres each, have a potential for additional land gain from 

levee gapping, and should extend the collective benefit of 

the project to the existing marsh. A total of 331 acres is 

predicted to remain after 20 years. 
26 

Round Lake

Brusle

Lake

CRMS6303

Data Accurate as of March 15, 2012

Map Date: March 15, 2012

Little Lake Shoreline Protection/Dedicated Dredging Near Round Lake

(BA-37)

Louisiana

Project

Location

Scale 1:40,000

Image Source:

2010 NAIP Photography

0.5 0 0.5

Miles

0.45 0 0.45

Kilometers

Marsh Creation

Project Boundary

Shoreline Protection

CRMS Site

The Little Lake Shoreline Protection/Dedicated Dredging near Round Lake (BA-37) project area 

boundary and features.
27 

BA-37 Little Lake Shoreline Protection/Dedicated Dredging 

Near Round Lake (CWPPRA PPL 11)

Project Description and Goals

There was very little marsh degradation in the 

Bayou L’Ours Basin until the advent of canal dredging 

for pipeline construction and oil field access in the 

1940s. During the 1950s and 1960s, several deep access 

canals were allowed to breach the Bayou L’Ours ridge, 

creating large gaps in the ridge, which significantly 

altered the hydrology in the semi-enclosed basin. These 

canals decreased the marsh surface elevations of the 

highly organic marsh mats and introduced saltwater 

into a fresh and intermediate marsh environment. 

Land loss data indicate that the Bayou L’Ours Basin 

decreased by 6,085 acres during the period from 1945 

to 1989. The Little Lake Shoreline Protection/Dedicated 

Dredging near Round Lake (BA-37) project was built 

to enhance a 1,374-acre portion of the Bayou L’Ours 

Basin. The goals of this project are to enhance 336 

acres, to protect and restore 713 acres of intermediate or 

brackish marshes, and to reduce the rate of marsh edge 

erosion along the Little and Round Lake shorelines over 

the 20-year project life. To attain these goals, a marsh 

creation and nourishment area and a foreshore rock dike 

were constructed.

Project Assessment

The BA-37 project is currently achieving its goals. 

The constructions of a 920-acre marsh creation and 

nourishment area and a 25,976-foot foreshore rock dike 

have enhanced and protected wetlands in the Bayou 

L’Ours basin (fig. 11).

Five years after construction, the BA-37 marsh 

creation and nourishment area seems to have created 

sustainable intermediate and brackish marsh habitats. 

The initial elevation of the constructed marsh was 

2.36 feet North American Vertical Datum of 1988 

(NAVD 88). Comparing the measured mean elevation 

changes to estimated values derived from consolidation 

curves reveals that the marsh creation area is settling 

and subsiding at a predicted rate established during 

project design, thereby suggesting sustainability of the 

area. The CRMS-6303 site vegetation data (fig. 12) 

confirm that the marsh creation area is intermediate 

and brackish marsh, thus supporting the assumption 

that the marsh creation and nourishment goals are 

being attained (fig. 12). Preliminary pre- and postconstruction shoreline position data indicate that the 

foreshore rock dike has reduced shoreline erosion rates 

in the BA-37 project area. Shoreline erosion rates were 

calculated for the marsh creation area and the lake 

rim area (project shoreline outside the marsh creation 

area) independently. Pre-construction data reveal that 

the BA-37 shoreline was transgressing at an alarming 

rate (fig. 13). It is apparent from the shoreline erosion 

data that the 2005 hurricane season significantly altered 

and reshaped the project area shoreline. The passage 

in quick succession of Hurricane Cindy (July 2005), 

Hurricane Katrina (August 2005), and Hurricane Rita 

(September 2005) in proximity to the project area 

probably eroded large sections of shoreline. The initial 

(2007–8) post-construction shoreline analysis suggests 

that the lake rim shoreline continued to erode at the 

pre-2005 rate while the marsh creation area shoreline 

erosion rate was substantially reduced (fig. 13). Later 

shoreline analysis (2008–10) shows considerable 

reductions in the lake rim erosion rates, thereby 

suggesting that the high post-construction shoreline 

erosion rate in the lake rim area was probably caused 

by Hurricane Gustav in 2008. Moreover, it appears that 

hurricanes, not cold fronts or wind generated waves, are 

the dominant force reshaping these shorelines.
Figure 11. Aerial view of a typical segment of the Little Lake Shoreline Protection/Dedicated Dredging near Round Lake (BA-37) project. The 

structure bordering the marsh creation and nourishment area is the foreshore rock dike. Note the sizable acreage of open water areas in the background.

28 
Figure 12. Annual mean cover of the dominant vegetation species populating the CRMS-6303 site 

inside the Little Lake Shoreline Protection/Dedicated Dredging near Round Lake (BA-37) marsh 

creation area from 2008 to 2011.

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

2008 2009 2010 2011

Percent Cover

Year

Southern Amaranth

Eastern Baccharis

Saltmarsh Morning-Glory

Seashore Paspalum

Chairmaker's Bulrush

Smooth Cordgrass

Saltmeadow Cordgrass

Perennial Saltmarsh Aster

Other Species

2008–2010

Post-construction

-180

-160

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

Shoreline Change (feet/yr)

1998–2003

Pre-construction 2003–2004

Pre-construction

2004–2005

Pre-construction 2007–2008

Post-construction

BA-37 Shoreline Intervals

Marsh Creation Area

Lake Rim Area

Figure 13. Preconstruction (1998–2005) 

and post-construction 

(2007–10) shoreline change 

at the Little Lake Shoreline 

Protection/Dedicated 

Dredging near Round 

Lake (BA-37) project. Note 

the considerable erosion 

induced during the 2005 

hurricane season.

29 
30 
C urrent CWPPRA Program Developments

31 

Louisiana State 2012

Coastal Protection and

Restoration Master Plan

The 2012 Louisiana Comprehensive Master Plan 

for a Sustainable Coast (Master Plan) was unanimously 

approved by the State Legislature on May 22, 2012. 

The Master Plan charts Louisiana’s coastal restoration 

and protection course for the next 50 years. The Master 

Plan includes many large Mississippi River sediment 

diversions (up to 250,000 cubic feet per second) and 

large marsh creation projects (over 20,000 acres). The 

Master Plan was developed in coordination with a 

Master Plan Framework Development Team (FDT) 

that consisted of Federal, State, and local agencies, 

stakeholders, and non-governmental organization 

(NGO) representatives. The Task Force, at its June 5, 

2012, meeting, modified the Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 

Priority Project List (PPL 23) process by requiring that 

CWPPRA projects nominated be consistent with the 

Master Plan. 

CWPPRA Projects

Reaching Their 20-Year Life

Current CWPPRA standard operating procedures 

(SOP) provide for a 20-year life for all projects, after 

which time the project would be closed and all funding 

would end. This was done because it was recognized 

that the amount of funding received would not allow 

the program to maintain projects indefinitely. CWPPRA 

does not require a 20-year project life span; however, 

the current standard operating procedures provide for 

20-year project life spans. Two of the 97 constructed 

projects will reach their 20-year lives in 2014, two in 

2015, and four in 2016. Project completion reports 

and closeout provisions may need to be implemented 

for projects ending at 20 years. CWPPRA Task Force 

member agencies are currently reviewing their projects 

nearing their 20-year lives to provide recommendations 

for closeout or continuance. The Task Force will be 

developing a 20-year project life policy in the near 

future regarding procedural steps for project closeout or 

continuance.

Sport Fish Restoration and

Boating Safety Trust Fund

The Louisiana CWPPRA program currently 

receives approximately 13 percent (70 percent of 

18.5 percent) of annual revenues from the Sport Fish 

Restoration and Boating Safety Trust Fund (Trust 

Fund), currently $79 million (FY 2012). The remaining 

30 percent of CWPPRA appropriations is divided 

evenly between the Fish and Wildlife Service Coastal 

Wetlands Conservation Grant Program and the North 

American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA). The 

Trust Fund was part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 

and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (SAFETEA-LU) that was enacted August 10, 

2005, which authorized Federal surface transportation 

and other programs for the 5-year period of 2005 to 

2009. The Trust Fund expired in October 2009 but 

has been currently extended until March 27, 2013, by 

Congressional continuing resolution.

Coastal Wetlands

Planning, Protection and 

Restoration Act Reauthorization

CWPPRA is currently authorized to 2019. It 

was reauthorized in 2004 from 2009 to 2019 through 

amendment to the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish 

Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777c[a]). Reauthorization 

will be necessary to continue the program beyond 2019.
32 

C onclusion

The Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection 

and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) has been 

actively reclaiming wetlands and helping to turn 

the tide on land loss for more than 22 years. 

Projects that have rebuilt the barrier islands and 

interior marshes and have repaired hydrology 

have all left a lasting mark on the coastal 

landscape. A foundation has been laid with the 

inception of CWPPRA, on which subsequent 

restoration initiatives have been built. Several 

comprehensive restoration plans have capitalized 

upon CWPPRA’s public planning process and so 

have been generated and widely accepted because 

of the encouragement of public involvement and 

interagency cooperation. Government planning 

documents and various ongoing feasibility studies 

have often resulted from CWPPRA generated 

project concepts. Additionally, some projects 

that have been designed through CWPPRA have 

been adopted and constructed through other 

authorities. This type of synergy between funding 

vehicles is not redundant but rather is efficient in 

pursuing project implementation. In addition to 

authorizing 192 projects, the CWPPRA program 

remains uniquely committed to the understanding 

and championing of restoration science. Together 

with a rich brain trust of local academia, program 

scientists collect and analyze data from CWPPRA 

projects to evaluate their environmental benefits. 

This helps guide managers to develop projects 

by using the most cutting edge science to support 

successful restoration. CWPPRA is meeting an 

otherwise unfilled niche by building near-term 

projects in acute, and often highly strategic, areas 

of need. This continues to be CWPPRA’s greatest 

asset and contribution to turning the tide on 

Louisiana land loss.
33 
34 

Barras, J.A., 2009, Land area change and 

overview of major hurricane impacts in 

coastal Louisiana, 2004–08: U.S. Geological 

Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3080, 

scale 1:250,000, 6 p.

Barras, J.A., J.C. Bernier, and R.A. Morton, 

2008, Land area change in coastal 

Louisiana—A multidecadal perspective 

(from 1956 to 2006): U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Map 3019, scale 

1:250,000, 14 p. (Also available at http://

pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3019/.)

Barras, J., S. Beville, D. Britsch, S. Hartley, 

S. Hawes, J. Johnston, P. Kemp, Q. Kinler, 

A. Martucci, J. Porthouse, D. Reed, K. 

Roy, S. Sapkota, and J. Suhayda, 2003, 

Historical and projected coastal Louisiana 

land changes—1978–2050: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open File Report 03–334, 39 p.

eferences

bbreviations

R

Britsch, L.D., and E.B. Kemp, 1990, Land 

loss rates—Mississippi River Deltaic Plain: 

Vicksburg, Miss., Technical Report GL-90-2, 

U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment 

Station, 25 p.

Couvillion, B.R., J.A. Barras, G.D. Steyer, W. 

Sleavin, M. Fisher, H. Beck, N. Trahan, B. 

Griffin, and D. Heckman, 2011, Land area 

change in coastal Louisiana from 1932 to 2010: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Map 3164, scale 1:265,000, 12 p. (Also available 

at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3164/downloads/

SIM3164_Pamphlet.pdf.)

LA CPRA, 2012, Louisiana Comprehensive Master 

Plan for a Sustainable Coast: Baton Rouge, La., 

Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration 

Authority, 190 p. 

• BICM – Barrier Island Comprehensive 

Monitoring Program

• CPRA - Coastal Protection and Restoration 

Authority representing the State of Louisiana 

- Office of the Governor–Coastal Activities

• CWPPRA – Coastal Wetlands Planning, 

Protection and Restoration Act

• CRMS – Coastwide Reference Monitoring 

System

• EPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

• FDT – (Master Plan) Framework 

Development Team

• GCERTF - Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration 

Task Force

• LCA – Louisiana Coastal Area

• NAWCA - North American Wetlands 

Conservation Act

• NGO – Non-governmental Organization

• NMFS - National Marine Fisheries Service 

• NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

• NRCS - Natural Resources Conservation 

Service 

• OC – (Public) Outreach Committee

• PPL – Priority Project List 

• SOP – Standard Operating Procedures

• USACE - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

• USFWS - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

• USGS – U.S. Geological Survey

A
35 

A

The Task Force has implemented various restoration techniques to protect and restore coastal 

wetlands in Louisiana. The types of techniques used in various CWPPRA projects depend on the 

problems being addressed and other site-specific factors, including project area landscape, substrate, 

wave climate, habitat type, and proximity to sediment and freshwater resources, major waterways, and 

open waters. Most CWPPRA projects employ one or more of the following restoration techniques:

•	 Freshwater Reintroduction - Freshwater is channeled from a nearby river or water body into 

surrounding wetlands. This infusion of water, sediment, and nutrients helps slow saltwater 

intrusion, slows the loss of marsh, and creates a limited amount of new marsh.

•	 Outfall Management - A variety of techniques are used to regulate the flow of freshwater 

reintroduction to ensure that water and sediment reach needed areas. These techniques maximize 

the benefits of freshwater reintroduction.

•	 Sediment Diversion - A crevasse is cut into a river levee, allowing river water, nutrients, and 

sediment to flow into nearby wetlands to mimic natural land-building processes.

•	 Dredged Material/Marsh Creation - Dredged sediment is placed at specified elevations in shallow 

open water and deteriorating marsh to encourage plant recolonization.

•	 Shoreline Protection - Eroding shorelines are protected by buttressing the land with rock berms, 

concrete, or plantings or by diffusing wave energy in front of the shore by using breakwaters and 

(or) fences.

•	 Sediment and Nutrient Trapping - Brush fences or low land ridges (terraces) are built to slow 

waterflow and promote sediment accumulation.

•	 Hydrologic Restoration - Natural drainage patterns are restored as much as possible by installing 

water control structures, by blocking dredged canals, and (or) by cutting gaps in levees.

•	 Marsh Management - The water level and salinity in a contained marsh area are controlled by 

levees and gates or weirs to promote the regrowth of desired vegetation and reestablish historical 

wildlife habitat.

•	 Barrier Island Restoration - Several methods are used to stabilize and protect islands, including 

shoring up dunes with fences and vegetative plantings, rebuilding islands with dredged material, 

and using breakwaters to protect islands from waves.

•	 Vegetative Planting - Site-appropriate marsh plants are established in project areas to reduce 

erosion, stabilize the soil, and accelerate wildlife habitat development.

•	 Terracing - Terracing is the construction of low ridges, usually in patterns, in shallow open water 

areas. The ridges slow waterflow and help trap sediment to rebuild marsh.

•	 Long-Distance Conveyance of Dredged Material - This technique is similar to other marsh 

creation techniques except different techniques are utilized to transport sediment greater distances, 

often by using booster pumps.

•	 Invasive Species Control Program - A control program pays licensed trappers/hunters to harvest 

invasive species, such as nutria, that damage the marsh.

•	 Delta Management - Wetland creation on active deltas can be enhanced by altering flow patterns, 

thus promoting land accretion.
36 

 

 

The following Web site provides a complete list of authorized projects under the Coastal Wetlands 

Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) since its implementation in 1990:

http://www.lacoast.gov/new/Projects/List.aspx.

A

A

ppendix 2. Complete List of Coastal Wetlands

Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA)

Projects Authorized Since 1990

ppendix 3. Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection

and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) Educational Videos

The Public Outreach Committee (OC) is composed of members from the participating Federal agencies, 

the State of Louisiana, other coastal programs, and non-profit organizations. But only the core group members 

representing the CWPPRA entities are eligible to vote on budget matters. The committee is currently 

responsible for 

• formulating information strategies and public and formal education initiatives, 

• maintaining a Web site of complex technical and educational materials, 

• developing audio-visual presentations, 

• organizing exhibits, 

• disseminating publications and news releases, and 

• conducting special events such as project dedications and groundbreakings.

The outreach coordinator manages the educational program, which provides information and materials 

for classroom use throughout the State. The Chairman and coordinator for outreach serve on local and regional 

planning efforts and act as the liaisons between the public, parish governments, and the various federal 

agencies involved in CWPPRA. To address the need for immediate action of wetland loss and educating the 

public, the CWPPRA’s Public Outreach Committee, in collaboration with our Federal, State, Local and private 
37 

stakeholders have developed various Outreach Videos (listed below). All the listed videos and their short 

descriptions can be found at http://www.lacoast.gov/new/Pubs/videos.aspx. 

• Returning Marshlands to Magnificent Life—Learn about hydrologic restoration techniques that 

CWPPRA uses to protect coastal Louisiana.

• CWPPRA - Rebuilding Coastal Louisiana - What is CWPPRA?—Learn about saving coastal 

Louisiana through the Coastal Wetlands Planning Protection and Restoration Act.

• Marsh Creation - Step by Step—Learn about CWPPRA’s efforts to save Marsh Island in south central 

coastal Louisiana.

• Meet the CWPPRA Task Force—Learn about Louisiana’s coastal restoration efforts through 

CWPPRA. As CWPPRA celebrates its 20th anniversary, Task Force members explain why 

restoration is essential to Louisiana. 

• Louisiana Coastal Land Loss Simulation Video 1932-2010—This USGS-NWRC video captures 

Louisiana Coastal Land Loss issues via animation.

• Coastal Louisiana: Impacts of Hurricanes on Salt Marsh and Mangrove Wetlands—This video 

describes research conducted by Dr. Karen McKee, USGS Research Ecologist, and her university 

partners, Dr. Irv Mendelssohn (Louisiana State University) and Dr. Mark Hester (University of 

Louisiana at Lafayette). They are studying the effects of hurricanes on marsh and mangrove wetlands 

in the Mississippi River Delta.

• Effects of Sea-Level Rise on Coastal Wetlands in the Mississippi Delta—This video describes 

research being conducted by Dr. Karen McKee, USGS Research Ecologist, and her university 

partner, Dr. Julia Cherry. Their goal is to better understand the effects of sea-level rise and other 

global change factors on coastal wetlands in the Mississippi River Delta.

• The Floating Marshes of Louisiana: A Unique Ecosystem—In the Mississippi River Delta Plain, there 

are large expanses of floating marsh, which are the focus of this video. This unique ecosystem is 

dominated by a variety of grasses and forbs, which can create a buoyant mat that floats on a layer of 

water. How these marshes form and some of their unique features are described.

• What Lies Beneath: Using Mangrove Peat to Study Ancient Coastal Environments and Sea-Level 

Rise—This video describes how scientists study past changes in sea level and coastal environments 

by analyzing mangrove peat. Mangrove islands located off the coast of Belize are underlain by deep 

deposits of peat (organic soil), which retain a record of past sea level, vegetation, and climate. By 

studying past changes in sea level and how intertidal ecosystems, such as mangroves, have responded 

to these changes, we can better predict what will happen in the future as sea levels increase. 

Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA)