&Jd.y3'//2 : / r 82 *>? °^ X s S *TES O* h / Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan - Phase Four - Lafourche Parish, Louisiana U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Zone Management UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ON THE PROPOSED PORT FOURCHON DEVELOPMENT PLAN PHASE IV, LAFOURCHE PARISH, LOUISIANA Prepared by: ^ Office of Coastal Zone Management \ National Oceanic and Atmospheric K Administration o Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation http://www.archive.org/details/finalenvironmenOOnati TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO, TABLE OF CONTENTS i LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES vli THF PRO.IFCT AMI ITS IMPACTS SECTION 1: GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1-1 A. SITE 1-1 B. THE PROJECT 1-1 C. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 1-8 SECTION 2: BENEFICIARIES 2-1 A. AREA AND COMMUNITIES AFFECTED 2-1 B. NEED FOR PROJECT 2-1 C. ECONOMIC STATUS 2-1 SECTION 3: PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 3-1 A. NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE 3-1 B. STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 1: BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE- JUMP WATERWAY 3-3 C. STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 2: WIDENING OF BAYOU LAFOURCHE 3-9 D. STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 3: REDUCING THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT 3-11 E. NON- STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 1 3-13 F. NON- STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 2 3-14 SECTION 4: PROJECT DESIGN *-i A. ENGINEERING DESIGN 4-1 B. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FEATURES . . . 4-12 SECTION 5: COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS AND PROCEDURES- 5 " 1 A. STATE PERMITTING PROCEDURES 5-1 B. LOCAL PERMITTING PROCEDURES 5-4 SECTION 6: SECTION 7: SECTION 8: SECTION 9: SECTION 10 ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY e-i A. ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS WHICH CANNOT BE SOLVED 6-1 B. MITIGATION 6-8' SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT • 7-1 A. LAND RESOURCES 7-1 B. VEGETATIVE RESOURCES 7-1 C. WILDLIFE RESOURCES 7-2 D. WATER RESOURCES 7-2 E. AQUATIC RESOURCES 7-3 F. AIR IMPACTS . 7-3 G. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPACTS (PRIMARY AND SECONDARY) 7-3 H. RECREATIONAL FACILITIES 7-4 I. ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 7-4 J. HUMAN ELEMENT 7-4 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES s-i A. LAND RESOURCES 8-1 B. VEGETATIVE RESOURCES 8-1 C. WILDLIFE RESOURCES 8-1 D. WATER RESOURCES 8-2 E. AQUATIC RESOURCES 8-2 F. RECREATIONAL RESOURCES 8-2 G. ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 8-2 H. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 8-2 I. MINERAL RESOURCES 8-2 J. EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS 8-3 K. HUMAN ELEMENT 8-3 L. MISCELLANEOUS 8-3 FEDERAL AND STATE INVOLVEMENT 9-i A. FEDERAL PROJECTS 9-1 B. STATE PROJECTS 9-3 C. OTHER AGENCIES CONTACTED 9-3 D. COMMENTS RECEIVED 9-4 E. EXISTING AND PROPOSED AREA-WIDE PLANNING AGENCIES 9-7 F. OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING CONSIDERED . . 9-8 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH OTHERS 10-1 A. AGENCIES 10-1 B. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 10-4 C. PRIVATE PARTICIPATION 10-4 li BWIROOTOTAL DISCUSSION PAGE NO . SECTION A: LAND USE a-i A. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT A-l B. IMPACT ON OTHER COMMUNITY FACILITIES . . . A-6 C. MAP INFORMATION A-8 D. GEOLOGY AND PHYSIOGRAPHY A-9 E. HYDROLOGIC ELEMENTS A-23 F. CLIMATOLOGY A~34 G. FLOODPLAINS A-39 H. WETLANDS A-42 I. WILDLIFE HABITAT A-50 J. FARMLANDS A-65 K. RECREATIONAL ELEMENTS A-67 SECTION B: NOISE IMPACTS b-i SECTION C: AIR QUALITY c-i SECTION D: WATER QUALITY d-i A. STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS D-l B. PRESENT CONDITIONS D-2 C. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS D-6 D. WATER QUALITY CHANGES D-8 SECTION E: WASTE WATER TREM1ENT PLANTS e-i SECTION F: SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT f-i SECTION G: HUMAN POPULATION g-i A. DESCRIPTION G-l B. ECONOMY G-4 C. INSTITUTIONS G-17 D. DISRUPTION OF SERVICES G-18 E. RELOCATION G-18 SECTION H: TRANSPORTATION h-i A. HIGHWAYS H-l B. RAILROADS H-l C. WATERWAYS H-l D. PIPELINES H-4 E. AIR TRANSPORTATION H-4 F. IMPACTS H-4 SECTION I: WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 1-1 in SECTION J: HISTORIC PRESERVATION j-i A. NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES . . J-l B. ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES . J-l C. GENERAL ARCHEOLOGY J-2 D. TYPES OF SITES AND LOCATION J-5 E. STATUS J-8 F. GENERAL HISTORICAL INFORMATION J-9 G. EVALUATION OF SITES J-10 SECTION K: .OWENIS AND RESPONSES *-i REFERENCES *-i IV LIST OF FIGURES FIG. PAGE NO. THE PROJECT AND ITS IMPACTS 1-1 The Bayou Lafourche transcoastal corridor 1-2 1-2 The Lafourche corridor located between Terrebonne and Salvador-Barataria estuarine areas. . . 1-3 1-3 Port Fourchon development plan 1-4 1-4 Jetty improvement in Belle Pass 1-6 3-1 Bayou Lafourche - Lafourche Jump Waterway 3-4 3-2 The Bayou Lafourche corridor in relation to its flanking estuaries 3-6 4-1 Shell road and bank reshaping under construction at Port Fourchon 4-4 4-2 Typical road cross sections at the Port Fourchon facility 4-5 4-3 Proposed channel and slip facilities at Port Fourchon 4-6 4-4 Typical bank stabilization along Pass Fourchon at the Port Fourchon facility 4-7 4-5 Navigation channel improvements in Belle Pass and Gulf of Mexico associated with the Port Fourchon facility 4-8 4-6 Proposed rip-rap at intersection of Bayou Lafourche and the flotation canal at the Port Fourchon facility. 4-9 4-7 Typical sections of proposed rip-rap at intersection of Bayou Lafourche and the flotation canal 4-10 4-8 Maps of the study area (a, b, and c) 4-13 ENVIfWFNTAI msmssTm A-l Port Fourchon area A-2 A-2 Different environments and vegetation of the study area A-3 Elk PAGE NO . A-3 The Port Fourchon study area in relation to the remainder of Lafourche Parish , A-4 A-4 Land use map of Lafourche Parish , A-5 A-5 The Gulf Coast Geosyncline in the vicinity of Port Fourchon , , , A-10 A-6 The deltaic sequence in south Louisiana A-13 A- 7 The deltaic sequence in south Louisiana .,«..., A-14 A-8 Contours showing depth to the top of the Pleistocene formations . ,..,.,.. A-15 A- 9 Physiography of the study region A-15 A-10 Geologic columns from the Port Fourchon area .... A-18 A-ll Subsidence rates, subsurface faults, and salt domes in the Port Fourchon area ,,.,... A-19 A-12 Historic and projected shoreline retreat in the Caminada-Port Fourchon area A-20 A-13 Oil and gas pipelines and petroleum fields in the Port Fourchon area A-22 A-14 General hydrology of the Port Fourchon area A-24 A-15 Average salinity distribution across south central Louisiana A-25 A-16 Selected sites for hydraulic data shown in Table A-4 . A-31 A-17 Percentage of rainfall excess, South Central Louisiana ' « . A-36 A-18 Paths of hurricanes in the vicinity of the study area , A-40 A-19 Storm surge from the Hurricane Betsy A-41 A-20 Impounded area in Port Fourchon A-45 A-21 Schematic diagram illustrating morphological environ- ments and related vegetation associations A-45 A-22 Spoil fill being prepared for Port Fourchon development A-46 A- 23 Port Fourchon beach A-46 VI LIST OF TABLES IflBLE PAGE NO, THE PROJECT AND ITS WATTS 2-1 The average effect of the location of a new establishment (offshore oil associated) in Port Fourchon 2-2 2-2 The average effect of the location of a new establishment (oilfield service) in Port Fourchon 2-2 2-3 The average effect of the location of a new establishment (port related) in Port Fourchon 2-4 2-4 Direct and indirect impact of the Port Fourchon development 2-5 4-1 Development program for Port Fourchon 4-2 6-1 Adverse effects on archeological sites of the area . . . 6-4 6-2 Degree of importance each archeological site should receive 6-5 ENVIROIfBllAL DISCUSSION A-l Geologic column of the study area A-ll A-2 Physical characteristics of depositional environments f » A-16 A-3 Oil and gas production in Lafourche Parish compared to Louisiana (1970) , , . . , A-21 A-4 Hydraulic data at selected sites , , A-30 A-5 Monthly tide levels in feet along the Central Louisiana Coast, 1958-59 A-32 A- 6 Annual wave climate summary for Coastal Louisiana .... A-32 A-7 Monthly precipitation in inches, Southeast Division , . . A-35 A-8 Percentage frequencies of relative humidity observations at 6 A.M. and 3 P.M., during midseason months A-37 A-9 Frequency in percent of winds from various directions in the Gulf of Mexico A-38 VII miL PAGE NO . A-10 Plants associated with environments located within the Port Fourchon complex A-43 A-ll Saline marsh as affected by spoil banks within the impounded area A-44 A-12 A list of vascular plants present in the study area . . A-48 A-13 Recreation provided in past years and for 1971-1979 Wisner Wildlife Management Area A-52 A-14 Trawl Data for the Impoundment Area A-61 A-15 List of species of fish common in the study area . . . A-62 A-16 Participation by activity of persons six years and older, Region 3 A-68 C-l Average percentage frequency of occurrence of wind speed - July C-2 C-2 Average percentage frequency of occurence of wind speed - September C-3 C-3 Average percentage frequency of occurrence of wind speed - October C-4 C-4 Average percentage frequency of occurrence of wind speed - December C-5 D-l Hydrologic and water quality data, lower Bayou Lafourche at Gulf of Mexico D-3 D-2 Hydrologic and water quality data, lower Bayou Lafourche 5.0 miles, south of Leeville, Louisiana . . . D-4 G-l Population increases 1960-1970, Lafourche Parish and Louisiana G-l G-2 Population characteristics of Lafourche Parish compared to Louisiana (1970) G-2 G-3 Projected population - Lafourche Parish G-2 G-4 Population Lafourche Parish and Ward 10 G-3 G-5 Percentage distribution of employment by major industry in Lafourche Parish G-5 G-6 Payroll distribution in Lafourche Parish, Louisiana, and the United States, January - March, 1972 G-6 G-7 Families at various income levels, Lafourche Parish, 1969 G-7 viii TABLE PAGE NO . G-8 Percent of families with incomes under $3,000 and $10,000 and over, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana, and the U.S.A., 1969 G-7 G-9 Selected agricultural statistics for Lafourche Parish, Louisiana (1974 and 1969) G-8 G-10 Total commercial landings of fish and shellfish in Louisiana G-9 G-ll Quantity and value of commercial landings at certain Louisiana fishing ports (1971-1973) G-10 G-12 Volume of shrimp landings (Heads-off basis) reported in Lafourche and Terrebonne Parishes, Louisiana . . . G-ll G-13 Quantity and value of oyster landings, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana G-ll G-14 Total and average wages and employment in fisheries, canned and cured seafoods, and fish processing and packaging industries in Lafourche Parish G-12 G-15 Oil and gas production in Lafourche Parish compared to Louisiana (1970) G-13 G-16 Petroleum, natural gas, sulphur, natural gas liquid, (Minerals in order of value), 1973-1974 G-13 G-17 Clfude petroleum production and wells completed in Lafourche Parish, by area G-15 G-18 Manufacturers in the Port Fourchon area (1972) .... G-16 G-20 Composite health status indicator, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana, and nation (1971) G-18 G-21 Direct and indirect impact of the Port Fourchon development G-19 H-l Waterborne Commerce of the U.S., Bayou Lafourche . . . H-2 H-2 Waterborne Commerce of the U.S., Louisiana Segment of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway H-3 J-l Coastal Louisiana culture sequence and chronology . . J-3 J-2 Percentages of decorated sherds for two sites in the Port Fourchon area J-4 IX SUMMARY ( ) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (x) Final Environmental Impact Statement This document was prepared by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Coastal Zone Manage- ment. For additional information about the proposed action or this document , contact : Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 1. TYPE OF ACTION (x) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION As part of the coastal zone management activities of the Federal government, the Secretary of Commerce administers and coordinates a coastal energy impact program (CEIP) under Section 308 of the Coastal Zone Management Act as amended (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.). The CEIP provides financial assistance to coastal states and units of local governments within those states to mitigate the on-shore impacts of coastal energy activities. The proposed action is a loan offer for the amount of $6,300,000.00 to the Greater Lafourche Port Commission to fund the fourth phase of a multiport facility to accommodate the needs of the fishing/seafood indus- try, recreation/tourism industry, the offshore oil industry, and the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, Inc. (LOOP). Phase 4 consists of: a) Dredging a channel and slip and fill in Pass Fourchon as well as relocating and maintaining an entrance channel at Belle Pass; b) Making stone jetty improvements at Belle Pass (Bayou Lafourche); c) Dredging and stabilizing a flotation canal; d) Making drainage improvements; and e) Constructing a bulkhead for docking facilities. S-l New construction and improvements will require dredging a total of 2.957 million cubic yards of spoil which will result in an average increase in elevation of 3.84 feet at the spoil sites. Phase 4 is described in more detail in Section 1, pages 6-7. The port facilities will be wholly owned by the Greater Lafourche Port Commission, a unit of general purpose government as defined in the Coastal Zone Management Act, as amended, Section 308 (1) (3). The System of user charges to provide the primary source of repayment of the loan over the 30-year life of the facility is described in the project document files located at the Office of Coastal Zone Management at the address shown on the previous page. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Short term benefits of granting a loan to construct Phase 4 of the port facilities are an increase in construction-related employment and an increase in disposable income which will be spent for housing and services in the communities near the port site. Combined with the first three phases of the port development, the long term benefits of this action will affect the economic base of Grand Isle and local communities north of Golden Meadow in Lafourche Parish. The commercial marina, docking facility, and warehouses should attract larger shrimp boats and seafood processing industries for a net increase in employment and tax revenues for the Parish. The five-ramp launch for sport boats should attract recreational fishermen who will need services from the local communities. The bridge providing access to the beach should attract land-based day users to the area which will benefit the local economy. Phase 4 will result in the creation of 450 acres of land to provide a site for future industrial and commercial development. If this development occurs, the employment and tax base of the Parish would increase significantly. LOOP, Incorporated, esti- mated that employment for 250 permanent full time persons would be generated by the offshore oil port. Property tax generated by the LOOP facility was estimated at $32,000 to $49,000 annually. Short term costs will primarily affect water quality and wildlife habitat. There will be a temporary increase in turbidity and loss of benthic organisms as a result of dredging and onshore construction. The degradation of water quality will reduce the food supply for aquatic species and disrupt breeding and feeding activities of aquatic species and waterfowl in parts of Bayou Lafourche and Belle Pass. Onshore construction will disrupt the breeding and feeding activities of terrestrial species, though the habitat affected has already been disrupted by previous dredge spoil disposal. Long term costs of Phase 4 can be grouped into five areas: land use, flood problems, recreation, terrestrial wildlife habitat, fisheries habitat and special concerns. S-2 Land use changes involve loss of 55 acres of land for construction of the T-slip and creation of 450 acres of dry land around the T-slip for the industrial/commercial site. The 450-acre site is currently a combination of brackish marsh habitat and old spoil disposal sites. Past spoil disposal has raised the land 6 to 12 inches; project-related dredging will raise the site another 3 feet. If development does not occur immediately at this disposal site, it will accommodate spoil from maintenance dredging for 20 years. As use of the port facilities increases, the rate of beach and shoreline erosion will increase as a result of wave wash from passing vessels. Storm surges and torrential rainfall will generate floods periodi- cally at the project site. Past floods have attained depths of 10 feet or more in the project area which will be elevated less than 10 feet above mean sea level by fill. The proposed site is within the 100-year floodplain as mapped for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in May 1971. The project is not presently specifically designed to minimize potential harm to the floodplain, to meet flood- proofing standards under the National Flood Insurance Program, or to be in compliance with the Flood Disaster Protection Act. However, the facilities are located behind the beach which serves as a natural buffer to reduce the force of storm surges. Changes in recreational uses at the project site will result in the loss of revenues from current fishing and duck hunting activities when the 450-acre marsh/spoil site is converted to dry land. Providing better access to the barrier beaches is anticipated to increase their use. Increased use will result in the loss of beach vegetation and an increase in the rate of beach erosion. Currently, the shoreline is retreating at a rate of just over 20 meters a year. As the land at the 450-acre site is committed to roads, warehouses and other industrial/commercial uses, the habitat available for ter- restrial species will be reduced. The conversion of the area from a migratory waterfowl feeding area to dry land is a more significant change in habitat than the loss of marginal habitat on revegetated dredge spoils. The long term loss in fisheries habitat will result from changes in the hydrology of the project area. Widening and deepening the channel at Belle Pass will increase the salinity in Bayou Lafourche and adjacent marsh/ estuarine habitats. Two of the most productive estuarine areas in the United States are located immediately to the east and to the west of the project area; they are the Caminada- Barataria and the Timbalier-Terrebonne estuarine systems, respectively. Bayou Lafourche is hydrologically connected to both of these systems and serves as a passageway for the movement of marine organisms into and out of the estuarine areas at different stages in their life cycles. Increases in salinity are expected up the channel as a result of dredging operations. The salt water wedge will move upward and will S-3 create a barrier to this movement of organisms, reducing the productivity of the estuaries. The impact of saltwater intrusion on the Timbalier- Terrebonne system could be mitigated by restricting water exchange through the tidal streams which connect lower Bayou Lafourche and Timbalier Bay. Special concerns relate to identified endangered species and archeological sites affected by the project. The project will en- croach on the feeding areas of the endangered brown pelican, bald eagle and peregrine falcon near the mouth of Belle Pass. The brown pelican, Louisiana's state bird, was only reestablished in the state coastal zone in the 1960 's. The project area also is in the range of three endangered species of sea turtles, but the use of the project area by these species has not been established. Project construction will affect six archeological sites, but only two are significant enough to be eligible for nomination to the National Register of His- toric Places. These two sites will be protected from being buried under dredge spoil during project construction. However, increased bank ero- sion, vandalism, and maintenance dredging will affect all the sites over the long term. 4. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The no action alternative was rejected because of the economic benefits which would be lost. Port Fourchon is strategically located between the LOOP project site and the Lafourche transcoastal cor- ridor. In addition, the first three phases of the port are well underway; failure to fund Phase 4 will not eliminate many of the impacts of the project. Structural Alternative 1, the Bayou Lafourche and Lafourche Jump Waterway, was rejected because of adverse impacts on archeological sites, saltwater intrusion into a municipal water supply and adverse effects on estuarine ecosystems which include parts of the Point-au- Chien Wildlife Management area and the Wisner Wildlife Management area. Structural Alternative 2, Widening of Bayou Lafourche, was rejected because of adverse impacts on the human environment, particularly relocation of existing facilities, residences and roads. In addition, widening the bayou would eliminate most of the land suitable for development so that growth would encroach further on wetlands. Structural Alternative 3, Reducing the Scope of the Project, was rejected because it would foreclose options for responding to future needs of the offshore mineral extraction industry. In addition, imple- menting this alternative might have the effect of overtaxing the planned facilities at Morgan City in adjacent St. Mary's Parish, described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Draft Supplement to Final Environ- mental Statement — Atchafalaya River and Bayous Chene, Bpeuf and Black, Louisiana. S-4 Nonstructural Alternative 2, Expanding Other Existing Small Port Facilities in the Region, was rejected because it would result in increased boat traffic through waterways in environmentally sensitive areas of the coastal zone and would induce expansion into wetlands at many sites, rather than concentrating development and wetlands losses at one site. 5. DISTRIBUTION Comments have been requested from the following Federal, state and local agencies and other parties: FEDERAL AGENCIES Advisory Council on Historic Preservation * Department of Agriculture * Department of Commerce Department of Defense Department of the Navy * U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers U.S. Air Force Department of Health, Education and Welfare Department of Housing and Urban Development * Department of the Interior Department of Justice Department of Labor * Department of Transportation Economic Development Administration Environmental Protection Agency Federal Energy Regulatory Commission General Services Administration Marine Mammal Commission * U.S. Coast Guard U.S. Department of Energy NATIONAL INTEREST GROUPS American Association of Port Authorities American Bureau of Shipping American Fisheries Society American Institute of Merchant Shipping American Petroleum Institute American Water Resources Association American Waterways Operators Barrier Islands Coalition Center for Natural Areas Coastal States Organization S-5 Conservation Foundation Environmental Defense Fund Environmental Law Institute Gulf South Atlantic Fisheries Development Foundation Izaak Walton League League of Women's Voters Education Fund National Association of Dredging Contractors National Audubon Society National Fisheries Institute Natural Resources Defense Council National Wildlife Federation Shipbuilders Council of America Sierra Club Sport Fishing Institute STATE/LOCAL AGENCIES Capital Resources, Conservation and Development Project Central Lafourche Regional Planning Commission Community Improvement Agency Cresent Soil and Water Conservation District Greater Lafourche Port Commission Jefferson Port Commission Lafourche Basin Levee District Louisiana Coastal Commission Louisiana Department of Natural Resources Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Louisiana Historical Preservation and Cultural Commission Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission Morgan City Harbor and Terminal District St. Charles Parish Environmental Council South Central Planning and Development Commission, Thibodaux South Lafourche Regional Planning Commission South Louisiana Tidal Water Control Levee District State Soil and Water Conservation Committee Terrebonne Parish Police Jury Thibodaux Regional Planning Commission Water Resources Study Commission OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana State University Sportsmens Committee, Morgan City Chamber of Commerce Dularge Hunting Club, Inc. Ecology Center of Louisiana Orleans Audubon Society Louisiana Center for the Public Interest Louisiana Wildlife Federation Nicholls State University Howard Stark Company, Inc. Woods and Waters Club S-6 WVUE-TV Individuals who requested copies of the document * denotes parties who commented on the DEIS LIBRARY INFORMATION CENTERS Copies of this document were provided to the following libraries: Assumption Parish St. Bernard Parish Napoleonville, Louisiana Chalmette, Louisana Jefferson Parish St. Charles Parish Metairie, Louisiana Hahnville, Louisiana Lafourche Parish St. Martin Parish Thibodaux, Louisiana St. Martinville, Louisiana Orleans Parish Terrebonne Parish New Orleans, Louisiana Houma, Louisiana Plaquemines Parish Buras, Louisiana 6. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT REVIEW A draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) prepared on this project was filed at the Environmental Protection Agency on July 28, 1978. The Notice of Availability of the document appeared in the Federal Register on August 7, 1978. On August 30, 1978, a public hearing was held for the purpose of receiving comments on the document. The 45-day comment period for the DEIS ended on September 18, 1978. A 15-day extension of the comment period was granted at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency. All comments received by the close of business on October 3, 1978 have been addressed in this Final Environmental Impact Statement. There will be a 30-day review period for this Final Environmental Impact Statement. PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS - THIBODAUX, LOUISIANA - AUGUST 30, 1978 Huey P. Collins, Golden Meadow Oil Company, Inc. Brent A. Duet, Martin Fuel Distributors, Inc. E.L. Ingalls, Dowell Division of Dow Chemical Co. Leroy "Tom" Kiffe, Louisiana Shrimp Association Andrew Martin, Greater Lafourche Port Commission Irvin Melancon, Louisiana Offshore Oil Port Larry D. Weidel, South Lafourche Chamber of Commerce S-7 THE PROJECT AND ITS IMPACTS SECTION 1: GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. SITE The Port Fourchon development is a multi-purpose facility to be completed on a 586 acre site located in the Tenth Ward of Lafourche Parish, Louisiana, where the waters of Bayou Lafourche meet the Gulf of Mexico. The project site lies within a larger tract of approximately 3,800 acres which is under the jurisdiction of the Greater Lafourche Port Commission. The Commission was established in 1960, with full powers of a port, harbor, and terminal district. The site is located at the seaward end of the Lafourche trans- coastal corridor, one of the most important and best established litiks between the inland areas of the coastal zone and the Gulf of Mexico. This corridor is defined by Bayou Lafourche, an important water trans- portation artery, and by alluvial ridges along the bayou (Fig. 1-1). The Lafourche corridor forms a natural boundary between two major estuarine complexes, the Terrebonne system to the west and the Salvador- Barataria system to the east. Each of these systems is highly produc- tive and represents a major resource (Fig. 1-2). To maintain the integ- rity of these systems and provide for environmental management, these systems must be retained as natural entities. Development related to oil and gas industry and fisheries must therefore be concentrated to the greatest extent possible on the higher boundaries of the units rather than be allowed to disperse through canals, roads, and other hydrologic alternatives with resultant fragmentation of the system. The Port Fourchon development follows this principle in that it confines activi- ties and related primary and secondary impacts to an existing corridor. As shown in Fig. 1-3, the total tract is comprised of four major components. Component A is the project area. Of the 586 acres lying within this component, 55: acres will be occupied by the proposed T-slip and 450 acres of spoil-filled area will be committed to other aspects of the project development. Component B is an impounded wet- land 2284 acres in extent. As shown in Fig. 1-3, an existing commercial marina presently lies in the northeastern part of this component. Com- ponent C is a 1316 acre area consisting primarily of wetlands bounded by Belle Pass and Pass Fourchon on the west and east and by the Gulf shore on the south. There is presently some petroleum industry related activity in this component. Component D of the tract lies between Pass Fourchon and Bay Champagne. Nicholls State University presently main- tains a coastal and marine research laboratory in this component . B. THE PROJECT It is proposed that the fourth phase of a multiport facility be implemented under the guaranteed loan provisions of the Coastal Energy Impact Program. The facility will accommodate the needs of: 1) the fishing and seafood industry, 2) recreation and tourism, 3) the offshore 1-1 < y^ H CO < o o CO _l is CO -J < z < CO < III <9 £C CC Z CC o CC CC < 3 CC o \- H O -1 cr < () < O Z Zt k 0. O -o •H U i-t o o ■p to cfl o a co C cd j-i CO C/3 c CO § O ■co- II II •H X rH II II o O w ■co- II II Pm II II 3 II II 4J o II II S-i rH •H II II O H CO 4-> II II Pm OS u o H CO os co co m vo o rn II II n. 3 cu CN 00 rH VO OS v£> LT> CN o II II c H 4-1 u rH lo >cr n rs o co • II II *H CJ w •v a<- rH II II O 3 o CN CO >st In CO IN |3 CO II II /-» H u rH vO ii II U vD t- O m oo rH co m m vO U II II o H 3 * n CO- -CO- -CO- * #» #\ * #v «\ r« CO || II 4-1 CU > ro Oi CO vD O H o o 3 II II to o •H r-l m rH 00 rH O H CO 00 co II II cu H Fn CU vO v£> - ^ *n #\ »> CU II 13 CO 00 CN CN CJ II II CU •CO- -CO- rH •> sO IN ^D v£) vO vO H II ii a G CO r. A #\ A r\ n #v is II It cu u CO CU m h inco •CO- -CO- CO II ii U rH rH cu ii II cu ■CO- -CO- CO II II 00 CU II II co Pi ii 1 u CO II II cu cu X! II II > CO CO J-l T3 4J II II cfl u co 4-i 3 cu 3 II II 4-1 cu H C WTl cu O II II cu H 3 M CO (U -H 13 rH rH CO || I! fl cu % u •H 6 13 <3 rH pQ II Pm S o r^ CX (3 o CO 4-1 II II x: IS cu «h cu cu u rH rH II II a) CO 13 4-1 ,£3 CX d >s •H 3 II II • 00 •H 4-1 a cu cd CO X rH TJ S W CO CO CU CO O II II co CO rH 3 o Pm 3 > II II l u ,a cu •H 13 4-1 > rH < II II cn 01 co R rH 4-J 4-1 rH O O CO 4-1 3 > 4-1 cu ii II cu < CO o o 3 CO 0) CU 4-> o 13 o a ii II rH w rH U 13 CU 2 4-1 d -H r! •* 53 U II II ,Q a r>S> O 00 rH CO rH CX 4-1 S o 1 3 II II CO B CO U CO CO O cd CO CU o <1 II II H W PM PM rs > cj > u z FQ 13 CO || 2-4 Table 2-4 . Direct and indirect impact of the Port Fourchon development. Item Affected Direct Indirect Total Population 371 a 1,197 1,558 Household 371 371 742 Personal Income $3,633,510 $2,634,100 $6,267,610 Bank Deposits $ 185,000 $1,187,200 $1,372,200 New Retail Establishments — 11 11 Employment 371 241 612 Retail Sales $l,453,403 b $1,228,010 $2,681,413 a Due to almost total employment in the parish it is felt that all direct employment will cause workers to migrate into the parish. b Retail sales cover only those sales resulting from personal spending. The combined land and related impact of the development was thus estimated to be $16,152,723. Source: Gulf South Research Institute, 1974. offshore needs. Excluding the temporary increase in employment activity associated with the construction of LOOP (including the platforms, piping, pumping station, and salt dome storage facility) that may create short-term positive secondary economic impacts on the Port; LOOP, Inc., currently estimates permanent full time employment to amount to 250 persons. LOOP, Inc., estimates that approximately one-half of its workers will reside in Lafourche Parish. In addition to serving as a port user, LOOP will provide significant tax revenues to Lafourche Parish through the property tax. The Port Commission, whose revenues are in part derived from the property tax, will benefit. In a study conducted for the office of Coastal Zone Management by Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Company (1978) it was estimated that the Port Commission would receive an additional $32,000 to $49,000 annually from property tax generated by LOOP. (The range reflects the low and high option development schedules of LOOP, Inc.). In summary, the economic impacts of the Port Fourchon develop- ment program are difficult to identify at this time. Such issues as specific land uses and their availability, staging of improvements (i.e., installation of sewage treatment facilities), and the develop- ment of a marketing program need to be resolved before an adequa e economic analysis can be performed. 2-5 SECTION 3; PROJECT ALTERNATIVES This section will describe the range of options from which the proposed action was chosen, the adverse and beneficial environmental impacts of those options, and the reasons the various options were not chosen. A. NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE This alternative would involve the decision to halt further devel- opment of the multi-purpose project. As the first three phases of the project have been implemented, this alternative would apply to phases 4 through 7 . 1. General Description of the Alternative a) Objective of the Action The objective of the no build alternative would be to restrict further development at the Port Fourchon site. b) Site and Area Description If no additional phases of the port project were implemented the area would continue to undergo changes from natural and man-induced processes. The already -diked area would continue to hold freshwater and give refuge to waterfowl and mammals 3 and the marshes would continue to revert to open water conditions as a result of subsidence. The area below Pass Fourchon and the Gulf shore would continue to deteriorate and erode at present rates. Some increased development would probably occur in the vicinity of the commercial marina and the petroleum industry in- stallations on Pass Fourchon. Construction and operation of the LOOP facility and increasing offshore service activity will result in heavier use of small ports throughout the area. If Port Fourchon is not further developed, this will be directed toward Venice, Empire, Grand Isle, Lafitte, Larose,and Houma (see Fig. 1-1). In all of these ports, with the exception of Grand Isle, the increased traffic will be along inland waterways which traverse environmentally sensitive areas of the coastal zone. Grand Isle is the onl> maj.ot tourism-oriented and recreational area near the proposed development. 2. Adverse Impacts Adverse impacts of the no build alternative would include increased bank erosion, water pollution, and maintenance dredging on waterways lead- ing into other small ports of the area. Most of these lie within fragile estuarine environments. In addition to this impact on fish and wildlife, archeological sites along these waterways would be further degraded through erosion should the no build alternative be chosen. 3-1 Failure to implement the project would mean that navigation, rec reation, transportation, and economic benefits attributable to the pro- ject would be foregone. 3. Beneficial Impacts Beneficial impacts relate primarily to increased economic benefits to locales in the immediate vicinity of other existing small ports. 4. Decision on this Alternative Because of the strategic position of Port Fourchon in reference to the LOOP project and the Lafourche "transcoastal corridor, as well as the present status of project development (through Phase 3), the no build alter- native was rejected. 3-2 B. STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 1: BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE- JUMP WATERWAY This alternative is a project authorized by the River and Harbor Act of 14 July 1960, House Document 112, 86th Congress through modi- fication of the River and Harbor Act of 30 August 1935, House Document 45, 73rd Congress, The project has not been funded at present. Public hearings have been held revealing strong opposition to the project and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared (U,S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, 1972), 1. General Description of the Alternative Project features are shown in Fig, 3-1, One project feature is channel enlargement through dredging of Bayou Lafourche from Thibodaux to the Gulf of Mexico, including the mouth of Belle Passe to the -20 ft depth in the Gulf. This feature has been completed since 1968 under the original authorization. The second feature is the Bayou Lafourche auxiliary channel parallel to and to the west of Bayou Lafourche providing a bypass between Leeville and Larose. The third feature is the Lafourche- Jump Waterway which follows the Southwestern Louisiana canal from Leeville to Caminada Bay, and proceeds through the bay to and through Bayou Rigaud shoreward of Grand Isle. a) Objective of the Action The objective of the overall channel system is to provide safer navigation and more efficient operations in the movement of materials and equipment to and from oil, gas, and sulphur - producing areas, the movement of shell, shrimp, and oysters by fishing vessels, the provision of an evacuation route, and refuge from Gulf storms and tropical hurricanes. The Lafourche-Jump feature of the proposed plan would facilitate east-west movement of vessels carrying fish and oilfield supplies between Bayou Lafourche and the highly productive areas to the east. This route is navigated at the present time only by smaller boats and shallow draft barges with considerable difficulty, requiring addi- tional time and power to negotiate. Implementation of the plan would provide a more readily navigable and shorter route to Barataria Bay and surrounding waters from Bayou Lafourche by the larger vessels currently in use. The auxiliary channel would alleviate navigation hazards along Bayou Lafourche. Expansion of both oil and fishing operations has exceeded the physical limitations of the bayou to accommodate the water traffic adequately. The restricted channel width is further re- duced by overhanging buildings and wharves to which numerous small 3-3 cd !* dJ ■u cd rs a l *-) Xi u o <+-! cd o o m cd o t^ cd PQ I m 60 •H 3-4 vessels are moored. Barges cannot be loaded to capacity and a reduction of speed is necessary in order to keep wave wash to reasonable limits, thereby preventing damage to moored vessels and structures. Movement of large oil barges and drilling equipment over the bayou is exceedingly difficult in the narrow waterway, On windy days, an extra tug is employed in an effort to hold the tow straight and avoid collision damage. Con- struction of the auxiliary channel would facilitate use of larger, more modern vessels used in fish and oil industries and thus eliminate the need to use circuitous routes by way of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) , b) General Design General design features are as follows. The completed enlargement of Bayou Lafourche would include a 9 ft by 100 ft channel from Lockport to Larose, a 6 ft x 60 ft channel from Larose to Golden Meadow, a 9 ft x 100 ft channel from Golden Meadow to Leeville, a 12 ft x 125 ft channel from Leeville to the Gulf, and a 20 ft x 300 ft channel from Belle Passe to the 20 ft contour in the Gulf. From Larose to Leeville spoil would be contained and effluent returned to the waterway. From Leeville to the Gulf, spoil would be placed along the east bank of Bayou Lafourche and Belle Pass. The Bayou Lafourche auxiliary channel would be 30,4 mi long, 12 ft deep, and 125 ft wide. It would include a 12 ft by 125 ft stub channel toward Golden Meadow with a turning basin 1300 ft long and 600 ft wide. Spoil waild be contained with retention dikes and spill boxes and effluent would be returned to the dredged channels . The Lafourche-Jump Waterway would provide a 12 ft x 125 ft channel. Where traversing wetlands spoil would be retained along the banks of the channel. Where traversing bays spoil would be placed on adjacent water bottoms . ' c) Site and Area Description The action does not include specific facilities other than the loca- tion of the channel which is given in Fig. 3-1. To achieve the objec- tives of the proposed Port Fourchon facility it is anticipated that the need for service to the fishing and offshore oil industry would be accom- modated by increased use or expansion of existing docking facilities and industries along. Bayou Lafourche within the various communities. Bayou Lafourche is a narrow coastal stream flanked by natural levee ridges representative of a development corridor. On either side of the corridor exist major, highly productive estuarine complexes that grade from saline bays through saltwater, brackish water, and freshwater marshes into freshwater swamps (Fig. 3-2). Development along Bayou Lafourche includes agriculture on the wide ridges north of Golden Meadow. Between Thibodaux and the Gulf there are some fourteen communities with a total population of approximately 30,000. Toward the Gulf of Mexico communities are increasingly dominated by economic activities that are related to the fishing industry and off- shore services for the oil and gas industry. Continuous development ends 3-5 SALINE MARSHES - T>piC0l ••g.lol.on it oytltraroit I SpOflino otltrnifloro ) , Soiicorn to t£ , block ruth (Juncut rogmtfiojtui ) . Boiit montimo , block mongrow ( flvictnnio mudo ) , and tolto'ott ( Dnlicnhi tpicotp ) 15 mi. Fig. 3-2. The Bayou Lafourche corridor in relation to its flanking estuaries. 3-6 in downstream direction at Golden Meadow. Below Golden Meadow the natural levee width is only sufficient to provide for a road which follows the west bank to Leeville. Above Golden Meadow development and roads are present on both sides of Bayou Lafourche. The Bayou Lafourche feature of the present alternative is con- fined to Bayou Lafourche itself and has been completed. The surround- ing environment during construction was as described above and has remained unaltered except for modifications due to spoil disposal along Lower Bayou Lafourche and along Belle Pass at the Port Fourchon project site. These spoil areas are presently revegetated along the left descending bank of Bayou Lafourche below Golden Meadow and provide for a road and warehouse at the Port Fourchon project site. Channel enlargement of Bayou Lafourche has led to increased boat traffic and an associated increase in bank erosion. The environment of the Lafourche auxiliary channel is entirely composed of highly productive wetlands including saline marsh, brackish marsh, fresh marsh, and the associated tidal and drainage channels. During construction of the channel the major change would be an increase of turbidities at dredging sites, the presence of the dredge and support- ing vessels, and an increase in ambient noise levels. Perceptible changes after dredging would be the spoil deposits flanking the channel, an increase in water turbidity due to traffic, an increase' in ambient noise levels, marsh deterioration as a result of saltwater intrusion into brackish and freshwater marshes, and marsh deterioration as a result of impoundment and other changes in the hydrologic regime. The environment of the Lafourche- Jump Waterway is similar to the above wetland environment including an open bay with oyster grounds. Perceptible changes during construction would include increased turbidity and increased ambient noise levels. Alterations after construction would be less severe partly because the channel would make use of an existing canal through the wetlands. Vegetation on present soil lands would be killed, but would revegetate within four to five years. Increased channelization would cause saltwater intrusion and spoiling would affect oyster bottoms. d) Existing Use and Environment Physically Affected Existing use of the area with regard to the Bayou Lafourche feature includes agrieul ture , rural residential development, and service facilities and industries associated with fisheries and oil and gas extraction. These uses occupy both banks of Bayou Lafourche as far south as Golden Meadow and are isolated at Leeville and Port Fourchon. The remainder of the area is occupied by wetlands and bays and is used for propagation of fish and wildlife, commercial fisheries, trapping, sport fishing, and other forms of recreation. A number of oil and gas fields are developed in the wetlands. Associated canals and natural waterways serve navigation. 3-7 Due to low discharge, development along its banks, waste dis- charges , and non-point source pollution from agriculture and developed lands, Bayou Lafourche is a relatively low quality stream. Discharge ranges from 100 to 400 eu ft per sec (cfs). Dissolved oxygen values show that average quality of the water is barely above the legal standard (A mg/1) and minimum values fall below that standard. These low quality conditions apply primarily upstream of Golden Meadow. Further downstream quality becomes higher due to increased mixing with estuarine waters through auxiliary canals and absence of development. 2. Adverse Impacts The estuarine systems that would be affected by the Lafourche auxiliary waterway and Lafourche- Jump Waterway are a prime renewable resource, These systems account for more than half of Louisiana's fisheries production and through export of detrital material play an important support role with regard to marine fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. Equally important is the role of these systems as breeding and nursery grounds for shrimp and fishes. The marshes serve also as major winter- ing grounds for migrating waterfowl. Dredge and fill activities would destroy about 20,000 acres of wetlands and water bottoms. Of these approximately 2000 acres lie within the Point-au-Chien Wildlife Management area and in the Wisner Wildlife Management area in Terrebonne and Lafourche Parishes respectively. The area encompassed by the Lafourche -Jump Waterway and auxiliary channel include a number of archeological sites. At least six sites would be directly affected and five sites are known to be present in the immediate vicinity of the proposed routes. Another major consideration is the effect of increasing salini- ties through saltwater intrusion in the Lafourche auxiliary channel. This effect would extend into the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway to the extent that it would interfere with its use as an industrial and municipal water supply for the city of Houma in Terrebonne Parish, 3. Beneficial Impacts The Bayou Lafourche and Lafourche- Jump Waterway alternative would provide more efficient and safer navigation into and out of the area. 4. Decision on this Alternative This alternative was rejected because of the severe nature of adverse impacts on wetlands and related uses. Present losses of wet- lands in Louisiana as a result of subsidence, saltwater intrusion, channelization, spoil disposal, impoundment, and other actions affecting water quality and the hydrologic regime amount to at least 16 sq mi annually. These losses represent a cumulative impact that seriously degrades the renewable resource base of the state and is of a magnitude that may attain material significance. 3-8 C. STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 2: WIDENING OF BAYOU LAFOURCHE 1. General Description of the Alternative This alternative would provide for widening of Bayou Lafourche from the Gulf of Mexico to the community of Larose where it intersects with the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. a) Objective of the Action The objective of this alternative action is to provide for safer and more efficient navigation between the Gulf and the docking and service facilities along Bayou Lafourche that support the fisheries and offshore oil industry. Problems presently associated with naviga- tion were described in Section 3, B, 1, a). b) General Design The project would require a channel 125 ft. wide and 12 ft. deep. c) Site and Area Description The project would only provide for the widened channel. Increased demand for services to the fishing and offshore oil industry would be accommodated through increased use or expansion of existing facilities in the communities along Bayou Lafourche. See the first tow paragraphs of Section 3, B, 1, c. , "Site and Area Description" for a description of the Bayou Lafourche environment. d) Existing Use and Environment Physically Affected See Section 3, B, 1, d. , "Existing Use and Environment Physically Affected". 2. Adverse Impacts Construction of the widened channel would result in a major change in the environment. Many of the present service facilities are located immediately along and partially extend into the waterway. These facili- ties must be relocated. In many areas Lhc road also follows the bank line and widening of the channel would necessitate relocation of the road and adjacent residences. 3. Beneficial Impacts Construction of the widened channel would provide for safer and more efficient navigation from the Gulf to the docking and service facilities along Bayou Lafourche. 3-9 4. Decision on this Alternative This alternative was rejected because of necessary relocations of facilities, residences, and roads^ and the associated adverse cultural impacts. Due to the limited width of natural levee ridges along Bayou Lafourche^ this action would also eliminate a large portion of the most suitable existing land for development on one or both sides of the bayou and would partially force development into adjacent wetlands that bound the natural levee ridges. 3-10 D. STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 3: REDUCING THE SCOPE OF THE PORT DEVELOPMENT 1. General Description of the Alternative This alternative would involve reducing the total scope of the Port Develop- ment to implementation of Phases 1 through 5 only. Phases 1 through 3, which have already been completed, include limited docking facilities, a warehouse, a marina, a boat launch, roads, utilities, and a stone jetty at Belle Pass. Phase 4, under consideration for the immediate future, would include dredging of the "T-Slip," preparation of 450 acres of spoil area for facility sites with ditches and drainage structures, bank stabilization, and dredging of the flotation canal and construction of additional bulk- head for docking, Phase 5, to be implemented as the development progresses and funding becomes available, would include the addition of a Police and Administration Building, a sewage system } and water mains and connections. Completion of Phases 1 thru 5 would provide complete multi-purpose facilities for steel-hulled shrimp boats, offshore survey and supply vessels, smaller fishing boats, crew boats, and pleasure craft, a) Objective of the Action The main objective of this alternative would be to reduce the ultimate size of the port and limit the kinds of activities that would be located there, The port would be limited to handling fishing boats, offshore service boats, and crew boats (including mineral extraction industry and some LOOP related activities) . b) General Design The facilities designs, site location, and impacts for Phases 1 thru 5 have been presented in Section 1 , "Project Description" of this statement. Under the project proper, the only facilities are the "T-slip" and adjacent sites, as described in Phases 1 thru 5 in Section 1, "Project Description." c) Site and Area Description This is treated under Section 1, A, of this report. 2. Adverse Impacts Included in the two phases to be eliminated under this alternative (Phases 6 and 7) would be the dredging of Belle Pass to -30 ft x 500 ft, additional stone jetty improvements^ and additional bulkheading. Failure to implement these phases would foreclose the option of larger ocean- going vessels and repair and/or fabrication of large offshore drilling rigs and platforms, 3-11 This alternative would limit the port's ability to respond to future needs of the offshore mineral extraction industry, It would also limit to a considerable extent the kinds and intensity of activi*-* ties that would be conducted in the port area, 3. Beneficial Impacts Restricting the channel depth and width would reduce the poten- tial for saltwater intrusion and the rate of tidal exchange. This would have the beneficial effect of reducing marsh deterioration and erosion. Physical effects on the environment, including streams and water bodies for Phases 1 thru 5 have been discussed in Sections 6, 7 and 8 of this statement, The direct and indirect effects of dredging related to the enlargement of Belle Pass including modification of benthic habitat, temporary reduction in water quality during construction, modification due to spoil disposal ? and increases in saltwater intru- sion and tidal exchange would be eliminated. In addition adverse effects on water and air quality related to activities such as offshore rig and fabrication yards would be eliminated. 4. Decision on this Alternative The reason for rejecting this alternative is that it would foreclose options for responding to future needs of the offshore mineral extrac- tion industry. 3-12 E. NON- STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 1 1. General Description of the Alternative By reducing the amount of offshore energy activity in this area the projected need for the port may be reduced. This could be partially accomplished by reducing the rate of offshore leasing in the Federally controlled areas of the continental shelf. 2. Impacts This action would have the adverse impact of curtailing the national supply of oil and gas. It would also have major economic effects locally and regionally, This action would reduce traffic and product movement through the coastal zone with proportional reduction of associated primary and secondary impacts. 3. Decision on this Alternative This alternative was rejected because it would not be feasible in view of present national energy needs. 3-13 F. NON-STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVE 2 1. General Description of the Alternative Use of expansion of other existing small port facilities in the region could be encouraged through legislative or financial measures. 2. Adverse Impacts This action would have the adverse impact of increased boat traffic through waterways in environmentally sensitive areas of the coastal zone, as discussed under the n No Build" alternative. It would also have local adverse economic impacts, Induced expansion in areas of many existing ports would involve unmodified natural wetland areas, Greater distance and travel time to work sites would be required, 3. Beneficial Impacts This action would have the benefit of concentrating expansion in the vicinity of existing development. A. Decision on this Alternative The location of the proposed port at the end of the transcoastal corridor and in proximity to the LOOP facility indicates that benefits outweigh adverse impacts. 3-14 SECTION 4; PROJECT DESIGN A . ENGINEERING DES IGN The Port Fourchon project is a multipurpose facility designed to serve as a port and industrial park. The port is to serve the offshore oil in- dustry including the Louisiana Offshore Port (LOOP) for supertankers and Outer Continental Shelf drilling, to provide docking, unloading, and repair facilities for fishing boats, and to provide anchorage against Gulf storms other than hurricanes. Docking facilities will be in a T shaped slip dredged into the port's property (See Fig. 1-3 in Section 1). Spoil from the slip will be deposited in the southern one-third (450 acres) of an impounded area to create sites for industries related to fisheries and oil and gas exploration and development. Such industries may include seafood processing industries, fabrication yards for offshore drilling rigs, and boat repair yards. The engineering design to meet the Com- mission's plans is summarized below in seven phases. The firms of Picciola and Associates, Inc., and J. Wayne Plaisance, Inc., under subcontract, conducted engineering investigations and studies involving fieldwork, drafting, and calculations necessary for the dredging and widening of Bayou Lafourche and Belle Pass, the calcula- tion of the amount of filled material made available by these operations, the resulting elevations of the fill sites, and the estimated cost of these projects. The Division of Engineering Research, Louisiana State University (Whitehurst, 1974a) studied the Belle Pass area in relation to the proposed jetty system improvements and its effect on sediment deposition and erosion along the area's shoreline. The study was spon- sored by a NASA grant and by the Lafourche Port and Harbor Commission grant for support of graduate students, 1974, and state funds from the Division of Engineering Research, Louisiana State University. The project phases are described below. Table 4-1 summarizes the cost and status of these separate phases. Phase 1 - Phase 1 has already been completed by the Greater La- fourche Port Commission at a cost of $4.2 million. This phase consisted of the deepening and widening of Belle Pass to a channel -20 ft by 300 ft, west of the existing channel from Mile 0.76 in Bayou Lafourche to a -20 ft depth in the Gulf of Mexico, and of a flotation canal which links Bayou Lafourche with the commercial marina, making it accessible to large shrimp boats. During this phase the commercial marina (with a capacity of 68 large shrimp boats) was constructed, as well as a docking facility and warehouse on Bayou Lafourche, a water distribution system with a 300,000 gal elevated storage tank, and a five-ramp launch for sportscraft. Other projects included in this phase were the construc- tion of levees for flood and hurricane protection, the extension of Highway 3090, and a bridge to provide access to the beach. 4-1 Table 4-1. Development program for Port Fourchon. Phase Description of Development Cost Status 2 3 4 A. B. C. D. E. A. B. C. A. B. Construction of docking facili- ties, warehouse, marina, boat launch, roads and utilities Stone jetty at Belle Pass Roadway construction Dredging (1) Proposed slip "c" (2) Belle Pass 2,700,000 cu. yds. of material Stone jetty improvements 60,000 tons of stones Drainage improvements 450 acres with ditches and drainage structures Flotation Canal (1) Bank stabilization 4000 linear feet (2) Dredging 292,000 cu. yds. of material Bulkhead for docking Total Phase 4 - Police and Administration building Sewage system Water mains and connections Total Phase 5 - Belle Pass dredging 30 X 500 Stone jetty improvements Total Phase 6 - Additional Bulkheading $4,220,700 Existing 2,100,000 498,000 1,600,000 2,000,000 Existing Under construction Planned Planned 500,000 Planned 175,000 175,000 800,000 $5,250,000 181,000 812,500 206,250 $1,199,750 4,000,000 2,000,000 $6,000,000 2,500,000 Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned Planned TOTAL COST OF DEVELOPMENT - $21 ,768,450 Source: Greater Lafourche Port Commission, 1975 Phase 2 - This phase, completed in 1975, consisted of the improve- ment of the small jetty at Belle Pass, extending it outward some 500 ft into the Gulf of Mexico. The jetty on the western side was to be extended a distance of 2100 ft from the existing shoreline at a cost of $2,100,000 (See Fig. 1-4). Work has been partially completed on this jetty. Phase 3 - Phase 3, under construction at the present time at a cost of $498,000 ■, consists of a preliminary clam shell surface road that will allow easy access to future industrial and commercial develop- ment sites and to all port areas (Fig. 4-1, 4-2, 4-3). 4-2 WP - 12 - 11 PROPOSED RIP-RAP ^ff\ I - 10 Pass Fourchon (GOBYMAT-4" THICK) yfjl^ ' — w — 8 — 7 AREA OF BANK TO BE RESHAPED N ^J^^ i - 6 5 ♦1.5* MHW-. r-+06'MLW \ - 4 r+I.O'MSL \ SOME OF SPOIL * — 'MATERIAL TO BE USED IN THIS AREA FOR FILL 21/2 SLOPE | 1 — 3 ! - 2 I ~ 1 ! - o r* i 1 i 1 W#| 1 1 9! + 1 Ol 1 o' IOI 5! 0+40 0+30 0+20 Ol + 1 ol o I 2 TYPICAL SECTION A - A' .. AREA OF BANK TO | BE RESHAPED 1 — 2 3 ol <0| o! 1 Ol Jl Ol I I Ol Ol * CO z 03 0) «< o c % & O o o ■n m x o o JL PLAN - 300' _ Jfc _ Fig. 4-6. Proposed rip-rap at intersection of Bayou Lafourche and the flotation canal at the Port Fourchon facility. 4-9 PROPOSED RIP-RAP (GOBYMAT-4" THICK) SPOIL AREA / -+0.6'MLW — +1.0'MSL L : * £Or—*~ Bayou Lafourche AREA OF BANK TO BE RESHAPED + 1.5' MHW SLOPE b 6 « II T3 II <3 II II II II II II « II H II 1 II ^D II II cu II rO II CO II H MH CO O CU CO 4J o u CO H a) O rC PQ CU e 3 9 X) Q is CO s T3 CO GJ CO •H CO 4-1 rH CO CO CO CU •H T3 u 5-1 C o D CO c o > M H c o T3 •H 0) CO co o CO O 5-i CD •H W U m O '-4-1 T3 d CO CU H 5-< CO H CO O CD H 4-J 5-4 CO a CD o c 3 PQ H P CD M d 4-1 60 3 s a fe o •H 5-i 60 >, fI-4 T3 pq CU CO !H T3 4J P CU •H y> CO CU CD O a > a C o CD CO u P CU CD rH 4-1 PQ •H d O •H O a CO H co rH •H X >> O H CU rH co CO CO 4-1 4-> >. •H o PQ CO H O T3 Ph CD CD CD PQ •H 5-1 P O fl H PQ CD B o S3 CU 4J •H CO X! X X! S>i s<^ S^ S** rN rN rS rS x X tS^t S-J K~rf KS rS % 4-» Pi X CO •H rH CJ O •H 4-J CO cO Ph H 5-i e a IW s rH CD CD < •H H •H 4J 4-J 4-1 4-> CO o rH u >-< CO U Ph CO < .-J •H PC CD 3 JH 4-J o 4-1 4J ao CO M •H •H •H a pd CO CO rH CO ta CO II CD •H II > fi CJ II «H H o •H II CD Z •H M-l II O <3 4-1 CD II CD H o c II 5-i Pi O 0) CD Cm II T3 Ph rH II <-H s O rH II 3 H u CO CO II O CD 4-J II XI >H o > CO II CO •H 4J CD Pi P II CD H CO II 4-1 2 e xi II *H CD rH II CO W P 4-1 co O II iH o ^^ II CO S CO CO II o II «H II W) II O CD II rH H O II O II CD § CD CO 14H II X H pq U II a Pi 3 CO II u O t^ CO c II 03 PH CO o § S •H 4-J II X CO CJ II o r-< 4J T3 CD II CO hJ CO CD rH II 0) H EH p •H rH O II a O QJ CO u II a H e 4-1 ll C iJ o X II ct) CO CO o II 4-J II r4 II o ii a T3 ii e CD 11 -H H >•> O II M-l jz 4-J r4 II O H CO o 4-J CO II CD Pi s CD ii a> O rH P II !-i P-i << II &o a >^ II CD H 0) rH ll P H O S3 4-J •H CO CO 4-1 O H II CN 1 II VO CO W II Ks* k,> S> kN k*N r*N kS < z m z V — 3Nll3dOHS cc Zj ll: vwnoH UJ »- < 3 o z >- to V a o UJ a 4 J? r (O < iF Z3H01VN o o u. / - _i a / - - - & ,* SIHdW3W 1* vt h Ex M o £?ki Js "^ ^ ^ OUIVO # a o A o }-i O S-i o Pn M-l o >^ •H a •H O •H > CD ,C +J •H CU a •H rH CJ fi >^ CO o H o o pj • o cd K QJ H M M cd tJ ^ T3 3 4J CO (1) Xi 4-» IH S3 O o M 3 H i <^ 3 s rH 2 O o a Pn o •H 00 o rH Pm o D CU O o Pi O 4: n u CU o H pm rO w cfl H mn • «t r. a CO CO 1 3 T) CU •H CU CU CU CJ •H cu CO 3 rH I »> rH o 3 4-1 3 4-1 3 o cu rO TD Cu 00 rH 4-1 o cd 5-i XI CU •H N 00 •> rO 3 CU a, o -3 4-1 T3 3 4-J 6 rH 03 00 cd 4-1 r-l CU 0) CO 3 o •H "3 13 •H rH o >, S-I 3 3 1 > / >> 3 03 u X CU 3 m •H rH U " o >^ cr 3 < cd cd -o •H • n UH O rQ 03 CO 00 03 f>> rH 5-i d tw CU CO 03 CO »> 3 4-1 cu x: CU *> K a) 00 CO cd 3 4-1 CO 3 CO 4-1 CO >^ O 3 U CO 3 CU CU 00 4-1 CO • #> o u CU O o 3 CU Td CJ CU 00 -H •H rH 4-1 cd X) rH CO 4-J CU 4-1 n a 3 3 £ > 14-1 rH •H a a •H 1 CU CO x: •H 5-i CJ O cd CU «H 4-1 O CU 4-1 03 CO H TJ U N o •N 4-J CO rH -a ,3 rH CU 3 3 « CU 03 3 4-J . ^ 00 co CO rQ cu 00 rH 5-i O £ ■— i CO -3 rH S-i 03 . n U 3 CO 3 CU -3 CU rQ CO •H CU O 5-i cu T3 c rH CU CO CU cd cd 3 •H rH 3 3 CU iH >. 6 4-1 X cu c 03 CU B 3 3 •H •H rH 3 cd •H PL rH •H rH oj 3 O o D 1 ^ cd CU 4-1 CO IW cd • ft #> . r, o « CU -Q CO co o rH 3 4-1 O O 4-1 3 o S*. •H co 3 5-i 4-1 4-1 a3 >, M 00 •H CO ,3 cd 3 3 3 >^ r^Xl > cu !5 O 3 5-i •H H rH 03 4-1 3 T3 -d 4-J rH 3 cd r-l CU r-l 3 3 5-1 O rH cd CU r-l 03 rH •H o CU 3 r-l cd O A 4-1 >>> CU cd rH 3 5-t o rfl .3 >. a) CO CJ O CJ 6 6 o ft Jgj CO 03 > CO 4H 4-J rO CJ 4-1 CJ CL CU cd rH CO 3 1 cu 6 0) H rH o u 03 cj T3 •■> 3 CU CU 0) •H CO •H C •H -3 en 03 3 4-1 > o H a 4-J 4-1 •H •H 3 M •H 03 rH rH 03 CO H 4-1 03 CU CD a) H o rH •H U X rO to 4-J •H T3 a a 03 CO (1) O PM u CO cd 0) O r-l > a r-l •H QJ CU P4 T3 H 0) 3 cu 0) o 3 o CU 4-1 | CO o o •H rH •H CU o rH rH pa PM Ph A-ll 4j a) H h4 H CO CO O Fn X w o o rJ o PC H o P=M T3 CU 3 d •H CM ■u d) d o o tf u o •H M-l d o CO d ,d o CO 3 rH 3 ,a o Pi •1— ) o CO 3 n w "il rH CO o rH CX •H /»-\ CX «-r-' O -H CO e < »H >H CO 6 T3 •H s - x T) C3 c •H <-r-' d CO y~\ d CO CO 5-i [5 •H •H C CO 5 JC H3 CU •H O QJ CO QJ •H •H O 00 •H ex C T3 rH ■d 4-1 00 •H T3 3 ^ ex O X> o 4-) d 5-i CO O cd CO 1 e «4-l QJ CO CO 1 > rH •p 4-J 3 5-1 M CJ <4-4 CO d CO d 4= CO •H d o r-^ O d co o £ O •H rH O «H ^ QJ o a cd CO •H •H CO rH •H S co X) •H -H c •H 4-> co 4J d CO CO 4-J *<-> 3 +J rH •H !-i 5-1 QJ 5-1 •H 4-» d 5h rH CO S-i 3 }-i CO O T) O 5-i o •H O CO rH •H o o 0) rH ex •H ex QJ 5-i 5-i CX'H O rH ex «h d 3 B c CO QJ 00 6 CO 4-> QJ 4-J QJ CO QJ QJ X> 00 U d,^ 4-1 M d 00 X rH u rH 00 O •H QJ CO o qj a; •H a) TJ O X) •H rH > CXC*!| P4 CXrJ PQ H T) P-. -d PQ O P ex Cl. "V -l •H PO t=> S a PQ CX CO CO 5-1 QJ 4-> CO QJ rd 4J r4 CO <4H a o •H 4-> 5-4 O ex d co CO ex •H 5-1 T3 QJ d o o ►J 13 CO ■H CO d QJ 00 C CO 5-i CO XI CO CO CO d co rH d d d rH •H cO -H QJ g U-f rH CO E 3 3 CO oo d rQ rH d co QJ a CO rH •H >> 5-i P-i hJ u CO pa d o •H 4-1 rH r4 3 O d ex -h oo rH 5-1 CO co co s CO PQ CO 4-1 rH •H CO o CO CO 13 4-1 d rH CO QJ co t3 00 "4-4 d o •H 5-4 CO QJ >-, 00 CO d rH •H O <4-( r4 T3 a) d 4-1 CO d 5-i QJ 4-1 CO rd CO CO •H t^ ^J co CJ rH CO o 5-1 ,a -d d • »> cO d •H CO 00 4J •H rH 5-1 -H O CO ^ oo co ex oo d d *h d co •H 5-1 B cO Pm QJ PC rH En rH M— I rH 3 CX O 3 O -a V4 d o co u o 3 XI co d w QJ o d o QJ CH O w O •H S CO ••* 4-» CO •H CO d co CO d CO co 5-i QJ 4-1 d T3 QJ QJ 6 N 00 'H CO CO M-l 3 O ,d co 4-t CO O ^C 4-J •H & CO S^ CO r-\ CO o -d QJ 4-t rH 00 •H d CO -H 5-i • « CO CO QJ QJ r& CO I CO <4-l cO cO 5-i CU 00 rH •H CO o ex QJ T3 O •H CO 4-J rH QJ -d co T3 QJ J3 cO CO CO 1 CO d ii •H 11 CO II cO II PQ 1! CO 'i ^ II CO II rH II CO II <4-4 II CO II X! II O II 4-> II •H < ; ! : CO •H n ii > 4-> II CO d ii T3 0) II B in CO QJ II d 4-1 II •H CO II d 4-1 II o CO Ii X cx rH J ; •H CO II CO 4-J II d ii QJ II B ii d ii O II 5-1 II •H II > !! d ii w ., 4-1 il «4-4 || CO II 5-i II Q il >> i< 5-1 II CO II d •H • II B 4J II •H O II rH 'H || QJ 5-1 II 5-1 4-1 II P4 CO II •H II II CO II M-i d ii O CO II •H II CO CO II CX -H II 5-i 3 II O O II O r4 II >» * II U CO II < Z II T3 II • O II CO O II • rH || dJ Pn II 01 Ii CJ II 5-t II 3 II O II CO || A-12 U O •H N r3 U Pn o a o c a cr 0) CO o •H c3 T3 a d S I fn A-13 UJ I X u < uj OJH-I 3JQ. O UJ 2 U. Q O < U X X 111 III -1 Z-l a 0. 11 % x 2 r TIM BAUER BAY %£- 10 Statute Mttet JO Kilonwtert Fig. A-9. Physiography of the study region. A-15 (0 o 1- CO ■p cc a UJ cu t- 6 o s < o u < X > o c _l a X o Q. •H •U •H CO O P- CU *o to CJ •H 4J CO •H U CU 4J o 03 U CO cd o •H CO >> X! P4 CN 4 c-Q CO H or p z t£ H H *~r x> •3 n Jj *J g « oo 2: z iZ ° C GO 1— U Ji a fl CO P5 oo UJ QJ Z _ £ Eg TJ -O 3 >, If ' x-o !■& O. Ss 21 c^ ^ M O i-s S * " " O a in C -H C -H C -H -1 LU L_u cr; 1 — :=> c ■jj £ U "q- "g "3 ^ "S — o 3 3 CD UJ . — i Ctl X O 4) td | ° UJ «vt o j±! gjj is s « % £ J-J ll 2 T3 ja £ «H 1 | 2 e S 3 •"- £ § JZ ftl i — i — S i— I« 2 2 2 2 I ^1 aa z 8 ce cd ll 5" B e B rf a s "S 3 o X 3 1 " y z ■3 s M « « a 2 o ■0 XI ce l— a ss z •o £s 3| 1 § J3 2 S 2S 3 3 l| ■D 01 E — a; l S II « J3 (0 ^ UJ •fl i- js N M 4i „ >Mll 1- .. c 5 j ?! a* a i 5? M K 3 O $£ B ° to u ±* a o H 1- H 2 1 3 "o 2 > 1 S z » to si fl i S" s s s 3 * U > dj > w £ ■« h 01 i~. •« i CO O % CO £ ^ Jo ■a a*s s ** •§ § S M "*4 X H to a > ■h ai a 32 !i i3 ,2 C K M S T3 -H V 2 H 5 QJ 3* t -' m. ■3 SiJ M -H C 3 S n u A > $ m S* c U G -^ £ -rf oo-rf » o o a <-> B •O O 41 « a > 1 a £-8 3 4J 00 T3 h 3 a "o in , co T) C Jj C 0. |j5,I mi ! — H -H 'HtCO g, J "S si f5 3 ££ (0 T3 -H C 3 O r-4 P tH JH C C m | S: g 1 1 a V- > >> CO Lr> O C OJ 3 o ^: U U o CO T3 J3 M 4J > TD -( an U h ,-< to o (0 a &s to i ^ •o « O | ZZ UJ c > en jj'1 S 2~ „ ^ 0) 0) at -h (0 » CO >, ■3 1 "! (_r) OO > -O w S " £ " 5 0) co 0) « CO *J u u •-* U u in W 60 « .O *J CO Ou 2 LL_ H LU LUUJ OO UJ OO Z UJ S z o cc Z UJ o_> o c— oo a. LUQ _J => > |— UJ d -J pa i— o O- ea> LUUJ Z -1 ca< CD Or-* LUX si >- OS ^— <— ) 5 UJ Q£ CO =3 > 2 o c_) 3 z Q- LU !N333U-3Hd 1N303H A-16 The Recent formation can be divided into seven depositional environ- ments. All of these facies are common in a deltaic cross-section and are distinguished by recognizable physical parameters (Table A-2). In the study area only the natural levee and marsh environment are present. Fringing the shoreline are reworked sand and shell beaches. Fig, A-2 shows the environments of the abandoned geomorphic features. Borings which were taken in the study area by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are shown in Fig. A-10. Elevations along the natural levees of Bayou Lafourche range from less than 5 ft MSL at Leeville to sea level at the mouth of Bayou La- fourche. The brackish marshes in the interdistributary basins are at or just above sea level. The marshes are inundated during high tides and south winds. The Bayou Lafourche delta Complex has undergone subsidence, consequently enlarging the bays, lakes, and marshlands in this area. Subsidence rates for Louisiana coastal areas have been established at 0.70 ft per century (Fig. A-ll) . The present seaward edge of the Lafourche delta complex is one of the most rapidly retreating parts of the Louisiana coastline. Retreat rate estimates vary from 20 m to over 33 m per year (Morgan and Lari- more, 1957) Gagliano and van Beek, 1970), The shoreline erosion rate for the Port Fourchon area was recently determined to be in some places 22.86 to 30.48 m per year (Whitehurst and Self, 1974). Figure A-12 shows historic and projected shoreline retreat in the Caminada-Port Fourchon area. 2. Subsurface Faults Subsurface faults found near the study area are shown in Fig. A-ll. Surface expression is absent even though displacement along a single fault may be as much as 2000 ft or more at great depths. Faults appear to be related to the regional trend of the Gulf Coast Geosyncline. 3. Salt Domes Related to the thousands of feet of sediment in the Geosyncline is the occurrence of salt domes (Fig. A-ll). The domes are cylindri- cal masses of salt that pierce through sedimentary strata from a mother bed at a depth of 20,000 ft or more. Economically, the salt domes are important for various reasons. Associated with the upthrusting of the salt stock, there is usually a peripheral upwarping of sedimentary strata adjacent to the dome providing structural traps for hydrocarbons. 4. Economic Geology In the vicinity of the study area and in the offshore areas the principal geologic resources are oil and gas (Table A-3) . The areas fronting the Lafourche Parish coastline contain 27% of the offshore oil wells drilled and 12% of the offshore gas wells drilled in the state A-17 5 -30 o .j c fl) CD £ -3b o t™ CD « -40 15-L 1961 sss^Kw-u nw»m<&*sWB 15-LD 1961 vSo dGr & Gr dGr mm SILTY SAND 17-L 1961 ^i^WBaanwF^twaro^jBa Rm^nnn t !W^> GROUND SURFACE ALONG TRAVERSE / CHANNEL **' ^ BOTTOM CS.sIf vSo.sIf slf So,Tr-slf So,Tr-sl( So.slf So,Tr-sl( DESCRIPTIVE SYMBOLS Color Tr-slf Gr Gray dGr Dark Gray Consistency for Cohesive Soils CS vSo vSo Very Soft S Soft M Medium So Modifications M M Tr- Traces slf Shell fragments CS Clay strata or lenses Organic matter SIS Silt strata or lenses F Fine SS Sand strata or lenses from field notes M,Tr-slf Fig. A-10. Geologic columns from the Port Fourchon area. A-18 FAULTS SALT DOMES 1000 ft. Contours SUBSIDENCE RATES (Feet per Century) 10 miles <£> Fig. A-ll. Subsidence rates, subsurface faults, and salt domes in the Port Fourchon area. A-19 < ia'O v. al T.\J ± at 5 = »- O •" o oo z.> ZU u. O < _ £< OS •< *1 H is *| SI C* *5 ^u < +J o PM I cd T3 Cd fl •H 6 cd o CD 43 cd 0) u u CD M (0 a •H O co co CO o u u CO e o •H +J d •H S-i ■P CO •H 13 CO T3 co c 01 cu ao 00 cu CO ,-H z ° I •H A-25 LEGEOD <5 PPT 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 >25 PPT ^^T MAJOR FRESHWATER INFLOW P^ (BAYOUS, RIVERS, CANALS) ^-y\ SECONDARY FRESHWATER INFLOW (BAYOUS, CANALS) ^^ MAJOR GULF INFLOW (CHANNELS, ^ PASSES) 10 Statute Mttes tO Kl l owntf ■ Fig. A-15. Average salinity distribution across south Louisiana (Continued). A-26 Most important with respect to the project area is the interdis- tributary basin formed by the natural levee ridges of Bayou Lafourche and Bayou Moreau. This basin will hereafter be referred to as the Fourchon Basin. Natural levee ridges of Bayou Moreau separate the Fourchon Basin effectively from the Barataria-Salvador Basin to the east. Natural levee ridges of Bayou Lafourche, on the other hand, are inter- rupted in a number of places, thus connecting the Fourchon Basin directly with Bayou Lafourche and indirectly with the Timablier Basin to the west of Bayou Lafourche. Exchange of water with the Gulf of Mexico occurs through one or more intermittent tidal passes connecting the Gulf with Bay Champagne and Bay Marchandj and indirectly and continu- ously through Belle Pass and Bayou Lafourche. Salinities of Bayou Lafourche are a function of a number of fac- tors. These include: the introduction of freshwater from the Missis- sippi River at Donaldsonville, salinity of water introduction through canals connecting Bayou Lafourche and the Timablier and Barataria Basins respectively, and Gulf water levels and salinities. 2. Hydrology of the Project Area To discuss hydrology of the project area, the Fourchon Basin has been divided into four smaller units shown in Fig. A-14, and numbered one through four. Each of these units represents a hydrologic entity with boundaries formed by natural and man-made features. Unit 1 occupies the northern half of the Fourchon basin. Rigid boundaries occur along the east and south sidej on the east is the natural levee of Bayou Moreau and the associated road bed of LA High- way 1 on the south side is a spoil embankment associated with the flo- tation canal that connects Bayou Lafourche and a commercial marina. To the west the unit is bounded by Bayou Lafourche^ exchange of water is possible through a number of tidal creeks. Spoil embankments along Bayou Lafourche have led to partial ponding. The area is characterized by the broken marsh surface and numerous shallow water bodies associated with deteriorating salt marsh. Unit 2 is part of the project area and is totally impounded by spoil embankments and associated road beds except for one small outlet to the flotation canal. Exchange of water with surrounding water bodies is negligible. The area is almost entirely occupied by shallow waters. As a result of impoundment, water has become brackish. Unit 3 is a salt marsh basin bounded by spoil and an associated road bed to the west and by the natural levee ridge of Bayou Moreau to the east. Along the south side, it is bounded by a narrow beach ridge which protects it from direct Gulf wave action but which allows exchange of water through a tidal pass into Bay Champagne. The unit represents an estuarine sub-basin within the Fourchon Basin. Most of the area is characterized by salt marsh interspersed with numerous small lakes and tidal channels. Bay Champagne takes up the remaining area. A-27 North-south water movement has been partly interfered with as a result of the Chevron Canal, which is oriented east-west along the north side of Bay Champagne. The canal connects with Pass Fourchon and thus indirectly with Bayou Lafourche. At times, the tidal pass may be closed due to spit building across its mouth. Under such circumstances the Chevron Canal regulates water exchange. Unit 4 is separated from the Gulf by a low marsh ridge that occasionally is breached. Spoil embankments partly separate the area from Belle Pass and Pass Fourchon with water exchange regulated by intersecting location canals. Spoil deposition has resulted in destruction of most of the original salt marsh. Some marsh remains in the eastern half. Bay Marchand remains just inside the beach rid ,e along the southern margin, but it is being filled as a result of shoreline retreat. Since Pass Fourchon is closed at its mouth by a dam, water exchange is primarily with water derived from Bayou Lafourche. In general, the hydrology of Units 1 and 4 is regulated by condi- tions in Bayou Lafourche that include stage, salinity, and water quality, and by local precipitation and the degree of ponding. Unit 2 is an impoundment, but subject to overflow during high tidal stages. Ponding of local precipitation greatly reduces salinities. Unit 3 may shift from indirect dependency on Bayou Lafourche when tidal passes are closedj to direct exchange with marine waters when Bay Champagne is connected with the Gulf of Mexico. Marine effects can be overriding for all units when storm surges lead to flooding of the entire area, 3. Major Tributaries Only one major stream, Bayou Lafourche, affects the project area. Bayou Lafourche originates at the town of Donaldsonville and flows into the Gulf of Mexico. Originally a distributary of the Mississippi River, the bayou was separated in 1904 from the Mississippi River by a dam; water is now pumped into the bayou at rates from 100 to 300 cfs with an average of 260 cfs. The length of Bayou Lafourche is approximately 102 mi. Water flow is confined between natural levee ridges but artificial canals provide for exchange of water with adjacent estuarine basins to the east and west. Near the Gulf of Mexico the channel bifurcates into Pass Fourchon and Belle Pass. Pass Fourchon, however, has been artificially closed so that all flow enters the Gulf through Belle Pass. Belle Pass has been enlarged by dredging to a -20 ft by 300 ft channel to improve deep water access as part of the Port Fourchon development program. Additional access work has been the building of jetties at the mouth of Belle Pass. Bayou Lafourche can be separated into two reaches; An upper, fresh- water reach from Donaldsonville to the Intracoastal Waterway, and a lower reach from the waterway to the Gulf which is subject to tidal effects and saltwater mixing. The upper reach is dependent primarily on water introduction at Donaldsonville and water exchange with the Company and Intracoastal Canal. A weir at Thibodaux is for water supply purposes. A- 28 Adjacent to the project area, Bayou Lafourche presently has a depth of approximately -10 ft and a width of about 500 ft. The Bayou has been intensively dredged for navigation. Dredging in the reach from Leeville to the Belle Pass was completed in 1963 when a channel of -12 ft by 125 ft was attained. Predicted maintenance frequency of the section was ten years, 4. Other Water Bodies Related to the Study Area The study area relates indirectly to water bodies of the Timbalier Basin as a result of linkage between the Bay and Bayou Lafourche, Timbalier Bay and its fringing marshes connect with Bayou Lafourche by means of Evans Canal and an unnamed pipeline canal farther north. Both canals are shown in Fig. A-14. 5. Uses of Surface Waters Use of surface waters in the project area is limited to naviga- tion related to oil and gas industry, commercial fisheries, and recre- ation. The Bayou Lafourche-Belle Pass channel serves as the main route to the Gulf of Mexico for fishing vessels stationed at the towns along Bayou Lafourche. Many industries serving the well platforms in the Gulf of Mexico are also located along Bayou Lafourche. The channel further gives access to the Gulf for recreational activities such as deep-sea fishing. Within the project area, there are two more channels that serve navigation. The flotation canal connects Bayou Lafourche with a commercial marina adjacent to LA Highway 1. Pass Fourchon connects Bayou Lafourche with oil and gas storage tanks. 6. Stages, Flows, and Tidal Effects Because of limited water diversion from the Mississippi River, stages in Bayou Lafourche are primarily determined by local rainfall in the upper part and tidal variation in the lower part. Average stages in Bayou Lafourche decrease in downstream direction from 5.2 ft at Thibodaux, to 1.1 ft at Leeville, to 0.4 ft at Belle Pass. Near the mouth of Bayou Lafourche in the project area the stage variation averages 1.4 ft. Extreme conditions occur in connection with hurricane passage or landfall. For example, stages associated with hurricane Betsy in September 1965 ran to approxi- mately 6.5 ft at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche. Flows in Lower Bayou Lafourche are influenced strongly by wind and tide. Connection with the Barataria and Timbalier estuaries provide for discharge increases over the water input from the Missis- sippi River at Donaldsonville . Flow measurements reported by White- hurst (1974) are shown in Table A-4. A- 29 Table A-4. Hydraulic data at selected sites (See Fig. A-16a) . Cross Mile Sectional Number Site Area (ft^) Q (cfs) Q max (cfs) V (fps) V max (fps) 106 3 565 266 544 0.471 0.963 70 14 750 266 544 0.394 0.725 51 22 1550 456 899 0.292 0.580 26 32 2930 533 4770 0.182 1.59 *A11 minimum flows are 0.0 cfs; All minimum velocities are 0.0 cfs. (ft2)=square feet; Q (cfs)=adverse discharge, cubic feet per second; Q max (cf s)=discharge maximum, cubic feet per second; V (fps)=adverse velocity, feet per second; V max (fps)=maximum velocity, feet per second. Source: Whitehurst, 1974. 7. Tides and Wave Characteristics Tides affect the coastal area by water level variation and water movement, and influence the mixing of sea water and fresh water, water depth for navigation, and dispersion of wastes. Tidal currents commonly attain velocities up to 3.5 knots during flood and 4.3 knots during ebb periods Tides commonly' inundate the coastal marshes to depths of 12 to 29 in. Monthly data for tides along the central Louisiana coast are shown in Table A-5. This data shows that monthly mean tide levels range from 0.4 to 1.2 ft above MSL and that the monthly mean tide levels range from 0.4 to 1.01 ft in June to 0.57 ft in September. The normal tide along this coast is diurnal, but strong winds may change its character. Winds modify the tides significantly. During the winter months the marshes are rarely covered as a result of northerly winds of long duration which accompany very low tides. The lowest mean water levels occur from December through March and the highest levels occur in September and October. The Louisiana coast is known as a low-energy coast in terms of waves. Generally, waves along this coast are 3 to 5 ft in height with a period of 4.5 to 6 sec when wind speeds are greater than 10 km/hr. They commonly approach the coastline from the southeast (Table A-6) . A previous study (Becker, 1972) implies that during spring and summer wave energy levels are at their lowest. During fall and winter they increase 2 or 3 fold. Direction of approach and longshore current velocity are important factors related to the erosion rates of the retreating shoreline of the Port Fourchon area, and should be taken into account when considering the placement of structures for shore stabilization, hurricane A-30 DONALDSONVILLE - A> / 'belle ROSE ^" 10 °, KLOTZ SITE 3 PALNCOURTVILLE ' ^*5 PLATTENVILLE NAPOLEONVILLE d N 90! / LABADIEVILLE 6v ,7/30 \ / / X£v THIBODAUX y . S \ \ LAFOURCHE ^ / \ ROUSSEAU i 7 SCALE A ^ Sfe HOUMA SITE 14 \RACELAND ^^ v - P MATHEWS RITA SITE 22 COMPANY CANAL INTRA COASTAL ' WATERWAY 4 \ NORAH VALENTINE LUDEVINE LAROSE CUTOFF 10 MILES _l \ SITE 32' GALLIANO \ \ \ /t golden meadow • / t_ 20 / / LEEVILLE J I j\om I OUTHWESTERN CANAL / / / GULF OF MEXICO Fig. A-16. Selected sites for hydraulic data shown in Table A- 4 (After Whitehurst, 1974). A-31 Table A-5. Monthly tide levels in feet (MSL) along the Central Louisiana Coast, 1958-59*. Mean Mean Mean Highest Lowest High Low Water Individual Individual Month Tide Tide Level Tide Tide January .39 -.35 .02 1.5 -2.0 February .56 -.26 .15 1.6 -1.8 March .60 -.18 .21 1.3 -1.5 April .78 .09 .43 1.2 - .7 May 1.13 .40 .76 2.4 - .7 June 1.19 .18 .69 1.7 - .7 July .83 -.06 .39 1.5 -1.0 August .83 .11 .47 1.6 - .8 September 1.26 .69 .97 2.6 - .2 October 1.06 .39 .72 1.8 - .5 November .85 .07 .46 1.5 -2.1 December .37 -.62 -.12 1.4 -2.2 Annual .82 .04 .43 2.6 -2.2 Source: *From Chabreck and Hoffpauir, 1962; Chabreck, 1972 Table A-6. Annual wave climate summary for Coastal Louisiana. Wave Direction From Which Wave is Coming Wave Wave Height Period (feet) (seconds) East Southeast South Southwest 3.0 4.5 13.4% 20.9% 7.5% 5.0% 5.0 6.0 8.9% 20.6% 8.7% 7.6% 7.0 7.0 1.2% 1.2% 0.8% 8.5 8.0 1.4% 0.5% 1.5% 0.8% Subtotals 46.8% 45.8% 3.2% 4.2% Subtotals 24.9% 43.2% 18.5% 13.4% 100.0% Based on hindcast wave data for locations in the Gulf of Mexico off Burwood, Louisiana, 20 year period of wind record. The percentages cited are relative to portion of time during the year when wind velocities exceed 10 kilometers/hr . Winds > 10 kilometers/hr prevail during 43.3 percent of the year on the average. Source: Becker, 1972. A-32 protection, and navigational improvements. A recent report (Whitehurst and Self, 1974) observed that littoral current moved from east to west (waves approaching from east-southeast to southeast) . Wave diffraction was also observed occurring around the jetty at Belle Pass causing recession on the downdrift side and varying shoreline recession immediately west of the channel. The study concluded that shoreline erosion west of Belle Pass will continue at the present rate from natural processes; and that the 1200 ft dike extension on the proposed west jetty will retard wave action on the remnant island and at the mouth of the north-south canal to the west. It also indicated that the proposed jetty system will offer safety to navigation in and out of Belle Pass at times of rough seas. A-33 F . CLIMATOLOGY The Port Fourchon area has a humid, sub-tropical, marine climate associated with the latitude of the region and proximity of the site to the Gulf of Mexico. 1. Temperature Distribution The annual average temperature in the area is 69.2°F; the average temperature in January being 54. 9° F, and that of July 80. 1° F. The summers are hot with dominant southeasterly winds. Fall weather is warm and generally frost free. During November frontal fogs begin to appear, reducing visibility near the Gulf of Mexico. Winters are usu- ally mild and cool; cold fronts, which move southeastward through the area, are accompanied by high velocity northerly and northwesterly winds. The average frost-free period is 264 days extending from February 27 to November 18. The greatest change in average temperature between successive months occurs from March to April and from October to November. During the winter, storms with winds blowing toward the shore can occur. These winds can cause significant erosion along the Louisiana coastline. 2. Rainfall Distribution Precipitation is high, averaging 60.5 in annually (Table A-7). July and August are the wettest months, with average monthly precipitation means of 7.37 in and 6.63 in respectively. Generally the summer and winter seasons are the rainiest. During the summer, moist Gulf air creates almost daily afternoon and evening thunderstorms. Monthly precipitation means for this season are 6.4 in. During the winter precipitation means are 5.2 in. Rainfall during the spring is 4.6 in, slightly less than that during the winter. Although autumn conditions regarding precipitation origins are very much like summer, the monthly precipitation means are 4.5 in. Precipitation is one of the most important environmental factors in the coastal zone because it controls the area and amount of water available (rainfall excess) for runoff into streams, lakes, swamps, and marshes. Rainfall excess (precipitation minus soil infiltration and evapotranspiration) for the study area expressed as a percentage of annual precipitation is around 27 in (Fig. A-17) .' The mean annual rainfall excess in the study area is 16 in (Gagliano et al. , 1973). 3. Humidity Humidity is high all year around but it is highest during the sum- mer months because of abundant precipitation and because the prevailing winds have a long fetch over the warm surface (Table A-8)„ A-34 II c II 01 II > II •H II toO II II co II •U II C II CU II H II cO II > II •H II d II cr II CU II II u II •H II 5-i II •U II cu II e II N_X II II co II CD II ,C II II c II •H II II C II •H II II G II O II •H • II 4-1 c II a3 o II 4-1 •H II •H CO II a •H II •H > II a •H II a) n II }-i II a. 4J II CO II >» CD II rH 0) II .C ,C II 4-> 4-1 II d 3 II o c II S CO r^ 4 a) CO toD >, CD rH CD so o 2 i— i rH d • • SO ON 5 LO CO ON m < rH 6 o so CO TJ r~» LO H co ON H CD CU 4-> sO sO i — I 3 CO 1—1 a CD 5-1 co II CO II r— 1 m • • 6 ii CO • • on r-~s CO ■H II . •~v • e CD rH II -* 6 a o i—i a i cD >-3 U II rH || .. o LO CU cu CO II cu On cu • d II toO • toO • cO cD CU O II cd > 4-1 CO II > o > . < 00 iH H >~,> 1— 1 CO CO • • rH rH i 1 d d CU .G G o O a 4-1 ON 4-1 SO CO CO 5-1 d oo d ON CD CD d o • o * 0) CU o s m S i — i CO CO CO A-35 i V 0) >^ 3 4-J CO T3 C CtJ cd C •H CO •H O n3 4J (3 0) o o in ctf •H cd o cu bO 4J d CD (J cu i 60 •H A-36 Table A-8. Percentage frequencies of relative humidity observations at 6 A.M. and 3 P.M. , during midseason months. Relative humidity in percentage 0-29 30-49 50-69 70-79 80-89 90-100 January 6 A.M. 2 12 14 22 51 3 P.M. 4 25 42 12 9 8 April 6 A.M. 2 9 7 22 59 3 P.M. 6 30 44 9 6 4 July 6 A.M. 1 2 20 77 3 P.M. <0.5 12 48 20 11 8 October 6 A.M. 2 9 7 33 49 3 P.M. 6 33 41 9 5 5 Source: Stone, James , et_ al. , 1973 (New Orleans , 1951-1960). 4. Winds The two pressure ridges that dominate weather conditions along coastal Louisiana are the ''Bermuda high^'' and the ''Mexican heat low." Pressure changes associated with these ridges bring about predominantly easterly winds. In fall and winter they come primarily from the north- east, and although a small percentage of all winds come from the southeast, the overall winds shift is still to the north. Spring and summer winds are predominantly from the southeast with only a very small percentage coming from the northeast (Table A-9) . The average yearly wind velocity is 9.7 mph. During July 98% of the wind speeds are £19 mph, and 59% of them are <9 mph. In September, wind speeds increase over those of July and 11.9% are > 25 mph. October wind speeds continue to increase over those of September, 13.7% of which are >25 mph. The increase in wind speed continues into the winter months showing December with 23.1% of the winds being > 25 mph. Maximum wind speeds of over 120 mph generated by cyclones and hurricanes can be expected in the study area from late May to early November. A-37 Table A-9. Frequency in percent of winds from various directions in the Gulf of Mexico; A. Monthly Data, B. Seasonal Data. A. Monthly Data. Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec N 19 13 12 10 10 4 4 4 6 13 18 12 NE 16 20 13 18 16 10 10 11 22 34 23 18 E 21 21 20 32 28 30 28 22 33 28 24 22 SE 17 17 27 19 17 23 18 13 13 7 11 16 S 7 10 12 7 6 6 10 8 5 2 6 8 sw 5 3 3 2 3 4 5 7 2 2 2 3 w 5 6 4 4 4 2 4 6 3 2 3 5 NW 10 10 7 7 5 4 4 5 4 4 7 7 B. Seasonal Data. Fall Winte r Spring Summer NE 26 18 16 10 E 28 21 27 27 SE 10 17 21 18 NW 5 9 6 4 Soui xe: Stone, Jame: s, et al. , 1973 (Data extracted from U.S. Naval Weathe r, 1970). A-38 G. FLOODPLAINS Flooding in the study area is primarily the result of storm surge from tropical storms. From late May to early November, tropical cyclones and hurricanes may cross the area. These destructive storms flood large areas of the marshes to depths of 10 ft or more. They cause severe damage, and change the environment by raising the salinity of the marshes, destroying wildlife habitat, and causing coastline erosion. During the hurricane season, the average number of tropical storms is 0.76/yr. The overall hurricane probability for any one day is 0.56% in June and July and increases sharply to 0.99% during the early part of August. The study area has been struck (in the period of recorded history) by 10 damaging hurricanes and 22 other hurricanes and tropical storms. The paths of several of these damaging hurricanes are shown in Fig. A-17. Flooding of the low lying areas at Port Fourchon occurs as a result of the storm surges associated with cyclones. The highest stage of water recorded for the area as a result of a hurricane was 9 ft above MSL at Leeville (north of the study area) in September, 1915. The area of inundation and conditions associated with the passage of hurricane Betsy in September, 1965, is presented in Fig. A- 18. This illustrates how storm surge generation may cause direct flooding as a result of inland propagation of the surge across the marshland, and indirect flooding through upstream propagation of the surge on the Mississippi River. The proposed site is within the 100 yr floodplain as mapped for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in May 1971 (FIA, 1970). The project is not presently specifically designed to minimize po- tential harm to the floodplain, to meet flood-proof standards under the National Flood Insurance Program, or to be in compliance with the Flood Disaster Protection Act. The facility is however set back from the beach area which creates a safety buffer consisting of a natural vege- tation area. The Greater Lafourche Port Commission will have to be in compliance with the Lafourche Parish Police Jury flood control plan (Picciola & Assoc. Inc., 1978). A-39 CO u cu ^ 3 4-1 CO 0) 43 4-1 14-1 O ^ 4-1 •H C •H O •H > CU 43 4-1 C •H co 0) el co a •H M M 43 iw o CO »—s 42 CN 4J r^ cO CTn P4 rH I <3 bO •H Pn A-40 4-J 01 PQ d) C a •H n in 6 o 5-i QJ OJO 5-i 3 en e 5-J O 4-1 00 •H A-41 H . WETLANDS With completion of Phase 1 of the Port Fourchon plan the natural vegetation at the site is already undergoing significant changes. Much of the 450 acres planned for development was formerly an inter- tidal, regularly flooded saline marsh dominated by oyster grass ( Spar- tina alterniflora ) , a species which occurs in almost pure stands along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. In Louisiana marshes it is sometimes associated with black rush ( June us roemerianus ) , black mangrove ( Avicen- nia nitida ) , and saltgrass ( Distichlis spicata ) (Woodhouse, Seneca, Broome, 1974; Chabreck, 1970; Penfound and Hathaway, 1938). Adjacent to the low marsh were the more elevated and better drained narrow levees and minor spoil banks along Bayou Lafourche, Pass Fourchon, and Belle Pass. Terrestrial species including shrubs, herbs, and grasses (Table A-10) occupied these landforms, but there were no large trees (Tobin, 1940; Aero, 1951-52). An oil tank farm and several small canals and rig cuts were con- structed below Pass Fourchon in the early 1950 's initiating a change in the indigenous marsh vegetation. Some of the saline marsh was covered by spoil material and shell which either remained bare or was invaded by shrubs and grasses. In 1967 approximately 2007 acres of this saline marsh were im- pounded by levees and the area became progressively fresher as salt water interchange was terminated (Monte, 1975). This resulted in deterioration of the interior marsh since Spartina alterniflora required flooding by saline water (Table A-ll). A large, shallow lake developed in place of this marsh in the northern three-quarters of the impound- ment. The lake bottom was invaded by Widgeon grass ( Ruppia maritima ) , while brackish to intermediate types of vegetation ( Spartina patens and Distichlis spicata ) began to replace the Spartina alterniflora along the fringes of the lake. Hurricane Carmen breached the levee in 1974 permitting saline conditions to return temporarily, but the levees were repaired within a few montns. Had saline Gulf waters been allowed to resume circula- tion in the impoundment , the Spartina alterniflora marsh may have re- juvenated. However, under present conditions the impoundment will under- go succession to an intermediate-to-freshwater lake and marsh environment (Whitehurst, 1975). The western and southern perimeter of this impoundment and the land adjacent to Belle Pass and Pass Fourchon has been receiving large amounts of spoil over the past 10 years. These spoil deposits ele- vated the land mass, killed the established vegetation through silta- tion, and initiated a transitional phase. Normal succession on these spoil deposits is expected to culminate in a terrestrial species association (over 60% not wetland species) , including some bottomland hardwoods (Monte, 1976). By the time of field reconnaissance in January 1976 a great diversity of species including shrubs, grasses, and herbs already covered the spoil sites and only a few areas remained unvegetated (Fig. A-19) . As expected, no vegetation grew in the pro- ject area where the land had been paved with shell for roads, parking lots, houses, and other industrial uses (Fig. A-20, A- 21, and A-22) . A-42 d o Xi o u s o 4-> 5-( O Pm (1) x: +j d •H 4J •H •H H •H CO CO cu o Mi U-l O CJ U-l cu d 4J 4-J CJ i 03 CU ■H rH •H •H u d CO O'j CO i T! g a CU bO S • CM g o cO cu CO CO CO o •H o •M 00 M CO Mi c- cO g •H CO CJ 4J Mi d o 4-J r-H H 1 •H •H a a) CO O o CM a d CU •H CU •H 00 CO X > • 0) 4-> 1 • o CO •H CO H • "4-4 4-J 4-) II fi CO X • CM u H Mi cu CO CM 4-) •H MM CM •H •H cO Mi c CM CO cO CO CO CO O rH cu CO CO CO •H r-H CO M Mi CM CJ co C>0 o • CO CO -H •H cu G >-, CM cu *H M !>, CO CU cO •H •H bO CM •H C G o 4-i CO •H 4-! cO 4-1 H CO 4J •H S CJ a cO G E CO Mi CO Mi Mi 00 p C B O cO •H •H X, CO X! d d c Cu co 3 o O CO Mi •H o 0) d a o •H CJ •H CO CO •H 0) X o CO X Mi O •X) I+-I 4-! rH o CD CO 00 •H CO Mi •H > CJ •H 4-1 o •H Mt X a 0) -H •H •H Ml CO Ml a X! cO 4J ■H X Mi d •H CM Ml 4-) •H rM tJ ft a CM rH r-H r-l CO CO X -o o CO Mi CO ■M a U CO Mi CM co d > CO d ?-. as £-. CO cfl O > CM CO >-> p- a> X •H CO •H cu !>, d CM CO < CO M jd CU 01 o S 60 CJ CO d cu 01 Mi O -d CJ Mi CO •H X! a; d CO t>0 r-l Mi cO CU CO > CO d CO CO CU Mi CO d r-H CO .rQ cu 4-> 4-1 Tl 'O Mi 4J d CO co cu r-H H 00 CO CO «H 0) H 00 Ml Mj O rH M O Mi T) X CJ CO 4_) X S*, CO 4J CO e > r -0 •H d -a O o Mi CU 4J O CO Mi Mi CO cu Ml Mi d Mi CO M cu '$ £ d Mi 4-) 5 O CU d 60 O d X d >-. o O ^! ^J >^ -Ml cu CO CO CO cu Xi cu CU ^ Mi rH CO 5 Mi o CM s cu O O X! 1 4-1 4-) CO CO -a CO 4J a d rH 4-) 0) 4-> 4J xs 1 bO CU CO CO CO 4-J CO CO cO cO ^H H CO rH d •H 4-J CO rH rH d CO CO X -a M rH rH d CO cO rH rH rH O CO P^ CO a) CO cO o CO CO cO 0) CU cO •H •H Q pqpqpQcjWfcOOOSOPMpMPdctff^coco cococo^^:^ cu > Ml d to cu •H CO 4-1 d a) I o M •H > d w rH CO 4-1 CO CO O o cu CJ Ml d o CO A-43 cO cu u cti CU § o p. CU 4-1 d •H X! 4-> •H CO M d cO rQ •H O CO >•> -a cu o CO 14-1 <4H co CO cd X! CO M cu a •H rH CO to Jl cd H 4-1 d CU CU 60 o a M cO CU rC rM O CO CU rH •H S CU u co cr CO CO CU rH •H a CU u d cr CO •H O CO CU cu a •H CO O CU CU CL »> d CO fi •H o CO d-H toO CO •H 4-1 w •H o o cu co CO •H rH bOo •H 4J d a a CO T3 ctj g a d d X! O d cr co o o etf CO rH II , II II CO CTi CT> r— 1 CO m r-H • I") d co CO rQ d co u Ph 4-1 ,Q rd Q^rH U CO d co cu co co o etf co jxj CU CO > cu o no u d toO* CO d • rQ CO cO U S co p . rH 00 rH O • CM m CM o CM rH CTl r-» cm o o I , CO o . ' I CM v£> CM CO T3 CU d d 4J cr co co < r-J r2 CO 4-1 o H •H CO •H o a CO cu 4J CO 4J CU toO cu % 13 ptl CO d •H 4-1 u crj a CO o CO ■!< O II m ii r-» II o> || -I II II * II cu II 4-1 II d ii O II s !! II II cu ii II U II d it O II CO II Fig. A-19. Impounded area in Port Fourchon. Shrub grass, herb community invading spoil deposited over former saline marsh. Shell Road High Spoil Low Spoil Transitional Marsh Brackish to Fresh Lake MARSH ELDER GOLDEN ROD SALT GRASS WIDGEON GRASS EASTERN BACCHARIS SALT WORT OYSTER GRASS BEARD GRASS GLASS WORT GOLDEN ROD CATTAIL RATTLE BUSH ROSSEAU CANE WAX MYRTLE WIRE GRASS SALT WORT SALT GRASS GLASS WORT OYSTER GRASS CATTAIL WIRE GRASS SALT GRASS Fig. A-20. Schematic diagram illustrating morphological environments and related vegetation associations. A-44 Fig. A-21. Spoil fill being prepared for Port Fourchon development. Fig. A-22. Port Fourchon beach. Erosion of the shoreline is resulting in reworking of the sand & shell beach and the destruction of vegetation (black mangrove). A-45 The beach along the southern perimeter of the Port Fourchon com- plex is approximately 250 ft wide and consists of reworked sand and shell. This area is undergoing rapid erosion (Dantin, Whitehurst , Durbin, 1974; Fig. A-22) . The beach material is being moved inland by normal wave action and storm surges and is covering the interior marshland, natural levees, and spoil sites. Small dunes back of the beach are covered by beach grasses intermixed with the pre-existing marsh and natural levee and spoil vegetation. A dense stand of mangrove grows behind the beach adjacent to Pass Fourchon and along the blocked tidal channel which bisects the southern portion of the Port Fourchon complex. Scattered mangrove also occurs in the Spartina alterniflora marsh surrounding Bay Marchand. There are no direct economic or commercial uses for the vegeta- tion in the vicinity of the planned complex. However, the marshlands and estuarine areas are indirectly of great economic value. The exact monetary value (of a marsh land) per acre is difficult to access, although Gossalink, Odum, and Pope (1974) derived a figure of $4000 per acre per year "Based on the gross primary productivity (in energy terms) of the natural marsh using a conversion ratio from energy to dollars based on the ratio of gross national product to national energy consumption." The value of spoil bank vegetation has not been inten- sively researched but it is believed to be approximately four times less productive than a saline marsh (Young, Odum, Day, Butler, 1974). In general, the vegetation of a salt marsh acts as an agent for controlling erosion by absorbing and dissipating wave and tidal energy. It also serves as a sediment trap, storm buffer, wildlife 'habitat , and estuarine nursery (Lagna, 1975). Spartina alterniflora marshes are an important component of any estuarine ecosystem for they possess high rates of primary production, and provide for energy flow and nutrient cycling. Their annual primary production in southern climates such as Louisiana is as high as 2960 g dry wt/m^/yr streamside and 1,484 g dry wt/m2/yr 50 m inland. These high rates place the marshes among the most productive systems on earth (Broome, 1973). Detritus washing from these marshes constitutes one of the 5 major primary food sources for estuarine organisms (Walker, 1973), many of which are ultimately harvested by man. The extremely high primary productivity of Louisiana marshland is largely responsible for this portion of the Gulf of Mexico being called the "fertile fisheries crescent" (Gunter, 1967). Louisiana's saline marshes are of value to fur mammals and water- fowl in that they moderate the effect of tides and salinities. This provides a buffer zone which protects the more desirable animal habi- tats further inland (Palmisano and Chabreck, 1972). The only direct recreation or aesthetic use for the vegetation resources in this area would be by those who engage in collecting plants or who wish to study an area undergoing dynamic changes resulting from the actions of both man and nature. The well-developed grove of mangroves along the beach and tidal channel and the beach vegetation possess significant aesthetic value for those who appreciate this type A-47 of environment. Port Fourchon provides one of the few easily accessible areas for observing these particular associations along the Louisiana coast; however, no rare or endangered plant species are known to exist in this area (McGinnis et al., 1972). A list of the vascular plants present in the area can be found in Table A- 12. Table . A- -12. A list of vascular plants present in the study area. Common Name Scientif ic Name Bushy beardgrass Black mangrove Eastern baccharis Saltwort Sea-oxeye Flatsedge Salt grass Sandrush Pennywort Railroad vine Marsh elder Wax myrtle Roseau cane Palmetto Glasswort Glasswort Black willow Rattle bush Sea purslane Goldenrod Oyster grass Wire grass Cattail Andropogon glomeratus Avicennia nitida Baccharis halimifolia Bat is maritima Borrichia frutescens Cyperus sp. Distichlis spicata Fimbristylis castanea Hydrocotyle sp. Ipomoea pes-caprae Iva frutescens Myrica cerifera Phragmites communis Sabal minor Salicornia bigelovii Salicornia virginica Salix nigra Sesbania sp. Sesuvium sp. Solidago sp. Spartina alterniflora Spartina patens Typha sp . Source: Coastal Environments, Inc., field survey. In summary, the study area serves as wildlife habitat for migra- tory waterfowl and other wetland fauna (See Section 1, K) . The Greater Lafourche Port Commission has received three U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits as follows: Date Permit Number Description of Action October 7, 1974 LMNOD-SP (Gulf of Mexico) 1242 Dredge Belle Pass to-20 ft Install and maintain a jetty A-48 Date August 16, 1976 Permit Number LMNOD-SP (Pass Fourchon) 6 Description of Action Dredge a channel and slip Install and maintain a road Fill in Pass Fourchon July 13, 1977 LMNOD-SP (Bayou Lafourche) 702 Dredge in an area and install and maintain rip-rap and fill There is no state agency which permits activities in the wetlands. The Louisiana Stream Control Commission, the Louisiana Air Control Com- missionj and the Louisiana Health and Human Resources Administration require permits for discharges into water and air and design of sanita- tion facilities, but they do not control land use. A-49 I. WILDLIFE HABITAT 1. General Wildlife Description The Port Fourchon project area may be described as a modified saline marsh zone at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche with a beach front on the Gulf of Mexico. The marshlands in the project area have undergone considerable change as a result of spoil deposition and impoundment. A large area (approximately 2284 acres) of former marshland in the northern two-thirds of the project area (above Pass Fourchon), which formerly contained large marsh lakes (as shown on the 1953 U.S.G.S. 7.5 minute quadrangle) has been converted into a single, shallow, impounded lake fringed with spoil deposits. A smaller marsh area (1300 acres) south of Pass Fourchon, vegetated mostly by oyster grass ( Spar- tina alterniflora ) and black mangrove ( Avicennia nitida ) , has likewise been affected by spoil deposition, although the interior of this marsh zone still receives tidal interchange with the Gulf via Bayou Lafourche, the Tennessee Gas Transmission Canal, and small, natural channels. The total area of functional marsh (approximately 600 acres) is, however, small as compared to the modified areas. Terrestrial wildlife habitats occurring in the Port Fourchon pro- ject area consist of: 1) the Gulf beach, 2) saline marshes, and 3) spoil deposits. Certain animal species utilizing these habitats may be closely associated with one habitat type, while other species, which are less exacting in their habitat requirements, may be spread over all habitat types. Terrestrial wildlife species occurring in the project area are discussed below under a) and b). Aquatic habitats in the project include: 1) the surf zone of the Gulf beach, 2) the jetties at the end of Belle Pass, 3) Bayou Lafourche, 4) small canals and bayous arising from Bayou Lafourche and entering the marsh, 5) the marsh proper, and 6) the large, impounded brackish water lake along Highway 3090. Aquatic animals, including fish and shellfish, and animals closely associated \\7ith or dependent upon aquatic habitats, such as shore birds, wading birds, waterfowl, and fur-bearing mammals, are the predominant fauna in the project area which may best be described as an estuarine environment. Aquatic animals occurring in the project area are discussed in more detail below. a) Game and Fur Mammals Virtually the only game species of mammal occurring in the project area is the swamp rabbit ( Sylvilagus aquaticus ) . Rabbit pellets were numerous in both marsh and spoil bank zones in the project area, indi- cating an abundance of swamp rabbits in these habitats. The Louisiana Wild Life and Fisheries Commission, in a wildlife survey of Lafourche Parish (1975), estimated the rabbit population in salt marsh habitats as one rabbit per ten acres of marsh. It is not known to what extent rabbits are hunted in the project area. The Wisner Wildlife Management A-50 area (adjacent to the project area) has provided an average of 600 man/days of recreation in the form of rabbit hunting in past years (Table A-13) . Other game mammals, such as deer and squirrels, are absent from the project area because of the lack of suitable habitat. The raccoon ( Procyon lotor ) is hunted as a game animal in forested areas of Louis- iana, but it is unlikely that raccoon hunting occurs in the project area. Fur-bearing mammals which utilize salt marsh habitats include muskrats ( Ondatra zibethicus ) , nutria ( Myocastor coypus ) , mink ( Mustela vison) , raccoons ( Procyon lotor ) , and otters (Lutra canadensis ) . All five of these species may occur in the project area. Although there is some limited fur trapping in the area, salt marshes are not major trap- ping grounds and most trapping efforts are carried out in other marsh types (i.e., fresh, intermediate, and brackish marshes). It is also in these other marsh types that the above-mentioned furbearers reach their highest population numbers. Saline marshes may periodically contain good numbers of muskrats, however, the quality of muskrat pelts (as well as those of other furbearers) from salt marsh areas is low, a factor which further reduces the value of salt marshes as fur-producing areas. b) Non-Game Mammals No systematic survey of the non-game mammals of the project area has been conducted. Terrestrial mammals which are likely to occur here, however, include the nine-banded armadillo (Dasyniis nnvpmrinctus ) and the marsh rice rat ( Oryzomys palustris ) . Certain bats, especially the seminole bat ( Lasiurus seminolus ) , are probably nocturnal feeders on insects over the marshes in and near the project area. The Atlantic bottle-nosed dolphin ( Tursiops truncatus ) is common in the nearshore waters on the Gulf of Mexico and inner bays near the project area, and very likely enters Bayou Lafourche on occasions. Other marine mammals may sometimes be observed offshore in the deeper Gulf waters or found washed upon beaches. On August 19, 1939, following a hurricane, Dr. George H. Lowery, Jr., of the L.S.U. Museum of Zoology found 49 short-finned pilot whales (Globicephala macrorhyncha ) dead on the beach ,: several hundred yards west of Pass Fourchon on the delta of Bayou Lafource i: (Lowery, 1974b). c) Game Birds Waterfowl and rails are probably the only game birds occurring in the project area in sufficient numbers to attract hunter interest. The impounded, shallow lake along Highway 3090 appears to be utilized heavily by waterfowl as a feeding area. This lake is also heavily hunted by duck hunters in the winter months as evidenced by the large number of A-51 r-l cd 0) rH m m m o o o o o moo >•> cd r>« r^ r-« o m o m o MSO 4-) CO CO 00 m r*» vo r-« r^ m co m H -d- CO CN r* o oo m r-4 — i •^ LT) CN CN CN o m m m m cn m o II i*"- CO ON r-- VO m cm r^. cn t— i r-4 CO O II cr> r>> n n a «> •s II *—* cd CN n r* n #, d ii ii d cu r^ CM — i CO t^ r^- r^ o m m m r» oo vo m in i— ( vd i— i i— i i— 1 CO C7\ Eh II II CU CU cd cy. r, n «t •> £ II II >. U .— i ^^ II II 4-> cu U II CO 4-1 4-J O o o o o o o o m o o o CO II ll cd d Cd IH CM m m m O O O O CO r-4 cm in CU II II ft cu g oo vo m O ■— i vO i— l .— I H CO 00 •H II ll S •H 5-4 •\ r. n «•, S-i II ii d qj 4-1 cd .— i . CO II ii T3 d m m in o o o o o moo •H II II cu cd 1—1 O CN CN o m m m co O rH o PM II ii -a g oo vo m in o m o — i t— 1 CO CO II -H n n n n -O II II > CU i— 1 <)- > P*. oo ^ m o o m o <— i rH CO o rH II II cd U cd ^ n a «t n «> •H II II CU d) U CO 4J O O- St r-4 i— i E5 II ii u d CU >, CO CM i 11 O CO > cd cd o cd ll II QJ -H < T3 ft o d ll ii erf ^ CO m cd ll •H II CO II 0) QJ o 00 •H II ii * ?, a > d 3 II II co CU -H cd •H O II II H ?« c 0 o ll < d 60 d 4J 00 60 "-3 CO <-3 w 00 d *H 00 00 cd a oo ** II d 4-> d -h ft d d & •* c CU II 1 d O rO- 'H rd co cd n cd -H r-l -H S 3 II II cd d d cd cd 4-) •H }-i J3 O M •H |3 Cd O II II H S3 P Prf erf o h U co M co pq co cj CO || A-52 duck blinds erected in the lake. The major species of waterfowl which occur in the project area include coots, mallards, pintails, gadwalls, American wigeons , shovelers, green-winged teal, blue-winged teal, mottled ducks, lesser scaup, and ring-necked ducks. All of these birds are migratory except for the mottled duck which is a year-round resident in the coastal marshes,. Other species of waterfowl may be present at times, but they are less common. Clapper rails ( Rallus longirostris ) are common in the salt marshes in and near the project area. These birds were seen in abundance in the black mangrove-oyster grass marsh between Pass Fourchon and Belle Pass during field trips to the project area. Rails are not usually subjected to heavy hunting pressure in Louisiana and most rails are killed incidentally by duck hunters. The clapper rail is a year-round resident in the more saline areas of the coastal marshes. The king rail ( Rallus elegans ) is also a permanent resident which prefers less saline habitats. Populations of both species are increased in the winter months in Louisiana by the arrival of migrant birds from more northerly areas. The Virginia rail ( Rallus limicola ) and the sora (Po rzana Caro- lina) are migratory game birds which occur in the Louisiana marshes in the winter months. Like the king rail, the Virginia rail and the sora are most common in freshwater habitats, including marshes, and are thus probably uncommon in the project area. d) Non-Game Birds A complete listing of all the various birds which occur seasonally and permanently in the project area would require at least a one-year period of observation. Certain bird groups, however, are conspicuous and are characteristic of the different habitats occurring in the pro- ject area. These groups of birds include (a) fishing birds, (b) shore birds, (c) marsh birds, (d) wading birds, (e) raptors, and (f) perching birds. Another group, the waterfowl, have been dealt with in the sec- tion on game birds. (1) Fishing Birds (Gulls, Terns, Skimmers, Pelicans): Gulls and terns are abundant in the project area, occurring anywhere along watercourses, ponds, lakes, and offshore. The most commonly observed gulls are herring gulls (mostly immatures) , laughing gulls, and ring-billed gulls; while Forster's tern, the royal tern, and the. Caspian tern are the most frequently observed terns. Least terns nest in the Bay Champagne area southeast of the project site. Other gulls and terns may be expected to occur in the project area, but are less common. The black skimmer frequents the Gulf beaches and is a coiiimon permanent resident in and around the project area. The native Louisiana population of its state bird, the brown pelican, became extinct in the state in the early 1960*s. Beginning in 1968, and for several subsequent years, the Louisiana Wild Life and Fisheries Commission introduced brown pelicans obtained from South Florida onto Grand Terre Island, approximately 2.5 mi east of the A-53 project area. Fortunately, these birds prospered and reproduced so that by 1973 the estimated population was about 400 birds, occurring from the Chandeleur Islands west to East Timbalier Island in Terrebonne Parish (Lowery, 1974a). More recently, however, in 1975, adult brown pelicans near the Mississippi River Delta suddenly began to die off for no apparent reason, although cumulative poisoning by concentration of chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides in body fats has definitely been linked to the initial decline of the pelicans and has been strongly suspected in the most recent die-off s. Thus, the brown pelican, an endangered species, is leading a pre- carious existence in Louisiana and is entitled to careful consideration whenever any project of man encroaches on its habitat, The project area — especially the Gulf beach, the nearshore Gulf of Mexico, and the rock jetties at the mouth of Belle Pass — - is undoubtedly utilized by brown pelicans as a feeding area. The white pelican, which is a winter resident in Louisiana, occurs in and near the project area, The large, brackish-water impounded area alongside Highway 3090 serves as a feeding area for wfyite pelicans. The white pelican is in much better shape, population-wise , than the brown pelican; however, its numbers have been declining in some areas of its range and the bird is included on the National Audubon Society's 1976 "Blue List" of declining birds. (2) Shore Birds; Shore birds include such small birds as plovers, sandpipers, and others which are frequently seen scurrying along the wave-washed beach zone in search of food. They also utilize marsh habitats. A list of shore birds observed near the project area during the Louisiana Offshore Oil Pipeline study (LOOP Inc., 1974) is given below: Piping Plover ( Charadrius melodus) Semipalmated Plover (Charadrius hiaticula semipalmatus) Wilson's Plover ( Charadrius wilsonia wilsonia ) Black-Bellied Plover ( Pluvialis squatarola ) Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres morinella ) Willet ( Catoptrophorus semipalmatus ) Dowitcher (Li mnodromus sp . ) Semipalmated Sandpiper (Calidris pusilla )** Western Sandpiper (C alidris mauri )** Sanderling (Calidris alba ) Dunlin ( Calidris alpina ) Killdeer ( Charadrius vociferus vociferus ) Avocet (Recurvirostra americana) (Helga Cernicek, Observer) (3) Marsh Birds: Seaside sparrows, grackles , and red- winged blackbirds are common in, and quite characteristic of, the marsh habitat in and near the project area. Rails, already discussed as game birds, also utilize this habitat. **Dominant Species A-54 (4) Wading Birds: Herons and egrets are numerous in the project area. Great egrets and snowy egrets were very frequently observed on field trips to Port Fourchon. Also common were Louisiana herons, green herons, and great blue herons. Other birds in this group which were not observed, but which are certain to occur there include the black-crowned night heron, white ibis, white-faced ibis (all three of which are listed on the National Audubon Society's Blue List of declining birds for 1976), the American bittern, and the least bittern. Wading birds were observed in most wet sites on the project area. They were absent from the Gulf beach, however, and were most numerous in the marsh areas. (5) Raptors: Raptors (birds of prey) were uncommon in the project area. Most hawks and owls are associated with forested habitats. The marsh hawk (listed on the National Audubon Society's Blue List of declining birds for 1976) occurs in marsh habitats and one marsh hawk was observed in the project area near Bay Marchand. Several American kestrels (sparrow hawks), also on the sama Blue List, were observed along Louisiana Highway 1 between the project area and Grand Isle. The osprey, on the same Blue List, may occasionally visit the project area, especially to fish in the shallow impounded lake. The peregrine falcon and the bald eagle could also presumably occasionally utilize the project area as a feeding area. These species are discussed in the section on endangered species. (6) Perching Birds: The perching birds (Order Passeri- formes) include a great array of birds of types familiar to most people, such as swallows, wrens, warblers, vireos, and sparrows. Many familiar town birds like mockingbirds, cardinals, blue jays, purple martins, and others are members of this group. Many of these birds are present in the project area only temporarily during migration. Highest land areas, such as spoil banks where much shrubby vegetation occurs, are used by passerine birds. These areas are particularly important during north- ward migration in the spring months when for many migrants such areas are the first opportunities for landfall after cross-flight of the Gulf of Mexico. Lowery (1974a) has pointed out, however, that utili-^ zation of such areas as cheniers by spring trans-Gulf migrants is only important during inclement weather. During good weather most migrants fly inland before making landfall. Although the woody cheniers are probably more valuable areas to spring migrants in this respect, spoil banks undoubtedly also serve as resting and feeding areas. e) Herptiles (Reptiles and Amphibians) The saline nature of much of the habitat found in the project area precluded its utilization by most reptiles and amphibians. Only two species of reptiles - the Gulf saltmarsh snake ( Natrix faciata clarki ) and the diamondback terrapin ( Malaclemys terrapin ) are regularly found in salt marsh environments. One amphibian - the Gulf Coast toad (Bufo A-55 valliceps valliceps ) - is sometimes encountered on Gulf beaches. Any of these three species may possibly occur in the study area. Certain sea turtles may occasionally be found in the Gulf of Mexico near the project area. f) Insects Little information is available concerning insects in Louisiana salt marshes. Mosquitoes, however, are periodically abundant. The predominant mosquitoes in marshes of the southeastern United States are Aedes sollicitans and Aedes taenlorhynchus , Biting midges ( Culicoides sp.) also occur in salt marsh habitats (LOOP, Inc., 1974). The aquatic larvae of these insects may be utilized as food by marine organisms. g) Usage There is no data available on usage of the project area by hunters and other recreationists. Usage of the adjacent Wisner Wildlife Manage- ment Area for various recreational activities is given in Table A-13. The major recreational activity derived from the terrestiral wildlife resources of the project area appears to be duck hunting, judging by the number of duck blinds on the impounded lake. Probably little, if any, hunting for rabbits or rails occurs within the project area. Although a few trappers work the area, most fur trapping is done in other, less saline areas, where pelt quality is better and furbearers are more abundant. No data is available on the extent to which the project area is used for non-consumptive recreational activities such as-; bird-watching, nature study, etc., which are based in whole or in part on the terrestrial wildlife resources. h) Public Hunting Areas The project area serves as a public hunting area, especially for duck hunters. Hunting recreation is further available on the adjacent 26,000 acre Wisner Wildlife Management Area. Game species most often sought on the Wisner Tract included waterfowl, rails, gallinules, snipe, and rabbits. Usage of the Wisner Area for various recreational activi- ties is given in Table A-13. i) Rare and/or Endangered Species Endangered species which may occasionally utilize, fly over, or visit the project area include the eastern brown pelican, the southern bald eagle, and the peregrine falcon. The American alligator currently designated as "threatened," occurs near enough to the project area to deserve consideration, but probably does not occur within the project area because of lack of suitable habitat conditions. A-56 The eastern brown pelican occasionally feeds in the project area, especially near the Gulf beach and the jetties at the mouth of Belle Pass. It was observed near this area during the LOOP study (LOOP, Inc., 1974). No pelican nesting sites occur, however, in the project area. Before the 1976 die-off, nesting occurred on islands in the Timbalier Chain and on Queen Bess Island in Barataria Bay, 15 mi to the northeast (Aycock, 1976). The southern bald eagle occurs in south Louisiana where it nests in the wintertime. Eagles are most often seen in and near wooded areas where they build their huge nests near the tops of tall trees. Eagles feed heavily on fish and thus their nests are usually located near lakes or other large bodies of water. The absence of wooded areas or trees near the project area precludes the use of this area by eagles as a nesting habitat. Eagles may occasionally, however, fly over the pro- ject area in quest of food. It is probable, though, that the project area is not nearly so valuable as a feeding area for eagles as the further inland bodies of water flanked by tall trees. The nearest bald eagle nest is approximately 40 mi away (Aycock, 1976). The peregrine falcon also occurs in Louisiana in the winter and spring months. Lowery (1974a) states that the peregrine falcon is now only likely to occur in the coastal region where it preys on gulls , terns, and ducks. The project area does probably on occasion serve as a feeding area for peregrine falcons, but there are no reports of recent origin of the peregrine falcon in this area. The American alligator (A lligator mississippiensis ) was listed as an endangered species on the U.S. List of Endangered Fauna of May 1974. Presently, the alligator is not an endangered species in this state because of the large populations of these reptiles that are encountered in many areas of the state's wetlands. The alligator is primarily an inhabitant of fresh to slightly brackish water, and only occasionally ventures into more saline areas for short intervals. The project area is thus not a primary alligator habitat. However, the alligator has made significant population gains and is currently classified as threatened throughout coastal Louisiana. In addition to the species discussed above, the birds listed below may occur in the project area and are listed in the Blue List for 1976 published by the National Audubon Society (American Birds, December, 1976). These birds are reportedly declining in numbers either in re- stricted areas or throughout their range. White Pelican ( Pelecanus ery throrhynchas ) Reddish Egret ( Dichromanassa rufescens ) White-faced Ibis (Plegadis chibi ) White Ibis (E ndocimus albus ) Black-crowned Night Heron ( Nucticorax nycticorax) Marsh Hawk ( Circus cyaneus ) Osprey (Pandion haliaetus ) Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) A-57 Three sea turtles - the Atlantic Hawksbill Turtle ( Eretmochelys imbricata ) , the Atlantic Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys kempi ) , and the Atlantic Leatherback Turtle ( Dermochelys coriacea ) - are included on the United States List of Endangered Fauna published by the U.S. Department of the Interior (1974). A-58 2. Aquatic Ecology Due to its location at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche on the Gulf of Mexico, the Port Fourchon project area may perhaps best be described in terms of the marine-derived aquatic fauna present in its bayous, canals, lakes, and marshes. Two of the most productive estuarine areas in the United States occur immediately to the east and to the west of the pro- ject area; they are the Caminada-Barataria and the Timbalier-Terrebonne estuarine systems respectively. Bayou Lafourche is hydrologically connected with both of these systems and serves as a passageway for the movement of marine organisms into and out of the estuarine areas. The importance of estuaries to Gulf of Mexico fisheries is well- recognized. Many commercial and sport fish and shellfish stocks are dependent on estuaries during part or all of their life cycles. Com- mercial shrimp stocks in the Northern Gulf provide a typical example of temporary utilization of estuaries as nursery areas. Adults spawn offshore in deeper waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Eggs hatch offshore, the larval shrimp mature through several stages, and the postlarvae migrate or are carried by currents into the inshore estuaries where they feed and further develop before returning again to the Gulf. Similar life history patterns are known for blue crabs, menhaden, croakers, and other important commercial fishery stocks. Other marine organisms, including oysters, speckled trout, and manv small fishes and crustaceans which are important as food for larger, commercial species are estuarine dependent; they live out and complete their life cycle within estuaries. Prior to the substantial modifications of the terrain by spoil deposition, the Port Fourchon project area was a saline marsh which was periodically inundated by the tides. The marsh vegetation — primarily oyster grass ( Spartina alterniflora V- growing in the area annually looses a portion of leaves, stems, and other plant parts which accumulate on the marsh floor. Some of this detrital material is eventually flushed from the marsh by precipitation runoff and tidal action into surrounding lagoons, bayous, and lakes where it is subject to further decomposition by physical and biological processes. De- tritus particles in the water form a substrata for the attachment of various microscopic organisms such as bacteria, fungi, protozoans, nematodes, and rotifers, as well as organic molecules which may adhere to the surface of the particles. Bacteria and fungi act to further decompose the detrital material, while the small animals present appear to only use it as a substrate. Detritus particles, along with the associated microbiota, are consumed by a wide variety of marine organisms, including zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, and fishes. The exact role of particulate organic detritus in the nutrition of estuarine organisms is not clearly understood. It is thought that the microbiota and organic molecules attached to the particles are more important in nutrition than the particles are themselves and that these components probably also account for much of the protein content of well-decomposed particulate detritus in estuaries (Odum and de la Cruz, 1967). Many estuarine A-59 organisms which reportedly feed on detritus may do so only incidentally, as in the case of bottom feeding fishes which may ingest some settled particulate matter along with more regular items of their diet. It is possible, however, that such fishes do derive some food value from the detritus so ingested. Other organisms, including many filter-feeding forms, ingest organic detritus particles in quantity, however, and de- tritus abundance has been correlated with peaks in biomass of zooplank- ton (Darnell, 1967; Day e_t al, , 1973). Carnivorous fishes which do not consume detritus eat other organisms which do. Thus, Odum and de la Cruz (1967) have stated that the major energy flow between autotrophs (plants) and heterotrophs (animals) in estuaries is by way of detrital food chains rather than by grazing food chains because 'only a small portion of the net production of the marsh grass is grazed while it is alive. " The ecological processes discussed above are still operative in the project area today although the value of the marshes inside the project area has been diminished by spoil deposition, channel dredging, creation of impoundments by surrounding areas with spoil, and damming of channels. The marshes inside the project area, because of these modifications, are no longer freely flooded and drained by tidal action resulting in the reduction of the export of detritus to the estuaries Certain marsh areas in the lower part of the project area, although considerably affected by spoil deposits, still function in a near normal manner, because of a hydrologic connection with Bayou Lafourche by way of the Tennessee Gas Transmission Canal and a small bayou. In the northern part of the project area, however, the marsh has been surrounded by spoil deposits on the south, west, and north, and by LA Highway 3090 on the east. Thus an impounded lake has been created which has little water exchange with the outside area, except for a water control structure on the northern edge of the impound- ment area which still permits some movement of aquatic organisms. The impounded lake covers an area that was formerly occupied by several large and small marsh lakes and ponds which were intricately connected and drained by numerous small, tidal channels. Maturing estuarine fishes and shellfishes were free to move into and out of the area. Transport of detrital material from marshes within the area was not interfered with. Impoundment of the area by encirclement with spoil material has raised water levels over the marsh, permanently flooding and killing the marsh grasses. Salinity in the impoundment has decreased due to dilution by rainfall. Movement of aquatic organisms and materials into and out of the area has stopped due to spoil encirclement and dam- ming of channels. The impounded area has been shut off from the sur- rounding estuary and, although it now has some importance as a feeding area for waterfowl, much or all of its function as a nursery area for estuarine organisms has been lost. a) Fishes Although no systematic collection of fishes and other aquatic organisms has been made (to our knowledge) in the project area, the area is close enough to well studied areas of the Louisiana coast to suggest that there would be no real difference in the kinds of fauna present. The nearby Caminada-Barataria Bay system has been well studied A- 60 in recent years by personnel of the L.S.U. Marine Sciences Department, the Louisiana Wild Life and Fisheries Commission, and other groups. The various faunal assemblages, including fishes, macroscopic inverte- brates, zooplankton, and endangered species occur ing in the project area are discussed below. In 1974 some samplings were taken from the impoundment area at Port Fourchon by pulling a 16 ft trawl for five minutes. The results are shown in Table A-14» Based on this information, the researchers concluded that they could not dispute the proposed uses of this area by the Greater Lafourche Port Commission on environmental grounds (Whitehurst, 1975). Table A-14. Trawl Data for the Impoundment Area, Port Fourchon, 1974 Total No. Total weight (gms) of trawled of trawled species Date species Fish No . Wt . Invertebrates No . Wt . 6 304 10 382 6/13/74 6 304 6/18/74 10 382 Source: whitehurst, n.d. Species of fishes which have been collected near the project area are listed in Table A-15. The list is not all-inclusive, but it does consist of the more common species which may be expected to occur in the Port Fourchon project area. Important sport fishes included in the list are such species as spotted sea-trout, red drum, and southern flounder. The lower one-third (approximately) of the project area, including Pass Fourchon, Chevron Canal, and the various canals and bayous in this area^ would appear to provide excellent sport fishing. Sport fishermen were observed fishing in this area on several occasions, Numerous redfish were observed in the shallow bayou connecting with the Tennessee Gas Transmission Canal on one field trip to the project area. Other fishes on the list are important commercial fish resources. Included in this category are menhaden and croakers. Menhaden landings in Louisiana exceed those of all other fisheries in poundage. The Atlantic croaker is the principal component of the industrial bottom- fish fishery which also utilizes a wide variety of other species. Other species on the list play imporant ecological roles in estuarine waters. The abundant bay anchovy is an important food item of juvenile sport fishes. Other small fishes, such as the various killifishes, gobies, mullet, silversides, and small flatfishes are also important food web organisms . A-61 Table A-15 . List of species of fish common in the study area. Co mmon Name Scientific Name Largescale menhaden Bay anchovy Gafftopsail catfish Sea catfish Atlantic needlefish Sheepshead minnow Gulf killifish Longnose killifish Sailfin nolby Gulf pipefish Bluefish Crevalle jack Bumper Pomp an o Silver perch Sand seatrout Spotted seatrout Spot Southern kingfish Atlantic croaker Black drum Red drum Sheepshead Pinfish Atlantic spadefish Atlantic cutlassfish Spanish mackerel Fat sleeper Sharptail goby Naked goby Clown goby Bighead searobin Freckled blenny Striped mullet Rough silverside Tidewater silverside Atlantic threadfin Bay whiff Fringed flounder Southern flounder Lined sole Hogchoker Blackcheek tonguefish Southern puffer Gulf toadfish Atlantic midshipman Brevoortia patronus Anchoa mitchilli Bagre marinus Galeichthys felis Strongylura marina Cyprinodon variegatus Fundulus grandis Fundulus similis Poecilia latipinna Synagnathus scovelli Pomatomus saltatrix Caranx hippos Chloroscombrus chrysurus Trachinotus carolinus Bairdiella chrysura Cynoscion arenarius Cynoscion rebulosus Leiostomus xanthurus Menticirrhus americanus Micropogon undulatus Pogonias cromis Sciaenops ocellata Archosargus probatocephalus Lagodon rhomboides Chaetodipterus faber Trichiums lepturus Scomberomorus naculatus Dormitator maculatus Gobionellus hastatus Gobiosoma bosci Microgolius gulosus Prionotus tribulus Hypsoblennius ionthas Mugil cephalus Membras nartinica Menidia beryllina Polydactylus octonemus Citharichthys spilopterus Etropus crossotus Paralichthys lethostigma Achirus lineatus Trinectes naculatus Symphurus plaguisa Sphaeroides nephelus Opsanus beta Porichthys porosissimus Source: Compiled from several sources and personal communication, A-62 b) Macroscopic Invertebrates This category includes a diverse assemblage of invertebrate animals which are large enough to be seen with the unaided eye. The economically outstanding organisms in this group include commercial shrimp, crabs, and oysters. Other species of ecological importance are listed below. Ctenophores (Comb-jellies) - Although ctenophores lead a planktonic existence, they are large enough to be seen without magnification. Ctenophores are often very abundant in estuarine waters. The most common species encountered in the project area is probably Beroe ovata , although (Suillespie (1971) listed Mnemiopsis mccradyi as also being com- mon. Ctenophores may be recognized by the beautiful irridescent sheen reflected from the comb plates as they swim slowly through the water. The exact position of comb-jellies in the food web is unclear; they feed on zooplankton but do not themselves appear to be utilized as food by other organisms. Annellids - Polychaete worms are an important segment of the estua- rine fauna. Near the project area the polychaete Neanthes succinea appears to be most abundant in the marsh sediments where they burrow through the mud feeding on diatoms, detritus, and small crustaceans (Day e_t al. , 1973). Polychaetes are consumed by many bottom-feeding fishes and probably also by various crabs. Tube-dwelling, filter-feeding polychaetes were observed in the project area in a sandy bottomed area near the mouth of Bayou Lafourche. Oysters are often infested with a small polychaete ( Polydora sp.) which lives inside the shell. c) Mollusca and Crustacea Mollusks occurring in estuarine habitats include gastropods (snails), and pelecypods (bivalves). One cephalopod - the squid (Lolliguncula brevis ) - is also common in the Barataria estuary. Common gastropods occurring in the project area are the marsh dwelling species Littorina irrorata . Melampus sp., and Neritina reclivata , These snails are often seen clinging to the Spartina T where they graze on epiphytic algae, diatoms, and detritus. The oyster drill ( Thais haemastoma) is a common marine gastropod which is a major predator on bivalves, including oysters. Bivalve mollusks of importance in the project area include the ribbed mussel ( Modiolus demissus ) and the American oyster ( Crassostrea virginica) . Clumps or groups of ribbed mussels live partially buried in the sediments on the marsh floor. The ribbed mussel is a filter feeder which feeds on detritus, algae, and other suspended matter brought near its siphons when tides flood the marshes. The American oyster is the most important mollusk present in the project area from an economic standpoint. Oyster fishermen in Lafourche Parish produced 2,363,000 lbs of raw oyster meat in 1971 with a value to the fishermen of $1,031,000. Signs marking an oyster lease were observed in the project area near the Tennessee Gas Transmission Canal indicating that the project area is or has been utilized by oyster fishermen. Oyster fishing as currently practiced in Louisiana is A-63 actually a sea farming operation. Young ( ,: seed") oysters are dredged from seed ground reservations and are transported to low salinity (1-15%) areas where they are allowed to grow for about 15 months. Lower salinities decrease the quantities of oysters lost to predators such as the oyster drill. After this time the oysters are again moved to higher salinity waters (10-25%) where they are allowed to "fatten" or "grow salty" for about six months, after which time they are harvested. Besides their obvious economic importance, oysters are also ecologically important. Under natural conditions oysters will form reefs which may be extensive. These reefs of living oysters and oyster shells form a hard substrate for the attachment of other marine organ- isms such as algae, anemones, bryozoans, and various tube-dwelling worms. The nooks and crevices of oyster reefs are often occupied by small crabs, shrimp, and fishes. Young oysters and the associated reef fauna form a food source for certain fishes (black drum, sheeps- head) , stone crabs, and other animals. The oyster reef is a community of living organisms. In general, the major commercial shrimps of the Barataria estuary and the northern Gulf are the brown shrimp ( Peneaus aztecus ) and the white shrimp ( Peneaus setiferus ) . Also caught in much smaller quantities are the pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum ) , the seabob ( Xiphopenaeus kroyeri ) , and the rock shrimp ( Sicyonia brevirostris ) . Shrimp are the most valuable fishery product of the Gulf of Mexico. The landings of shrimp in Lafourche Parish in 1971 were 15,832,000 lbs, valued at $8,159,000. Brown and white shrimp are estuarine dependent organisms. Shrimp spawn offshore and the postlarval shrimp migrate or are otherwise carried into the estuaries where they feed and grow, then return to the Gulf as near mature shrimp. Besides their enormous economic value, shrimp are an integral part of the estuarine food web and are utilized as food by many predatory fishes. Smaller non-commercial crustaceans, such as the abundant grass shrimp ( Palaemonetes sp.), the mantis shrimp ( S qui 11a empusa - a stomatopod) , and the amphipods ( Corophium and Ampelesca ) are utilized as food organisms by species which are of more direct value to man. The blue crab ( Callinectes sapidus ) is another commercially im- portant species which is the object of an extensive fishery. Blue crabs are estuarine-dependent crustaceans which mate in estuaries and spawn in near-offshore areas. Crab larvae drift back into the estuary where they grow to maturity. Male crabs often penetrate well into freshwater areas before returning to the estuary to mate. Blue crabs are omnivores , feeding on both plant and animal material and on organic detritus. They are abundant in the Barataria estuary and in the project area. Other crabs of ecological importance include the stone crab ( Menippe mercenaria ) , which is a predator on oysters, the fiddler crab ( Uca pugnax ) , and the square-backed crab ( Sesarma ret icula turn) . The latter two crabs inhabit the marshes where their burrowing activities rework the marsh sediments. Hermit crabs (Clibanarius sp.) are common benthic scavengers. A-64 Guillespie (1971) studied the zooplankton populations of the Louisiana coast. Several of her sample stations were located near the project area in the Barataria-Caminada estuary. It may be assumed that the zooplankton populations occurring in the project area are similar. Crustaceans were most abundant in the samples. The copepod (Acartia tonsa) was found by Guillespie to be the predominant zooplankton in the Barataria estuary as well as along the entire Louisiana coast. Copepods were in general the most abundant members of the zooplankton, based largly on the abundance of A. tonsa alone. Other common copepods included Centropages sp. , Eurytemora hirundoides , Labidocera aestiva , Temora sp. , and Tortanus sp. Besides copepods, other crustaceans which accounted for a con- siderable portion of the plankton included barnacle nauplii, ostracods, cladocerans, and decapod larvae. These last included the zoea and magalops larvae of brachyuran crabs, mostly the blue crab ( Callinectes sapidus ) . Adults and larvae of the small decapods Leander tenuicornis and Lucifer faxoni were also common in the samples. Fish eggs and larvae were taken in plankton samples throughout the year. Most fish larvae collected were those of menhaden ( Brevoortia patronus ) , bay anchovy ( Anchoa mitchilli ) , and silversides (Menidia beryllina ) . Planktonic tunicates, Qikopleura sp., occurred commonly in the samples from the Barataria region. The chaetognath Sagitta hispida was often an abundant member of the zooplankton community particularly along the central Louisiana coast. Besides the above-mentioned species, the bioluminescent dinoflagel- late Noctiluca scintillans is often present in the Barataria region. Ctenophores , already discussed as macroscopic invertebrates, often filled Gillespie's samples. Beroe ovata was the most common ctenophore encountered 3. Wi ldlife Habitat and the Project The project will alter about 500 acres of land which has been partially altered already. (Fig. A-l, A-2) . Areas presently in spoil bank, water, or marsh will be converted to filled land or dredged chan- nel. There will be some alteration of vegetation but stream flow will not be affected. Most of the site area under the jurisdiction of the Port Commission will remain as wildlife habitat. Spoil and fresh marsh are the primary habitat zones affected by the project. There will be a loss of nesting areas for small mammals and some loss of food supply and cover. There are other similar habitats in the immediate vicinity of the project therefore the purchase of a replacement habitat is not considered necessary. A-65 Although the site is in the general range of several endangerd species^ the development of this site is not considered to jeopardize their continued existence since it does hot result in the destruction or modification of habitat used by these species. In coordination of analysis with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, rare and endangered species were not mentioned as a major constraint to the project. J . FARMLANDS There are no farmlands in the study area. A-66 K. RECREATIONAL ELEMENTS 1. General Description The coastal region of Louisiana dominates the tourist and recrea- tion activity in the state. Water oriented recreation activities are concentrated along the southern tip of Lafourche Parish. The coastal marshes and associated estuarine areas provide the opportunity for water sports. Participation in twenty-four recreational activities enjoyed" in six southern Louisiana parishes ("of which Lafourche parish is in- cluded) is shown in Table A-d6. About 40% of the activities listed are enjoyed outdoors and the majority of them are related to the coastal wetlands. User-days for these activities are projected to increase by about 25% by 1985. Recreation provided in past years and pro- jected until 1979 is shown in Table A-13. Lafourche Parish offshore waters are among the most productive in the Gulf Coast for sports angling, due in part to the numerous offshore oil and gas platforms. These platforms serve as artificial reefs, attracting and concentrating many species of saltwater fish. Several fishing rodeos are held in the area from May to October. Every August the three-day Tarpon Rodeo on neighboring Grand Isle attracts thousands of visitors. The only State Park near the Port Fourchon site is located on the east end of Grand Isle, approximately 20 mi away. Grand Isle State Park, 140 acres, offers access to the Gulf of Mexico and a beach. Jetties there can be used for fishing. A 3 mi beach stretches from Bayou Lafourche to Bay Champagne and offers opportunities for recreation. A small boat launch site has been built with funds provided through a grant from the U.S. Bureau of Recreation and is used by sportsmen in the area (See Fig. A-l). The facility will not be adversely impacted by the project. Hunting is another popular sport in the area since Lafourche Parish has one of the finest hunting grounds in the state. The marshes are wintering grounds for migrating wild geese and ducks. The hunting season for both resident and migratory game opens in early September and continues for about five months through the winter. The Wisner Wildlife Management area is adjacent to the Port Fourchon area. The 26,000 acres of the Wisner Wildlife Management area are owned by the Wisner Donation Foundation and consist of low saline marshes with dense stands of oyster grass. Hunted species at Wisner are mainly waterfowl, rail, gallinule, snipe, and rabbits. Main fish species are speckled trout, flounder, redfish, black drum, sheeps- head, and croaker. Crabbing and shrimping are also favorite sports for the people in the area. A-67 o •H 60 CU P in 0) XI X) fi CO Cfl M CO CU >n X •H en co C o co s-l CU P o 4J •H > ■H 4J CJ cO >% o •H 4-1 Cfl p •H O •H 4-1 5m cfl CM CU >, ON CO Cfl -) P P O S-l CO 00 d) ^ on co cfl to J-i CO r^ d) >-, on co cfl -i P Q H H O <3 Looor^-— irncMn^fO^m^cooo o . vo to st St o CO CO 1 — 1 00 O uoO 00 .— 1 v£> t— I lo-— i CO CO CO LOOi-HCNLnoo>— coon Nivoor>.ONff>inr>ivONO*NCNONoo— I N rs JOON00r^00>*O NCOOHCSfOCOCNCONNHOAHHHin OvdcOOOOOvOiOiOst iTiOcOOOi/inOCOHtMHiOiONWstvO 00 On On st r^ "~o oooocNtnLor^-j-o > i'-Hoocosto>cNoocovoco ct\ oo on on mm -<|-f-HOOONstr^i— icocNiONLOvDONr>-LOvoo>oo cn o lo vo oo co o u co r~- CD >N CO oo CO m r^ St CN CO CO rH CN i-^ lo LO CO CO O 1— 1 o o v£> ON ST ON ON co cfl r^ Csl LO -H o CO rH CN v£> CN <-H "-H St -h r^» r— 1 r— 1 rH LO t — 1 CO CM t— 1 P Q On LO CM r- 1 oo r~. vO LO St Sf CO CO CO >N CO X) G 3 ►. >> >N >> >N >N >» >•> >1 >> >> CO CO CO cfl cfl cfl cfl cfl Cfl CO CO CO X X X X X X X X X X X M '*h a a C c C C C a a C c cu a) D 3 3 s 3 3 D D 13 d 4-> 4-1 *~>^ CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO a a -»l •H •H cucucucua)cucuci>a)(i)cucL)cijcucuci)cu — — 5-i U u u sh u U U u u u u u u u u u u U Sh 3 cfl CO Cm CO 4-) S-J co o 5-i QJ O O cfl rH o rH X O Cm 1 Cm 5-i O o X 4-1 D P o 00 4J o 00 00 C ■H 4-) cjO MM o <4M •H oo a cfl 60 fl CU a CO •H O C •H 00 bO 60 00 CU •H 4-) ^J pq 00 •H rH C fi C c CO X O c £ O •H •H •H •H 4-1 a QJ •H 5-) •H g >N > >N X ^ Xi CU > c o 4-1 •H O •H Cfl CO rH bD 4-> W a 4J e IS •H J-i rH ■H Cfl •H 4J •H o 3 CO PQ P P Cm rs CO II II II • II , vQ II H 11 J< II <3 II II II 0) II i-H II rO ll cd II H m }-i CO 00 (U >■> CD> CD CO HUP O 5-1 CO CO 1) ^ CTi CO CO -H p P m u co r» a; >^ 0> CO CO -H D P O M CO o> CO CO ^ D P H H O o r~- v£> o> CO in o o vD St CN r>. i-H m o r% vO o^ o ■ — i i—4 CO CM o> i— 4 St vO v£> CO CO a> o CO « in CN . — i o 00 CO CO i—i CM i— i CM o o 00 vO CO o m 00 oo CO vD r^- vD • CM r^- CM m ■ — i CM vo 00 CO CT\ vO m CO vD vO cc m CO CO o n a\ in r- CM o m i—i r^ i— i oo O^ vO ^D CO CO i-H oo vD m 00 CTn o^ —4 vO CO m f— 4 CO o CO i^» CO in CM 00 CM O CM o- ■ — i o^ r^ CO 3 m o \0 00 00 vO CN CM 1-4 o •H CO CO •H 1 o u > ts > >•> >^ >■ > >! ►) ^ ►, ^ > 3 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO cO O X X X X X X T3 T3 T3 -a X X X •H 3 c a c 3 a 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4-1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD 5-4 a 5-4 >-( u 5-4 u 5-4 5-4 5-1 5-4 5-4 5-i 5-1 5-i 5-1 5-i 5-1 5-4 5-1 5-i 5-1 5-i 5-i 5-i 5-4 u 5-1 CD 0) CD cd CD CU 0) CD a) CU CD CU CU OJ CU cu 0) CU cu CU CD CD CD CD CD 1 CD CD Pi 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 X en CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO pj CO CO M 5-i CO Pu cu 4-1 CO 4-J CO >-i V- >, CO CD 00 O cO 3 rH 3. o tH CO •H 4-1 •H XI Pm •H CO c X 00 4-J CO 5-4 at •H a 00 14-1 CO 3 r. •H H 1 H M CJ •H o 4-> c •H •H 00 c •H rH O O M rH CO !3 O 00 3 CO 4-1 5-i CU 00 3 O r-4 00 00 3 CO i? CO CO 00 •H CJ pj 00 • • 3 d ■H 42 JS •H a QJ 00 X) 3 •H 3 o rH 5-i 6 6 CO 5-1 5-i 4-1 cO CO *J ^5 ■M 3 •H 3 CO CO 5-i o •H CO 5-4 rH CO •H 4-1 CO CO O o a u Pd CQ Es c_> P-I 2 Pd < u CO CO A-69 SECTION B: NOISE IMPACTS The proposed port is not a noise sensitive facility, but the project itself will generate noise through increased industrial/commercial activ- ities. The primary consideration with regard to noise in the general pro- ject area is recreation along the beach to the south. No sensitive re- cepters exist presently in the area and the nearest residential develop- ment is more than 5 mi to the east. The project is not in an unacceptable noise zone as defined by HUD Circular 1390.2 (U.S. Department of Interior, 1975). The undeveloped recreational beach area lies 1 mi to the southeast. No sound barriers are present between the beach and the project area. At present the area is only affected by boat traffic through Belle Pass. Noise criteria established by the U.S. Department of Interier, 1975, for recreational areas are 45 dBA during the daytime, 40 dBA in the evening and 30 dBA at night. Application of these criteria to the southern pro- ject area boundary as a line source allows sound at the project boundary to reach a magnitude of up to 90 dBA at night and up to 105 dBA during the daytime. It is not likely that such levels will be attained and noise pollution therefore is not considered to adversely affect recreational activities along the beach area. Noise levels will be further reduced as a result of sea breezes during most of the recreation season. The general effect of noise on terrestrial wildlife (including birds) is likely to be one of the wildlife's avoidance of the immediate project area. Noise from boat traffic or project construction and maintenance is not considered to add significantly to the ambient noise level in the area since Bayou Lafourche is already a major waterway for commercial fisheries and offshore oil industry service. B-l SECTION C: AIR QUALITY The project area and site have a high air quality. Neither the area nor the site have a history of air pollution^ and air quality meets the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and the State Standards. The coastal setting of the project area provides for nearly contin- uous air movement so that potential pollutants are dispersed rapidly. The conditions are furthermore enhanced by low atmospheric stability and limited atmospheric inversion frequency. No topographic or vegetative barriers exist to adversely affect ventilation. Wind speeds are greater than 5 mi per hour during 85 percent or more of the time (Tables C-l through C-4) . Atmospheric stability has been measured at Taf t , in coastal Louisiana, by the Louisiana Power and Light Company (1974). These mea- surements , taken from May 1972 through April 1973, showed that moderate to extremely stable conditions occurred only during 26 percent of the year. Neutral to slightly stable conditions occurred during 60 percent of the year. It should be pointed out however, that these measurements most likely overestimate atmospheric stability for the project area because they were obtained some 50 mi inland from the coast line. Atmospheric inversion in the project area has an average annual frequency of approximately 25 percent of total hrs (Hosier, 1961). In- version frequency ranges from 35 percent in the winter to 20 percent in the summer. At present no industrial concentrations or major population centers exist in the area, therefore major sources of air contaminants are absent. The project area is more than 5 mi from human habitation and no sensi- tive facilities are in the area. Project construction and maintenance and anticipated development are not expected to measurably change air quality or to have major short- term or adverse long— term effects, including those on the micro-climate of the area. During construction and maintenance, emissions from the dredge and earthmoving equipment and dust particles will be released into the air. These will temporarily degrade local air quality but these sources are not considered to add significantly to ambient air pollution. During operation of the projected port facility boat traffic is anticipated to increase but not to the extent that present levels of typical emissions related to diesel engines of fishing boats and work boats are significantly exceeded. The same applies to emissions of auto- mobiles. Anticipated types of industrial development include fish processing and oil-rig fabrication yards. Neither of these is known to contribute significantly to degradation of ambient air quality levels. C-l II ctJ rH II d CO II 1 CO 4J II •H o II "d CO H II CU •H II •H 3 CTi II <3 Q ^ 1 II m II II II II • CN II o r^. II c^ II rH II II •» II d II CN CU II • rH II O o II II e II o II M II m m II II o X) II CU II 4J II a II cd II o U II • ■U II T-i X II cu II II cd II 4-J II CO 01 II • P II CN v II II CO II r^ II c^ II CO rH 11 il CN #v II r-\ • II HI II dl II II CO ■•"•I II • a> 1 II co II CO ■\ II co II SJ II CO II • cd II m 1-3 II CO II n II rH CU II • d II m o II rH u II w II II II II CU II rH o II CO M II 4-1 3 II O II H W II C-2 II CO rH II a CO II 1 cd 4-1 II •H O II T3 CO H II CJ •H II CJ 3 II CX o co II CO rJ 3 II rH II T3 QJ Ph II d M II •H O o II £ XI ^ H 1 II CJ CO CO LO II d H QJ CN II CJ rH II T3 •H II w d S sr II qj CO >-* CN II u |H 1 II MH O CO O II CX CN II QJ d II too • • o II CO CO J-i c^ II 4-1 a O H II d 3 1 II QJ o h3 lo II a m QJ rH II u bO QJ II QJ • a II ex C m co ■H QJ ON II < n CO 1 II LO II II II JHHOO OOOOOOOO CNOOOOOCOrHOO OOiHOOOOO OOrHrHOOOO coir\coooroinrn< OCNCOCNrHOOO cooocooo iH<|-vOLOCNOOO r-^l^vOLOCTiOCNCT> HmNvONHrlO cocO'sOiHtHcN^rr^ rHCO II d II O- QJ II • rH II H O II II e II o II u II CN M-l II II CO TD II QJ II 4J II CJ II cd II LO U II • 4J II CO II • n II rH •s_^ II rH II CO II r^- II CT\ II CN rH II II CN •v II CN • II rH II CO II II LO 4-1 II • a; II r^ II CN r. II CO II QJ II CN Id II • CO II ON >-> II rH II QJ II H CJ II cd U II 4-1 d II O o II H CO II CJ II p II O II CO II C-3 H O^MNOOvDvOH o II ct) 03 • II 1 c 4-J CMONNtvDI^CNMin o II 03 O i— 1 CNJ CM i— 1 o II T3 -H H 1-1 II 0) CO II O -H II 0. 3 CO II CO o 3 • II hJ rH LOvDvO^J-OOOO H /—■ \ II T3 PU • CM II 3 O oooooooo CM r^ II -H 5-4 O a> ii !» o o- r4 II 3 M 5-i en OOCMiH'vOtHOOCM o 4-1 ii a a 3 1 • II a o o o OrHrHOOOOO itH 1 • 4-J now W LTi iHrHrHrHOOOO vO X ii a h O CM CU II 0) H II 3 T3 •H 03 II cr pj s •* 4-1 II O Ctf W CNJ Ovooo CMr-»v£>-<)-rHOOrH II O 5-i a) h CM • II U 60 o H II o a CO ii a a co - o 3 O NNvD<|-NOOH v£> ii aj o ,q •H H CM »> ii n a> o [2 CO || CU M -M 2i II > -H O ON cnmLOcnr^-ooooco l^s B II < P O 1 • 03 m rH II 15 O CO II II cd P-i CN COrHOOr^rHcncM r^ 5-4 II II >.tH 1 • 4-> II II O CO c/) in CMCMrHrHOOOrH oo X II II C H CD CM CD II II a> rH II D XI •H cO II ii cr c S — ' || .1 CD 3 en ii II 60 •• O r^ II II CO CO 5-1 a\ o> II ii 4-i a, O H H NNvOr 1 CO I s - CO o rH II II C => 1 • II CD O T3 LP) fO^D^ il II 5-1 CD CD ts CO II II CD 5-4 U CD II II > -H CD On Or- 1 v£> r^. rH CM LT| M3 co 6 il II < Q Q 1 cO II LO rHCMrHrHrHrHOO o\ "-5 II I co-vro-^r-j-cocnro 00 CD II C II o oooooooo CM O II 4-1 II • co n II <*" 1 o II ^ •H 4-) CD II 1 CD a rH a ll II H CD CO 5-1 II II ^3 5-i 4-) 3 II II CO •H w w rs rs O O II II H P !2|z;wcococoS!2i H CO II C-5 Objectionable odors can be expected from the deposition of dredge material on land due to decomposition of vegetation and organic materials contained in the dredge spoil.. This would be a temporary effect which could be expected to disappear in 2 to 3 months. A potential for objec- tionable odors also lies in the anticipated fish processing industry; however, this is considered a manageable source through control over waste disposal. C-6 SECTION D: WATER QUALITY A. STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS General and specific water quality criteria have been set for Bayou Lafourche by the State of Louisiana. For Lower Bayou Lafourche, water should allow primary and secondary contact recreation and should encourage the propagation of fish and wildlife. Dissolved oxygen should not become less than 4.0 milligrams per liter (mg/1) , pH should be within the range of 6.5 to 9.0, and the monthly total coliform median (MPN) should not ex- ceed 70 per 100 and not more than 10 percent of the samlpes may exceed an MPN of 230/ 100 milliliters (ml} No standards have been set for chlorides, sulphates, and total dissolved solids (Louisiana Stream Control Commis- sion, 1973). Because of salinity, Lower Bayou Lafourche does not serve as a domestic or industrial water supply. D-l Bl. present conditions The water quality of Bayou Lafourche relative to the project area is first dependent on that of the Mississippi River and runoff from towns, agriculture, and industries along the bayou, since the base supply is obtained from shore sources. Changes in quality occur all along the course of Bayou Lafourche as a result of development on its natural levee ridges, exchange with water from adjacent estuaries, navigation, and exchange with Gulf of Mexico waters. As a result of the changing intensity of the processes that affect water characteristics in Bayou La- fourche, a wide variation of physical and chemical properties is encoun- tered in location and over time. Water quality measurements are made by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District, at two stations along Lower Bayou La- fourcne. These are located 5 mi below Leeville and at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche. The project area is located approximately halfway between those two stations. Water quality data for Lower Bayou Lafourche are shown in Tables D-l and D-2. Temperature in 1975 showed a natural fluctuation between a low of 13.4°C and a high of 32.2°C. No difference is apparent between the two stations referred to, therefore temperatures shown may be considered to be representative for the study area. Conductivity expressed in 1000 micro-ohms/cm is approximately 20 percent higher at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche than at the station near Leeville. This can be attributed primarily to higher salinities as a result of proximity to the Gulf of Mexico. Conductivity measurements vary greatly in Lower Bayou Lafourche. A study by Whitehurst (1974) showed average conductivity variations of 10,000 micro-ohms at Golden Meadow, 21 mi above the mouth of Bayou Lafourche. Near the project area, continuous salinities are available for the USCE gaging station at Leeville proper. Data from this station for the period of 1962 through 1968 showed a mean salinity at mid-depth of 17.4 parts per tho (ppt) with a variance of 10.5 ppt. Salinities of Gulf waters at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche are probably similar to those measured at the Grand Isle mine platform and are mainly affected by Mississippi River discharges. Salinities at mid-depth at the platform over the period 1962 through 1968 averaged 26.1 ppt with a variance of 9.8 ppt. USCE data (USCE, 1972a) gives a salinity range of 23.4 to 28.8 ppt at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche. Dissolved oxygen is invariably higher at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche than near Leeville as a result of greater turbulence and di- lution of Bayou Lafourche water with seawater. Average dissolved oxygen concentration at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche was 7.5 mg/1 versus 6.8 mg/1 near Leeville. Even at the mouth of Bayou Lafourche, however, oxygen content showed considerable variation, ranging between a low of 3.9 mg/1 in September, 1975 to a high of 10.5 mg/1 in July, 1975. The above readings show much improvement in water quality over conditions further upstream. Above Mile 33, oxygen contents are barely above the legal standard of 4 mg/1. D-2 o o •H X CD a <4-l O =3 CD a O M-l cd >J O CO PQ 5-i CD O CO 4J CO xl >> 4J •H iH CO 3 cr M OJ •P § C CO O •H o rH O S-4 33 I Q CO H O p <1" M OS p4 O O O hJ M U 00 00 P O p4 o < o H O H O \ < s o O EC o o oo crv o pa ">* CN Q O O O C* g O P-< U Pn O pS O H O o <:o O 12 K I s H fe tf o P-, O w H W 00 H Q pq < o > W s H n i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i o o o CO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O I I m i i i i i i i Nr-I VD M I NLD^-ia\(Ni-lCiOCNrOCMC?iC\ | N CO N On • • • • I I .... vOvDvOOO CO0000r>COCONON00C0NN 00 ON CO 00 MO»i^oor^.r~-oooocyioor^ oo ^o o vo n co oo -imr-criooc»chOcriCM o> co co to ,_, _l .-H ,_l CM CNCMCMCMCMCNCMCMCOCMOO CM CM CM CM oooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooo CNlCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM oOr^cNiiOr^LoooLOinoocMOi-HCMin--HOuoooMD(X) OC^OcOOCOO-CM^fO-— ir- lOOoOOoOLOCMi-Hi— ( iO ^cococMNNfHO^(yiOcMLOco is^o--ir>.Nvoooro^MnNHinc^cn^cnoovocoo OHCONHNOCSOCSIOhOhMhcnOOhON ^h-— i •— icMcncooo 00000000000000000000--^^ u-iioiAioioioinioioioinioinioioioioioiriioiriio r ^r > «.rNr>-r^rNr^«rNiN.rN.r-~rNr^r^r^rNrNr^r~r^-r*-rN- W o u E < D-3 CD CJ U o m co ►J O !* ccj CQ M • QJ CO £ C o CO ctj •H en •H 3 o CO hJ ^ cu j-i H •H rH iH -H CO > d a) .-J 5-1 0) iH 4-> O CO 4J 3 O CO o •> •H (0 00 0) O iH O 6 U T3 O >> • ad in CM i Q CO H O O 32 o o £3 c* o o o U Pk O pfij OHO o <|o o & I < > o m CO PQ o 5 H w a 1^. CO i/~> ,— i I vDO-vDi— I O !->■ ■— lOOvOOMJiOONSN • . . • I vOvO^O 00CONrNSr>.00Nh.vON0OCO0000 monohncoho i vomooNrvpsOcjioocri OOOOOOOOO l>tf— i ^D CJ\ 0> in rv O CNCMCMCn]CNCOCO«— ICO vO«sl- HHvON00CJiCT>ONN(Na\00CON H H r-( H CM CMCMCMC\|C\lCMCs)CMCOCOC\ICMCMCs| oooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooo CnJCvJCNCNCNCNCNICNCNCNICNCNCNCNCNICNCNCNCNCSI tno^tnooHfuaojiAco^r^ooocoro^ onmH^OHr-ininN<-in>j—i c\| .— I CN O ■— iOCN rHHH(NfOCO» o ex 00 r-. oo o vo CO 00 00 m o - 00 m m rH vD CX vD m rH ex co CN m m O CM ex CM ex. ex CO CM vD CO rH tH 00 vO 00 ON r^ ex 00 m CM CO m co oo co T3 CO T3 >-l £3 -d C CO CO £3 CO rH CO 3 CO rH 3> o 3 o o PU o o OS CO T3 CO T3 >-4 £3 TJ C CO CO £3 CO rH CO 3 CO rH 3 O 3 O O Pm O Q ex co £3 TJ £3 CO CO £3 CO rH CO 3 CO rH 3> O 3 O O Pm o P ex rH CO CD •H CD 43 CO •H O u IJ-I o CO (U u 3) O CO •m r^ ii S3 CX II CD rH II +J *> II rl CM II CO r^ II a ex ii CU rH || O II « II rH II co r- ii ex II PH II II II II cd ii o || u O II co n G-9 CO 00 d •H T3 d • cfl /-> rH co r^ rH <^ cd rH •H 1 CJ rH H P"- (1) o> s rH g V-<" o o CO 4-1 m n o o p- cu 3 00 rH C crj -H > JS co TJ -H crj crj U cd •H «H CrJ rH crj H a is CU o rH crj O OJ cd ;>> 00 4-> U «H o u s M •H & I -H o > cd 3 rH co *6 Q d o u % cd O cu O O CU P4 O 53 O O a) U O O OJ psj 4-1 O 53 O o CM CO *T3 CO TJ 5-1 CO CJ (S cd d cd H CO 3 CO rH 3 O 3 O O Ph O Q o o co o o vO o o o o rH cr> co vO m CM m •o- rH co co CM VO 00 00 CM 00 CM O CM CT. 00 CM rH 00 m cr> vO O O rH O O O O o o o rH 00 m CO VO 00 rH 00 •o- CO rH r-» vO rH CO H o o O o o o o o o o o O CO co o o m CM rH CO 00 rH rH 00 00 rH o CM o o O o 00 o o m o o CM ON rH in o m X! CO •X) M T3 CO X) n c T3 ti cd d T3 a cd cd c cd rH cd d cd H en 3 CO II II II • II • CO II CO II > II •H •4-1 II +J o II cd II rH 3 II OJ cd II U cu II M II OJ 3 II .d PQ II 4-> II « II & 5-J II o O II rd •H II CO M II CU II o 4-» II 4J d II rH II Tj II CU 14-1 II T3 O • II d CO II OJ 4-1 r-~- II 4J d ON II d SJ rH II •H 9 II 4-1 •> II 4-1 S-i CM II o cd r-«. II d P-. CT> II QJ rH II OJ Q II n *\ II cd • rH II en r^ II cd • C^ II 4J £> rH II cd II P ,, II II CU II •• o II OJ 5-i II 4-1 3 II O O II 53 CO II G-10 Table G-12. Volume of shrimp landings (Heads-Off Basis) reported in Lafourche and Terrebonne Parishes, Louisiana 1967-1971. Year Lafourche Terrebonne 1967 7,786,673 13,199,438 1968 7,165,628 10,937,655 1969 8,088,204 14,139,519 1970 9,902,675 15,629,867 1971 9,981,095 17,490,653 Source: Roy and Bordelon, 1974. In 1971, 2,363,900 pounds of oysters were harvested in Lafourche Parish; this represents the best year in quantity since 1964 and the best year in value ($1,031,267). In 1964, 2,374,000 pounds were har- vested with a value of $664,440 as shown in Table G-13. Table G-13. Quantity and value of oyster landings, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana, Selected years (1967-1971). Year Quantity (pounds) Value (Dollars) 1964 2,374,000 655,400 1965 96,000 29,100 1966 161,400 73,800 1967 630,900 198,039 1968 1,240,200 399,892 1969 733,500 319,112 1970 404,800 160,600 1971 2,363,900 1,031,267 Source: Stone, James, et al, , 1973. The crab fishery industry is also important in Lafourche Parish. It has tremendous potential for growth since this fishery resource is bountiful in Louisiana waters. Other species caught in Lafourche waters include buffalo fish, carp, catfish and bullheads, flounder, drum, sea trout, snapper, Spanish mac- erel, crayfish, squid, turtle, frogs, and many others. Combined, these G-ll species have a meaningful volume and monetary value within the fishery resources. A large segment of the south Lafourche Parish population is employed in fishing or seafood related industries. Average wages and employment for Lafourche Parish in fisheries, canned and cured sea- foods, and fresh or frozen packaged fish industries for selected years are shown in Table G-14. Table G-14, Total and average wages and employment in fisheries; canned and cured seafoods; and fish processing and packaging industries in Lafourche Parish. Selected years (1968-1972). Year Fisheries 1968 Employment 98 Total Wages 557,563 Average Wages 5,689 1969 Employment 94 Total Wages 586,119 Average Wages 6,235 1970 Employment 72 Total Wages 505,641 Average Wages 7,023 1971 Employment 103 Total Wages 643,223 Average Wages 6,245 1972 Employment 261 Total Wages 2,434,528 Average Wages 9,238 Canned and Cured Seafood Fish Processing and Pack- aging Industries 72 113,582 1,578 79 157,690 1,996 81 188,591 2,328 69 184,168 2,669 59 188,813 3,200 Source: Stone, James, et al. , 1973 Many of the fishery resources are estuarine dependent forms, there- fore modification and destruction of marshes contributes to the decline of these resources. This decline, in turn, affects the economy of the parish and the state. G-12 c) Mineral Extraction The principal mineral resources in the study area are fossil fuels: petroleum, natural gas, and natural gas liquids. Sulphur is also mined. For a number of years the extraction of crude oil and natural gas has been a major industry in coastal Louisiana and has brought a number of related petrochemical industries into the state. Fossil fuels are rap- idly being depleted onshore increasing the need for offshore exploration and production in order to meet the nation's energy demands. The volume of oil and gas production for Lafourche Parish in 1970, when it ranked third among the parishes in the state in the value of mineral production, is shown on Table G-15 and G-16. Table G-15. Oil and gas production in Lafourche Parish compared to Louisiana (1970). Crude Oil Condensate Casinghead Natural (Barrels) 3 (Barrels) 3 Gas b Gas (Mcf) (Mcf) Louisiana (000) 787,138 117,699 1,104,941 6,691,805 Lafourche Parish (000) 117,674 8,272 138,586 296,994 Percent of Louisiana 14.9 7.0 12.5 4.4 a 42 Gallon Barrel; 15.025 pounds per square inch absolute. Source: Louisiana Department of Conservation, 1972. Table G—16. Petroleum, natural gas, sulphur, natural gas liquid (Minerals in order of value), 1973-1974. 1973 1974 Lafourche $439,940 $582,091 Louisiana $8,150,000* * Louisiana, 96.4% of total mineral production value was crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids. Source: Louisiana Department of Conservation, 1976. G-13 Production figures for offshore areas fronting the Port Fourchon area, when compared to Louisiana offshore totals, represent 31.5 percent of the total production and account for 8.5 percent of the state total tax revenue derived from offshore operations (Table G-17). As indicated before in Table G-5, 10.92 percent of the total work- force in the parish representing a payroll of $2,955,000 was involved directly in mining operations in 1972. Indirectly there are many jobs, such as construction and transportation activities, associated with the petroleum industry. d) Manufacturing Included in manufacturing are: food and kindred products, sugar, raw cane sugar, cane sugar refining, paper and allied products, paper mills (excluding building paper), machinery (excluding electrical), farm machinery, transportation equipment, and ship and boat building and re- pairing. Manufacturing accounted for 1,790 employees in the first quarter of 1972 in the parish. This represents 15.02 percent of the total 11,916 persons employed at the time. Manufacturers in Lafourche Parish and in the area around Port Fourchon are shown in Table G-18. e) Retail and Wholesale Trade The retail and wholesale trade segment of the economy accounted for 3,231 jobs, 27.1 percent of the estimated work-force in Lafourche Parish for the first quarter of 1972. f) Services Services, employed 13 V 2Q percent of the work force in the parish in the first quarter of 1972, This section accounted for the lowest paid job. in the. state j the average weekly wage was $91 in 1972 * g) Economic Growth. Projections of economic growth are somewhat difficult to assess because of the many variables involved and unpredicted changes that might occur in the area. Mineral resources, on which a large segment of the economy is dependent, are rapidly being depleted posing a danger to the parish of becoming more economically depressed. The development of the superport off the mouth of Bayou Lafourche could, on the other hand, mean more em- ployment opportunities resulting in additional parish income (Gulf South Research Institute, 1974). The development of the Port Fourchon facility is another factor which would economically contribute to the growth of the parish. G-14 o ON rH I 00 CO on tH cd CD 5-1 cd CO •H 5-i CO PM CU CJ 5-1 O M-) CO •H 0) 4-) CU tH O. e o U tH CU C CO C O •H 4-) O Xl O U 0) rH O J-l 4J CU p. CU -d J-l C_) co cu J-i 5-4 CO -a ca cu o T3 J-i O 3PmO 5-1 O U ^-' CU O Ph 3 CU T3 60 CU tH CO i-H CO +J iH i-> O -H O O 5-i H Ph Q ^ P 5-1 S Q ^ 00 CN M CO 00 ^O r->- iH CO tH CN un tH CN CO 00 co r-« CN CN J H m lO vO ON H tH tH CO r^ J-i cu O LO CO m n m n cu t2 «3" 00 ON O cm m CM X> 00 LO o m ro 1 tH n a «s 3 •H H eg o\ a O fi .H -H cu CO cd o 4J 4-) J-i O o CU H H Ph cd cu Cd OJ 5-4 CU 5-i O 5-1 5-4 < X < CU CO •H G <4-l C T3 tH o iH o c O cd X O X co H xi CU o o & H .H 5-i cd 5-4 o CU •H CO D C 3 u Ph H M O cd o cd f^ •H Ph S 42 X TJ CO 4-) H C 4-1 •H 4-> >. 3 3 cd 5-4 3 5-i CO o o 5-i o O O PQ cn C/3 O Ph hJ Ph O II r-^ II On || H II n || CO II CU II G II •H II a ii 4-1 || O II 3 II co ii CU II 5-i II 2 II W II * II CO II >> II CU II > II 5-4 II II C/5 II ^ II 5-4 II 4-1 II CO II II T3 II S=! II IH || tH II cd ii 5-< II CU II G II •H II S II H3 II C II cd II •"li CM II r^ ll ON II tH II * II C II O II •H II 4-) II cd ll > II 5-4 II CU II co ii G ll O II O || M-4 II O II 4-J II G II 0) II e ii 4-1 II 5-1 II cd II Cl- II CU II p II CO cd ll tH a ii CU cd ii 5-1 •H II 5-1 CO II cd •H 11 X 3 11 O II C hJ II O H tH ** II cd cu II 00 U II 5-i II CN 3 II u u o cfl o 3 o. w 0) +J CO -P CO T3 CU ■U •H c p QJ X J-» • >» IW rt o S H 1) (U u •U !-J CO 0) Es g a o e u 3 i-l <0 1 c 01 n JS o O ^ u n 3 - UJ»- o — z.ur j — ■ 5 4 r- DO) 1 o -o o ZlUO M -» *-V> -w* J O O J2>- « T O < Ui U a _• *- _j n »- UJ-I n 2 O Ui — c »- u. > O Ui - *ai J »- -I o l/> JJ UJO -: a,u cn>- -I O — r*. .*r >- jj X <* t> MTDNtft JP CD * H H t £ 5 i u OLU»-I UI UJ — LU J >* z u. ■* o o 1 O O LO — * •* u. o — o aa o u •- u CX «* u. o o or J^- Q. ►- •> x. z *a -*.o— , •-. o OujJU.' u. O 3 *- O J => o - -I IT -LU Q U. >c _J O O _l CD _l ■« ' Ui t- ■> X Z 0»- CD Ooj-D 3 u- I O o r- a. •* Z r"UJ CD o z _J »~ z z -> C3 -* o ia2 H 21 tr. -o (no r» i o* w « . f*. o •© r- if. o WO CO CM CO r4IO ©> *\ r*. « »~ » « or. < JJ *o ° tr> » ro ir> r- o* r. fO « ©■ o «J«* * * * * - - - * - - • a 13 i IX o- i a u. UJ 3 ■ a v a < x fc- Z" » I X ►- ■* • (/> -ui»- ui vu>-c x Kcjt-Dr-a ; »x otrt o : _i o ra c o t ~ — t- _l z z ■ojflin-oo cr x a. u i cux *- i « k> ro «o r> »o io • rt CD V* a> at c •r< CO C3 w 4-1 a. o e < a) o C CO H-2 P ip o p c I (1) CO § 3 O cr> to CD p 03 P CO T3 4-4 P iH CN cd H _icn I9X tcn««n •o -o -© ir\ >n Z J o ae oo — _» o a — 0.0 0. UIX CO III »LE — IE wz CE >- in — o z UJ — l/> OP- z IOID ■< — o o aiui UJ X3 — _r _* Oik »o o >-z m o ^ ■o •<— z »- ** ^ »— • o a u V) t- in • z a - I I _»x t- o — U- CE uor < •« IM III IK UJ riZ ►-Z to — Z — JC - CE — m o -•< « o x la *.v> -tut _» *- o ^ (A ►- <* IT • Lucr to — 111 if C3>- U J— O «Or _l amw zzs <— UJ to — >- ■» o LUt/i _l >■ •< a o •*►- a 3 Z «n « X x o o >- CE O UJ U. _> > or CO < — or i □ 1U NKIOO P> r« »^ m «4H% • >n«o O O Vt " 7C -X u. — o w. o t- a or z U lllil JXIZ ■«■ o c* ■» -^ r^- c S a o iz O C3 er ^ i a — o I a (j 80 I ►- _i x ■< j -o a »~ ae z z ml r»- i jd j- <(_)^- x: — _j a. iu -> — o •« o — ~ '/> rt •a cor — » ic j z .i ; a. t; o i o o — .. -«r c/i o n- a p o o c •H C w <4-l o CO a. p o CJ B P < CO =5 a o P O CO H-3 D. PIPELINES Pipelines associated with the oil and gas industry criss-cross the parish. Those that cross the Port Fourchon area are depicted in Fig. A- 13. E. AIR TRANSPORTATION There are no airports in Lafourche Parish; there are three existing air facilities in neighboring Terrebonne Parish, F. IMPACTS There will be an increase in highway traffic on Highway 1 as boat crews commute from their residence to the port. However, there will be a parallel decrease in boat traffic on the more inland waterways. This trade-off is considered a benefit since automobile transportation is more fuel efficient than boat transportation. Car pools or other forms of group transport of workers could reduce traffic and fuel use further. Highway 1 is of sufficient capacity to accommodate the port traffic. The above described shift in traffic patterns will not significantly affect land uses, especially residences, hospitals, and schools. There are no major community facilities in the vicinity of the proposed port. Recreational use takes place in the marshes, waterways, and the beach area along the Gulf. Traffic to the port will not adversely affect recreational traffic although there will be some mixing of auto- mobile traffic on Highways 1 and 3090. Recreational and commercial boat traffic use different launch facilities and waterways for the most part and are not in conflict. There are no transportation plans for the area and air quality is well within present standards. Traffic should not adversely affect air quality because of favorable air circulation patterns for pollutant dis- persion. H-4 SECTION I: WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS There are no national wild and scenic rivers or rivers designated for potential addition to the State of Louisiana Natural and Scenic River system in the project vicinity. The designated streams closest to the project area are Bayou Penchant in Terrebonne Parish (50 mi away) and Bayou Des Allemands on the border of St. Charles and Lafourche Parishes (54 mi away). Neither stream is in the same hydrologic basin as the proposed port. No pri- mary or secondary impacts on either streams are anticipated. 1-1 SECTION J: HISTORIC PRESERVATION A. NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES The National Register of Historic Places lists no sites within the Port Fourchon area. The state nominating committee has no record of re- cent additions or nominations to the National Register from this area. B. ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES A comprehensive survey of archeological and historical resources of the project area was conducted by Coastal Environments, Inc. (CEI) . A report describing the methodology, findings, and recommendations was submitted to the Louisiana State Historical and Cultural Commission, State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)* in April, 1976. A summary of this report follows. *Note: As a result of a recent reorganization of state government, the designated SHPO for the State of Louisiana is now the Secretary of the Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism. J-l C. GENERAL ARCHEOLOGY 1. Overview of Existing Data The meager published record of the southern Bayou Lafourche area is more reflective of the minimal amount of survey work that has- been done than of the region's true archeological significance. Initially, attempts to derive a chronological sequence for the area revolved around the geological interpretations of the former Lafourche - Mississippi course. Russell (1940) placed the Indian cultures along the original Lafourche - Mississippi course and its distributaries into an association earlier than the Bayou Cutler Complex (see Table J-l). Bayou Cutler at that time was seen as a complete cultural configuration, but has since been relegated to a coastal phase of the Coles Creek period (Phillips, 1970). A time frame earlier than Bayou Cutler would thus have seen a Baytown period connection. In 1944, Fisk assigned the Lafourche - Mississippi to a time span equivalent to his river stages, numbered 4 through 11. This would place the delta into a broader Tchula to Coles Creek temporal span. Ford and Quimby (1945) mentioned that the Lafourche course probably was as- sociated with the Tchula culture. In the most complete study to date, Mclntire (1958) places the Lafourche - Mississippi subdelta into an association with Plaquemine culture sites. Mclntire notes at least 23 sites showing Plaquemine culture occupations for the whole Lafourche - Mississippi system. In one of the most recent reports, Saucier (1974) equates the Lafourche - Mississippi system with a time range beginning approximately 3,500 years ago, but does not show evidence of human occupation until Baytown times. The delta continued to grow during the succeeding Coles Creek and Mississippi periods. Although most of the sites recorded to date are of the Plaquemine culture, it seems likely that their initial occupation may have been during Baytown and Coles Creek times (Gagliano, Weinstein, and Burden, 1975). Of the nine aboriginal sites recorded within 5 mi of Port Fourchon (Fig. A-2) , four have been discussed in previous literature. The sites west of Belle Pass (16 LF 7), at Bay Marchand (16 LF 8), east of Pass Fourchon (16 LF 9), and along Bayou Lafourche near Leeville (16 LF 34), were all located in the early 1950' s by Mclntire, and were eventually included in his report on the changing Mississippi River delta (1958). In that report, Mclntire described each of the sites by means of initial occupation maps and ceramic analysis. In regard to the varying oc- cupations of each site, the following may be stated: 16 LF 7 - Mclntire does not give an initial occupation date, but does place the site in a Plaquemine culture context. His pottery J- 2 Table-J-1. Coastal Louisiana Culture Sequence and Chronology UJ O PHASES < PERIOD CULTURE TIME INTERVAL V) EASTERN AREA CENTRAL AREA WESTERN AREA HISTORIC VARIOUS CULTURES PRESENT VARIOUS TRIBES 1 NATCHE2AN DELTA NATCHEZAN MISSISSIPPI MISSISSIPPIAN BAYOU PETRE ■> : 1300 AD. PLAOUEMINE MEDORA HOLLY BEACH BAYOU RAMOS COLES CREEK COLES CREEK 850 AD BAYOU CUTLER ui > 700 AD 400 AD. BAYTOWN BAYTOWN WHITEHALL •> •> s K o u. GUNBOAT LANDING MANDALAY MAGNOLIA MARKSVILLE HOPEWELLIAN- MARKSVILLE 200 AD VEAZEY SMITHFIELD JEFFERSON ISLAND LABRANCHE BEAU MIRE TCHULA TCHEFUNCTE 250 B.C. LAFAYETTE GRAND LAKE 500 B C PONTCHARTRAIN POVERTY POINT GARCIA BEAU RIVAGE 9 1500 B.C. BAYOU JASMINE RABBIT ISLAND o LATE ARCHAIC PEARL RIVER COPELL BAYOU BLUE < X u DC < 3000 B.C. MONTE SANO MIDDLE ARCHAIC ARCHAIC AMITE RIVER BANANA BAYOU ? EARLY ARCHAIC ST HELENA 9 7 LATE PALEO PALEO-INDIAN JONES CREEK VATICAN STROHE (J X EARLY PALEO ? AVERY ISLAND ? -i PRE-PROJECTILt POINT ? •> ? ? •> J- 3 analysis would seem to confirm this, except for the "Moundville types" and Fatherland incised which connote a later Mississippi period occupa- tion. 16 LF 8 - No data. 16 LF 9 - No data. 16 LF 34 - Mclntire gives this site an initial occupation during the early Mississippi period. Table J- 2 supports this statement. Percentages of decorated sherds for two sites in the Port Fourchon area, 16 LF 7 and 16 LF 34. Table J-2. SHERD 16 LF 7 16 LF 34 Fatherland Incised Moundville Types Fort Walton Types Manchac Incised Plaquemine Brushed Unclassified Decorated 7.5% 22.5% 35.0% 15.0% 20.0% 15% 15% 65% 5% Source: Mclntire, 1958. Newman (1973) also briefly mentions each of these four sites. He describes each as a shell midden and gives tentative dates to three of them: 16 LF 7 - Bay town to Plaquemine culture. 16 LF 8 - Coles Creek to Mississippian. 16 LF 34 - Plaquemine culture. Finally, Philip Phillips (.1970) in his monumental work on the lower Mississippi Valley mentions two of the Port Fourchon area sites. He places 16 LF 7 and 16 LF 34 into the Bayou Petre phase of the Mississippi period. J- 4 D. TYPES OF SITES AND LOCATION In addition to the above mentioned four sites, the archeological survey conducted for this impact statement, by means of pedestrian and boat search, revealed five new sites in the Port Fourchon area (Fig, A-2). The following summary is derived from all of the sites, both newly discovered and previously reported: 16 LF 7 - This site is located immediately west of the west jetty of the Belle Pass channel (29 C 04'55"N Lat . , 90°13'44"W Long. - NE 1/4 of NW 1/4 Sec. 34. T.23S, R.22E). The site has been destroyed by wave action and shoreline retreat. When first reported, it was listed as beach wash. During this survey no evidence, aside from scattered oyster shells, was observed along the beach west of Belle Pass. Currently, spoil deposits are being dumped onto the beach so that any further at- tempt at locating scattered sherds or stone would probably prove fruit- less. 16 LF 8 - This site is located along the beach bordering the Gulf of Mexico in front of Bay Marchand (29°05'37"N Lat., 90°12»005"W Long. - Center of Sec. 26, T.22S, R.22E). The coordinates originally delin- eating the site location were 29°05'15"N, 90 c 12' 05'X and would place it about 2,000 ft out in the Gulf from the present shoreline; there is probably, an error in the original coordinant location. Again beach retreat has played havoc with the site. During the course of this survey only two sherds were collected along the beach at Bay Marchand and represent what is left of a midden formed on the Lafourche delta farther out in the Gulf . 16 LF 9 - This site is located east of Pass Fourchon (29*06' 23"N, 90'°10'18"W - Sec. 7, T.23S, R.23E) along the beach between the pass and Bay Champagne. The original location (probably in error) is listed as 29*05' 49"N, 90 o 10'35"W. The site is in the same state of preservation as 16 LF 7 and 8, and only wave-washed artifacts may be expected. Nothing was found by the survey team. 16 LF 34 - This site is located along the east bank of Bayou Lafourche (29*12 '50"N, 90*13'35"W - SW 1/4 of NW 1/4 of Sec. 3, T.22S, R.22E). It was located when canal dredging revealed its presence. Mclntire described it as a series of small middens on the natural levee of Bayou Lafourche. This survey's crew did not visit the site, but it is listed as "destroyed" by the Louisiana Archaeologic Survey and Anti- quities Commission. 16 LF 82 - The site is situated on the west bank of Belle Pass (29 a 05'50"N, 90*13'50"W - south central portion of Sec. 22, N-Central portion of Sec. 27, T.23S, R.22E), and extends for approximately 1.4 km along the bank. The site was found during the course of the CEI survey, and can be described as a wave-washed oyster shell midden. No evidence J-5 of in situ material could be seen. The site is. about Q.. 3 to 0.5 m high and about 3-6 m in width.. Much ceramic material was obtained and anal- ly zed. 16 LF 83 - This is another oyster shell midden, similar to 16 LF 82, but it is located on the west bank of Bayou Lafourche (29° 0.7 ! 40"N, 90° 13'07"W - SW 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Sec, 10, T,23S, R.22E). It ranges from 6-9 m in width and is about 15 m along the bank. The site is totally wave- washed with shell and much pottery is scattered along the banks. 16 LF 84 - Although tentatively recorded as a site this location is at a pipeline crossing on the west bank of Belle Pass (29 Q6'12"N, 90° 12'30"W - E 1/2 of NW 1/4 of Sec. 23, T.23S, R.22E). A lengthy (about 300 m) pile of Rangia cuneata shells has been placed along the bank to help shore it up, and these Rangia are definitely not part of a midden. However, sherds washing out of the Rangia shells were located along the northern portion of the pipeline crossing. Also associated with the sherds, but minor in comparison to the amount of Rangia , were oyster shells. The oysters and the artifacts may be eroding from a midden pres- ently covered over by the Rangia pile. Another possibility is that the Rangia used for the pipeline crossing were removed from another Indian midden, at some unknown location, and transported along with the sherds to the bank of Belle Pass. 16 LF 85 - The CEI survey located a small (10 m long by 1 m wide) oyster shell midden on the south bank of the small bayou which courses through the marsh between Belle Pass and Pass Fourchon. The site is lo- cated at the confluence of the bayou and Belle Pass (29°06'30"N, 90° 12' 05"W - S 1/2 of MW 1/4 of Sec. 23, T.23S, R.22E). The mouth of the bayou has since been silted in, however, so the site appears to be located on a little cove along the east bank of the pass. The site appears to be wave-washed, with only a few in situ material remains. 16 LF 86 - Immediately across Belle Pass from the northern portion of 16 LF 82 the survey party located a badly disturbed oystershell midden (29*06' 11 M N, 90°12'55"W - SE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Sec. 22, T.23S, R. 22E) . This midden lies to the north of a slip dug for an oil well lo- cation, along the east bank of Belle Pass, and has an extent of approx- imately 30 to 40 m and a width of about 15 or 20 m at its widest point. The midden cannot be seen from the pass, and was only located by walking back from the pass's bank. Two levees have been constructed over the western portion of the site and run parallel to each other and to the bank of the pass. A small canal (assumed to be a pipeline canal) has also been dredged through the site, with the spoil deposits from this canal adding to the levees. It was the artifacts and oysters washing out of the levees which first brought the site to the attention of the survey team. To the east of the canal cutting through the site, a large area could be seen con- taining scattered oyster shells and artifacts; however, dense marsh grass prevented determination of this area's exact dimensions. From J-( what was seen, the area extended back from the large, westernmost levee for about 15 or 20 m. No measurements as to the depth of this deposit could be determined, hut the midden in this area seems to be in situ. In addition to these prehistoric archeological sites, the CEI survey located the remains of a shrimp boat washed up on the beach fronting Bay Marchand. Although a shrimp boat is of little archeo- logical value, its widely scattered wooden remains are interesting and may be a popular place for beach parties or campers. J- 7 E. STATUS It may he emphatically stated that sites 16 LF 7, 8, and 9 are totally destroyed, with, only slim bits of evidence for their presence remaining. Site 16 LF 7 is; currently having spoil deposits from Belle Pass dumped upon it, so it is doubtful that it will yield any further information., Sites 16 LF 8 and 9 may contain some highly wave-washed artifacts, but their scientific study potential is small. 16 LF 34 was not visited by the CEI survey team; however, it lies well beyond the project area. 16 LF 82 and 83 are wave-washed sites with little to offer stratigraphically, but much to offer materially. They are fine col- lecting areas for artifacts and the data which can be gained from hori- zontally controlled collection of such artifacts should prove extremely beneficial. They are most highly important for that reason. 16 LF 84 is so small and wave-washed that it is questionable how much information can be gained from it. However, the fact that it is completely reworked has not been confidently established, and in situ artifacts and midden may still remain. If that proves to be the case, a high priority should be given to the site. Finally, 16 LF 86 may prove to be the most significant site in the area. Aside from the western portion which has been dredged and leveed, the remainder of the site appears to be in fairly good condition. Al- though surface artifacts were not very plentiful, there may be more ma- terial still in place below ground. The site is also very important in that it may have been the camping area for Indians who utilized the Belle Pass region. The aerial dimensions of the site suggest such a possi- bility. The site is also immediately across the pass from 16 LF 82, and thus some definite relationship between the two is highly probable. J-8 F, GENERAL HISTORICAL INFORMATION The historical role of the Bayou Lafourche area centers around the bayou's use as a main artery for transportation and commerce in south- eastern Louisiana, connecting the Mississippi River with the Gulf of Mexico and the many towns along its flanks to one another. The entire Lafourche area was settled by Spaniards, by Germans from the German coast, and by Acadians from Canada in the eighteenth centruy. The Acadian influence is the most strongly reflected in the present day pop- ulation. The name Lafourche (the fork) is one testimonial to French in- fluence; it is derived from the configuration in which the bayou flows from the Mississippi River at Donaldsonville. In 1904, this flow was cut off by the partial construction of a lock and dam system intended to control flood waters. A pumping station was finally built in 1955, allowing the bayou to once again distribute Mississippi River waters. The flanks of the bayou are extremely fertile and have been farmed from the earliest days of its settlements. Sugarcane farming is especially productive and this activity is a viable part of the landscape and the lifestyle in the area. Bayou Lafourche was also active during the Civil War as it was recognized for its wealth and closeness to New Orleans. The nearest known historic sites are the Cheniere Caminada s lying approximately 4 to 5 mi east of the proposed port site, and Jacko Bay Camp, 5h to 7 mi to the northwest. According to Swanson (1975), the settlement at Caminada may date to the Spanish period in Louisiana when Fort Blanc was established in that area. The settlement prospered in the early 1800' s when sugar plantations thrived in the area. Before the severe hurricane of 1893, Cheniere Caminada was heavily settled by fish- ermen with a population of about 2,000 people, the most populus area along the Louisiana Gulf shore at the time. Over 1,000 people were drowned in the storm of 1893 and the community was largely abandoned until the 1930' s when a highway was built into the area. Jacko Bay Camp was a fishing and hunting settlement located around two small bays on the northeast shore of Timbalier Bay. Twenty-seven structures are shown on the 1894 edition of the U.S. Geological Survey, Timbalier, Louisiana, quadrangles. The structures were probably all built above the marsh level on pilings. Neither of these historic sites is within the near-vicinity of the proposed port facility. The sites will not be adversely impacted by the proposed project. J- 9 G. EVALUATION OF SITES The results of the survey and study were reviewed with representa-^ tives of the SHPO and the Greater Lafourche Port Commission. Of the historic and prehistoric sites known to exist in the general vicinity of the proposed project, four represent possible candidates for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. These are the Cheniere Caminada settlement, Jacko Bay Camp, Site 16 LF 82, and Site 16 LF 86. The first two are historically significant, while the latter two prehistoric sites have in situ material and potential for contrib- uting significant information to culture history, cultural processes^ and paleoenvironmental conditions of the area. Possible adverse effects could occur at six of the prehistoric sites as a result of the project if precautionary measures are not taken. Sites 16 LF 7 and 16 LF 86 could be affected by spoil disposal. While 16 LF 7 is already so badly degraded and of such minor importance that protective measures are not warranted, Site 16 LF 86 is of National Reg- ister caliber and will be excluded from designated spoil disposal areas. Four sites on the west bank of Belle Pass (16 LF 82, 16 LF 83, 16 LF 84, and 16 LF 85) might be endangered by future disposal of spoil resulting from maintenance dredging. This adverse impact will be averted by designating the sites as non-spoil areas. As in most cases, secondary impacts related to accelerated erosion and vandalism, which may affect the form of the sites (16 LF 82, 16 LF 83, 16 LF 85, and 16 LF 86), are more difficult to deal with. The sites are too large and erosion too far advanced for structural measures, such as rip-rap or bulkheads, to be effective. Instead, a program of systematic data and artifact collection to be conducted over a period of years has been recommended. Survey monuments or reference points will be established (in places safe from erosion) , and systematic surface collec- tions and observations will be made at least once a year. The collecting will be controlled by area and referenced to the survey monument. In the event that special features are exposed by erosion, they will be systematically excavated and recorded. The program will be conducted by qualified archeologists and the data deposited in the custody of the Louisiana Archeological Survey, Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism. J-10 REFERENCES Aero. 1951-1952. Ammann International Corporation. San Antonio, Texas. Algermissen, S. T. 1969. Seismic Risk Studies in the United States in Fourth World Conference of Earthquake Engineering. Santiago, Chili. January 13-18. Algermissen, S. T. and D. M. Perkins. 1976. A Probabilistic Estimate of Maximum Acceleration in Rock in the Contiguous United States. U.S. Gov. Print. Off., Washington, D.C. Angelle, J. Burton. 1976. Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commis- sion Director. Personal Communication, January. Aycock, S. Ray, Jr. 1976. Fish and Wildlife Service, Assistant State Supervisor. Letter dated January 23. Bahr, Leonard M. , Jr. 1974. Geological and Geographical Description of the Louisiana Coast, _In Environmental Assessment of a Louis- iana Offshore Oil Port and Appertinent Storage and Pipeline Facilities. Vol. II. Center for Wetland Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Becker, R. E. 1972. Wave Energy Studies along the Louisiana Coast. Report #12. Hydrologic and Geologic Studies of Coastal Louisiana, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, La. Center for Wetland Resources, 22 pp. Bernard, H. A. and R. J. LeBlanc. 1965. Resume of the Quaternary of the United States, edited by H. E. Wright, Jr., and D. G. Frey. Princeton University Press t Princeton, New York, p. 137-185. Broome, Steve. 1973. Stabilizing Dredge Spoil by Creating New Salt Marshes with Spartina Alternif lora. Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of Soil Scientists, Society of North Carolina, pp. 136-149. Buford, R. L. and S. C. Murzyn. 1972. Population Projections by Age, Race, and Sex, for Louisiana and its Parishes. Occasional Paper No. 10, Division of Research, College of Business Admin- istration, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Chabreck, Robert H. 1970. Marsh Zones and Vegetation Types in the Louisiana Coastal Marshes. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 113 p. Chabreck, Robert H. 1972. Vegetation, Water and Soil Characteristics of the Louisiana Coastal Region. From Bulletin No. 664. L.S.U., Agricultural Experiment Station, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. R-l Chabreck, Robert H. and Clark M. Hoffpauir. 1962. The Use of Weirs in Coastal Marsh Management in Louisiana. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the South East Association of Game and Fish Commission. Vol. 16, pp. 103-112. Clark, John. 1977. A Technical Manual for the Conservation of Coastal Zone Resources. The Conservation Foundation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Coleman, J. M. 1966. Recent Coastal Sedimentation (Central Louisiana). Technical Report No. 29, Coastal Studies Institute, L.5.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Dantin, E. J., C. A. Whitehurst, and W. T. Durbin. 1974. An Investi- gation of Environmental Factors Associated with the Current and Proposed Jetty Systems at Belle Pass, Louisiana. Division of Engineering Research, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 40 pp. Darnell, R. M. 1967. Organic Detritus in Relation to the Estuarine Ecosystem, In Estuaries, G. H. Lauff (ed) , American Association for the Advancement of Science. Publication No. 83, pp. 376-382. Day, J. N. , W. G. Smith, P. R. Wagner, W. C. Stone, and C. Wilmer. 1973. Community Structure and Carbon Budget of a Salt Marsh and Shallow Bay Estuarine System in Louisiana. Center for Wetland Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Publication No. L. S.U.-SG-72-04. Diversified Economic and Planning Associates, Inc. 1974. South Lafourche Regional Planning Commission. Comprehensive Plan, Ward 10, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. Federal Register. 1974. Vol. 39, No. 251. December, Washington, D.C. FIA. 1970. FIA Flood Hazard Boundary Map, No. H 22 057 0000 04, August 6, Washington, D.C. Fisk, Harold N. 1944. Geological Investigation of the Alluvial Valley of the Lower Mississippi River. War Department, Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army. Vicksburg, Mississippi. Ford, James A. and George I. Quimby, Jr. 1945. The Tchefuncte Culture, Mississippi Valley. Memoir of the Society for Ameri- can Archaeology, No. 2, Menasha. Frazier, D. E. 1967. Recent Deltaic Deposits of the Mississippi River: Their Development and Chronology. Gulf Coast Association Geo- logical Society. Vol. 17, pp. 287-315. Gagliano e_t al. 1972. Environmental Atlas and Multi-Use Management Plan for South-central Louisiana. Center for Wetland Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Gagliano, S. M. , P. Light, and R. E. Becker. 1973. Controlled Diver- sions in the Mississippi Delta System: An Approach to Environ- mental Management, In Hydrologic and Geologic Studies of Coastal Lousiana. Report No. 8. Center for Wetlands Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. R-2 Gagliano, Sherwood M. , and J. van Beek. 1970. Hydrologic and Geo- logic Studies of Coastal Louisiana, Geologic and Geomorphic Aspects of Deltaic Processes, Mississippi Delta System, Vol. II. Center for Wetland Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Gagliano, Sherwood M. , Richard A. Weinstein and Eileen K. Burden. 1975. Archaeological Investigations along the Gulf Intracoastal Water- way: Coastal Louisiana Area. Report submitted to the New Orleans District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Gosselink, James G. , Eugene P. Odum, R. M. Pope. 1974. The Value of the Tidal Marsh. Center for Wetland Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Publication No. SG-74-03. Greater Lafourche Port Commission. 1975. Port Fourchon Development Program - A Title IX - Special Economic Development and Adjustment Assistance Program Action Plan. Prepared for: Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. Greater Lafourche Port Commission. 1977. Letter dated October 25, 1977. Guillespie, M. C. 1971. Analysis and Treatment of Zooplankton of Estuarine Waters of Louisiana, In Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory and Study, Louisiana. Phase IV. Biology, Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission, New Orleans, Louisiana, Gulf South Research Institute. 1974. Port Fourchon Development Program. Final Report. Prepared for: Greater Lafourche Port Commission, Galliano, Louisiana. Gunter, Gordon. 1967. Some Relationships of Estuaries to the Fisher- ies of the Gulf of Mexico, JEn G. H. Lauff (ed), Estuaries . American Association for the Advancement of Science. Washington, D.C. pp. 621-638. Hosier, C. R. 1961. Low-Level Inversion Frequency in the Contiguous United States. Monthly Weather Review, Vol. 89, p. 319-339. Johnson, David B. 1973. Selected Socio-Economic Considerations, In Louisiana Superport Studies: Recommendations for the Environ- mental Protection Plan. Report No. 3. Center for Wetland Re- sources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Kaiser, H. J. 1976. A Summary, Effect of Superport Development in Louisiana. Offshore Terminal Authority. Kolb, C. R. 1962. Distribution of Soils Bordering the Mississippi River from Donaldsonville to Head of Passes. Waterways Experi- ment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Technical Report 3-601, 61 pp. R-3 Rolb, C.R. , and Jack van Lopik. 1958. Geology of the Mississippi Deltaic Plain, Southeastern Louisiana. Technical Report No. 3-483, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 2 volumes. Lagna, Lorrain. 1975. The Relationship of Spartina Alterniflora to Mean High Water. N. Y. Sea Grant Institute, No. 4 SSGP-RS-002. Light, Phillip. 1974. Hydrology, In Environmental Assessment of a Louisiana Offshore Oil Port and Appertinent Storage and Pipe- line Facilities. Vol. II. Center for Wetland Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Little, Arthur D. , Inc. 1971. Issues Relevant to United States Ports; Interpretative Study of the Development and Operation Experience of Selected Foreign Deep Water Ports. Report Commissioned by the Institute of Water Resources, Alexandria, under contract to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. LOOP, Inc. 1974. Environmental Baseline Study, Prepared by Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Conservation. 1972. Louisiana Oil and Gas Production. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Conservation. 1976. Louisiana Oil and Gas Production. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Education. 1971 and 1973. One hundred and Twenty Second Annual Report Bulletin No. 1205. Baton Rouge, Louisiana Louisiana Geological Survey. 1974. Interstate Gas Map of Louisiana. Published by Department of Conservation. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Louisiana Power and Light Co. 1974. Preliminary Safety Analysis Report, Units 3-4. Waterford Steam Electric Station, 1973-1974. Taft, Louisiana. Louisiana State Planning Office. 1976. The State of the State in 1976. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Louisiana State Parks and Recreation Commission. 1974a. Louisiana State Parks Plan, 1975-1990. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Louisiana State Parks and Recreation Commission. 1974b. Outdoor Recreation in Louisiana 1975-1980. Louisiana State Comprehen- sive Recreation Plan. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Louisiana Stream Control Commission. 1973. State of Louisiana Water Quality Criteria, 66 pp. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Urban and Community Affairs. 1977. Letter to Greater Lafourche Port Commission from Vivienne Francis, Assistant Secretary, Office of State Clearinghouse, October 10, 1977. R-4 Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission. 1975. Parish Survey, Lafourche Parish, District VIII. March 31, 1975. Lousiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission. 1976. Personal Communi- cation t Charles Shaw. January, 1976. Lowery, George H. , Jr., 1974a. Louisiana Birds. Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission. L.S.U. Press, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Lowery, George H. , Jr. 1974b. The Mammals of Louisiana and Its Adjacent Waters. L. S.U.. -Tress , Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Mackin, J. G. 1961. Canal Dredging and Silting in Louisiana Bays. Publication of the Institute of Marine Science, University of Texas. Vol. 7. Austin, Texas. McGinnis, J. T. , T. A. Ewing, C. A. Willingham, S. E. Rogers, D. H. Douglas, and D. L. Morrison. 1972. Final Report on Environ- mental Aspects of Gas Pipeline Operation in the Louisiana Coastal Marshes to Offshore Pipeline Committee. Battelle, Columbus Laboratories. Mclntire, William G. 1958. Prehistoric Indian Settlements of the Changing Mississippi Delta. Coastal Studies Institute Series, No. 1. L.S.U. , Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Meo, Mark, John Day, T. B. Ford. 1975. Comparative Cost Evaluation of Selected Waste Water Treatments in Louisiana's Coastal Zone. Center for Wetland Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, pp. 19. Mineral Industry Surveys, Bureau of Mines. 1970. Crude Oil, Refined Products, and Natural Gas Liquids, 1970. Final summary . Washington, D. C, Monte, J. A. 1975. A Study of Impounded Marsh Areas and Areas Which are Subject to Impoundment. Unpublished paper. Monte, J. A. 1976. Man- Induced Diversification of Wetland Vegetation in Bayou Lafourche Subdelta of Louisiana: Spoil Banks. Abstract, International Meeting Geophysical Union. Morgan, J. P. and P. B. Larrimore. 1957. Changes in the Louisiana Shoreline. Trans. Gulf Coast Association. Geological Society, 7th Annual Meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp. 303-310. National Audubon Society. 1976. Blue List of American Birds. Neuman, Robert W. 1973. Archaeological Assessment of Water Resource Planning Areas 9 and 10, Louisiana. Report submitted to the National Park Service in Tallahasee. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Odum, E. P. and A. De La Cruz. 1967, Particulate Organic Detritus in a Georgia Salt Marsh-Estuarine Ecosystem, J_n Estuaries, American Association Advancement of Science. Washington, D,C. No. 83, pp. 383-388. R-5 Palmisano, A. W. and Robert H. Chabreck. 1972. The Relationship of Plant Communities and Soils of the Louisiana Coastal Marshes. Proceedings of the Louisiana Association of Agronomists. Parish of Lafourche Police Jury. 1977. Letter from Robert H. Simmons, Director of Department of Public Works, November 10, 1977. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. 1977. Interim Report on Port Fourchon Multiport Loan Application for the Office of Coastal Zone Manage- ment, Washington, D.C. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. 1978. Report on Port Fourchon Multiport Financial Schedules for the Office of Coastal Zone Management, Washington, D.C. Penfound, W. T. and E. S. Hathaway. 1938. Plant Communities in the Marshlands of Southeastern Louisiana. Ecological Monograph. Vol. 8, pp. 1-56. Phillips, Philip. 1970. Archaeological Survey in the Lower Yazoo Basin, Mississippi, 1949-1955. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Vol. 60, 2 Parts, Cambridge. Piccola & Associates, Inc. 1978. Letter of September 28, 1978. Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, Inc. 1971. Statistical Profile of Lafourche Parish, Baton Rouge, Louisiana- Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, Inc. 1973. Statistical Profile of Lafourche Parish, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Roy, E. P., and F. Bordelon. 1974. Selected Shrimp and Seafood Statistics for Louisiana and the United States. Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness. Information Series No. 33. L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Russell, Richard J. 1940. Quaternary History of Louisiana. Bulle- tin of Geological Society of America. Vol. 51, pp. 1199-1234, New York. Saucier, Roger T. 1974. Quaternary Geology of the Lower Mississippi Valley. Arkansas Archaeological Survey. Research Series, No. 6, Fayetteville, South Central Planning and Development Commission. 1974a. Overall Economic Development Program. Fiscal Year 1972-1973, Vol. I, Thibodeaux, Louisiana. South Central Planning and Development Commission. 1974b. Existing Regional Land Use Map» Thibodeaux, Louisiana. Steponaitis, Vincas P. 1974. The Late Prehistory of the Natchez Region: Excavations at the Emerald and Foster Sites, Adams County, Mississippi. Unpublished Honors thesis, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge. R-6 Stone, James e_t al_. 1973. Louisiana Superport Studies: Recommenda- tions for the Environmental Protection Plan. Center for Wet- land Resources, L.S.U., Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Swanson, Betsy. 1975. Historic Jefferson Parish, from Shore to Shore. Pelican Publishing Co., Gretna, Louisiana. 176 p. Tobin Survey, Inc. 1940. Aerial Photographs. San Antonio, Texas. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1972a. Bayou Lafourche and Lafourche- Jump Waterway, Louisiana. Draft Environmental Impact Statement. New Orleans District. 39 pp. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1972b. History of Hurrican Occurrences Along Coastal Louisiana. New Orleans, Louisiana. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1973. Inventory of Basic Environmental Data, South Louisiana, Mermentau River Basin to Chandeleur Sound with Special Emphasis on the Atchafalaya Basin, New Orleans, La, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1975a. James F. Roy Acting Chief, Planning Division. Personal Communications, December, 1975. Enclosure with letter, December 19, 1975. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1975b. Hydrologic and Water Quality Data Print Outs. Lower Bayou Lafourche at Gulf of Mexico. New Orleans, Louisiana. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1976. Letter to Coastal Environments signed by James F. Roy, Acting Chief, Planning Division, (LMNPL-RW) , Personal Communication, February 12, 1976. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1976a. Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Calender Year 1976. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1972. U.S. Department of Commerce, Social and Economic Statistics Administration. County Busi- ness Patterns, Washington, D.C. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1973. Characteristics of the Population. Census of Population: 1970. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Vol. I, Part 20, Louisiana. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1977. Census of Agriculture Louisiana State and Parish Data. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Vol. I, Part 18. U.S. Congress. 1899. Rivers and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899. 30 Stat. 1151; 33 U.S.C. U.S. Congress. 1972. Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. Public Law 92-500, 86 Stat. 816, 33 U.S.C. 1344. U.S. Department of Commerce. 1931-1971. Climatological Data - Louis- iana. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. R-7 U.S. Department of Commerce. 1975. Louisiana Landings, Annual Sum- mary, 1973, In Current Fisheries Statistics No, 6422, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, D, C, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1976. National Marine Fisheries Service, 1976. Letter to Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District (FSE 211 GB) . Signed by William H, Stevenson, Regional Director, March 3, 1976. U.S. Department of the Interior. 1971, 1972, 1973, Bureau of Commer- cial Fisheries, Fisheries of the United States, Washington, D,C f U.S. Department of the Interior. 1974. U. S. List of Endangered Fauna. Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of the Interior. 1975. HUD Circular 1390.2 ^ Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of the Interior. 1976. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1976. Letter to U.S. Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District. Signed by Kenneth E. Black, Regional Director, March 8, 1976. U.S. Department of the Interior. 1977. Most U,S. Alligators Come Off Endangered List. News Release. Atlanta, Georgia. U.S. Department of Transportation. 1976. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Local Deepwater Port License Application, Deepwater Ports Project, Office of Marine Environment and Systems, Dept. of Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard, vols. 1 & 2. U.S. Geological Survey. 1894. Timbalier, Louisiana. 15 minute quad- rangle, scale 1/62,500, surveyed 1891. Walker, R. A. 1973. Wetlands Preservation and Management of Chesapeake Bay: The Role of Science on Natural Resource Policy, Coastal Zone Management Journal. Vol. I, No. 1, pp. 75-101. Whitehurst, C. A. 1972. Application of Remote Sensing Data in the Bayou Lafourche Delta of south Louisiana. Division of Engineering Research, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Whitehurst, C. A. n.d. Continuation of: Application of Remote Sensing Data in the Bayou Lafourche Delta of South Louisiana. Division of Engineering Research. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Whitehurst, C. A. 1974. A Parametric Study of Water Resources Vari- ables in a Delta Region of South Louisiana, . .Bayou Lafourche. Division of Engineering Research, L.S.U. , Baton Rouge, Louisi- ana, Vol. I. Whitehurst, Charles A. and R. P. Self. 1974. Sediment Transport and Erosion in the Fourchon Area of Lafourche Parish, _In Research Monographs. Division of Engineering Research. RM3. L.S.U. , Baton Rouge, Louisiana. R-8 Woodhouse, W. W. Jr., E. D. Seneca and S. W. Broome. 1974. Propaga- tion of Spartina Alterniflora for Substrate Stabilization of Salt Marsh Development. Technical Memo 46, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Engineering Research Center. Ft. Belvoir, Virginia. 54 pp. Young, C, E. Odum, J. Day and T. Butler. 1974. Evaluation of Regional Models for the Alternatives and Management of the Atchafalaya Basin. Bureau of Sports Fisheries. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. R-9 SECTION K: COMf-IENTS .AND RESPONSES UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE Post Office Box 1630, Alexandria, La. 71301 September 14, 1978 Ms. Lisa Jorgenson Coastal Energy Impact Program Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Ms. Jorgenson: Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, LaFourche Parish, Louisiana. We have reviewed the referenced draft EIS and find it to be well organized and presented. The impacts of phase four, to include the conversion of 450 acres of marsh/spoil to dry land, are clearly identified. The associated loss in fisheries and wildlife habitat is also presented. The problems with beach and shoreline erosion are also mentioned. We recommend that every effort be made during construction to control and reduce erosion in the disturbed areas. Sincerely, Alton Mangum Ls State Conservationist cc: Director, Office of Federal Activities, EPA, Washington, D.C. Director, Environmental Services Division, SCS, Washington, D.C. Office of the Coordinator of Environmental Quality Activities K-l 6 United States Department of Agriculture forest service 1720 Peachtree Road, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 3 0309 1950 September 15, 1978 Ms. Lisa Jorgenson Coastal Energy Impact Program Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whiteheaven Street, N.W. L Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Ms. Jorgenson: The United States Forest Service, State and Private Forestry's review of the draft environmental statement covering the "Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, La Fourche Parish, Louisiana" reveals there is no forest land involved. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this ES. Sincerely, ~^TK- M.W. KAGEORGE Asst. Area Director APMA cc: State Forester, LA WO K-2 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY DIVISION, CORPS OF ENGINEERS VICKSBURG. MISSISSIPPI 391SO REPLY TO ATTENTION OF, LMVPD-R 20 September 1978 Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Sir: We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, LaFourche Parish, Louisiana. Comments for your consideration are furnished in Inclosure 1. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the DEIS. Sincerely , 1 Incl As stated IE H. HILL Acting Chief, Planning Division K-3 COMMENTS ON DEIS ON THE PROPOSED PORT FOURCHON DEVELOPMENT PLAN, LAOURCHE PARISH, LOUISIANA 1. The U.S. Army Engineer District, New Orleans, has issued permits for portions of the proposed Port Fourchon Development plan. However, the District has advised the Greater Lafourche Port Commission (GLPC) that an EIS is required for the total port development prior to the issuance of permits for future phases of the plan. Although all phases of the plan are identified in the DEIS under review, this DEIS is not considered adequate to meet the District requirement for an EIS on the total port development. 2. In 1975, the New Orleans District received a permit application from the GLPC to enlarge Flotation Canal to a 25- by 150-foot channel. It is noted that this previously proposed work is not identified in the DEIS. Also, a possible discrepancy in the alinement of the T-slip may develop. The DEIS shows the alinement of the T-slip such that it enters Pass Fourchon. The New Orleans District understands that a proposed revision will be filed to the GLPC permit application currently on file, which will request permission to rotate the slip so as to place the entry of the stem on Bayou Lafourche with the stem about normal to the bayou shoreline. A change in alinement could have an adverse impact on traffic, safety, and validity of the permit application or EIS. Due to the complex nature of the proposed port development plan, representatives of the Office of Coastal Zone Management may wish to contact the District Regulatory Functions Branch regarding the current status of permit applications on file. 3. Identification of induced secondary impacts from the proposed port development appears lacking. The assessment would be improved by a clear statement regarding the induced development of adjacent areas by the port development. Also, it should indicate whether the capacity of the port site is sufficient tq accommodate projected industrial and commercial developments in the general area of the proposed facility or whether other satellite areas will be required. 4. The publication titled "Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana," implies that all of the plan is covered by the publication; whereas, in the publication, it is identified that only Phase 4 of the plan is covered. The presentations become confusing because portions of the plan other than Phase 4 are intermixed in the discussion. Section 6A and B, relative to recreation resources, is an example of intermixing information on phases. K-4 5. Identification of dredged material placement areas is confusing and unclear. The extent of such areas for the plans of development for Flotation Canal are, not shown. Also, it is not discussed where the maintenance dredged material will be placed in the event the ^50 acres develop immediately. 6. Although drainage plans are mentioned, sufficient information is not provided on the impacts. Runoff is a major element of water quality impacts and a complete discussion of the structural and pro- cedural intentions should be provided. Also, the overall water quality impacts, other than possible salinity increases, are not assessed. 7 A No flood control plans are identified or the possible flood damages assessed for the induced development in the flood prone area. The assessment should be sufficient to identify whether the improvements are in accordance with Executive Order 11988, Flood Plain Management , and the Water Resources Council Floodplain Management Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order II988, 10 February 1978 (1+3FR6030). 8. Analysis of Figure A-12 of the DEIS indicates that the shoreline will extend through the middle of the T-slip by the year 2050. The scope, impacts, and costs of measures to deter erosion into the site from the Gulf should be addressed. 9. The DEIS indicates that the increase in salinity will create a barrier for the movement of marine organisms. However, since the salinity is already high (20-25 parts per thousand), this assumption may be incorrect and should be supported by more detailed information or references. 10. The habitat value of the impounded area appears inconsistent in the document. Page 7-2, paragraph C, states that the 1*50 acres are poor wildlife habitat; while paragraph H on page 7-3 implies it is good habitat. Also, it is indicated that the productivity is low due to its "saline" character and at another place indicated that due to reduced circulation, has induced a shift toward greatly lowered salinity. 11. A number of other less significant comments follow: a. The figures in the DEIS and their descriptions in the text are inadequate for a complete evaluation. Additional comments relative to the figures are as follows: (l) The proposed riprap along Pass Fourchon shown on figure U- 1 is not shown on typical sections A-A and B-B of figure h- 2. K-5 (2) The discussion on page k-2 which describes the dredging of a 20- by 1+0-foot T-slip refers to figures 1+-3, k-k, and k-5. Figure h-k does not appear to show typical cross sections of the T-slip since the figure is titled "Typical bank stabilization along Pass Fourchon at the Port Fourchon facility." (3) The jetties shown on figure k-5 are identified as proposed but are described on page k-3 as completed under Phase 2. (k) The design thickness of the proposed riprap is not indicated on figures k-k or h-'J . (5) For clarity, separate presentations are needed on the original configuration of the land and water bodies at the site, the projects which have been completed, and the projects proposed (all future phases). b. The location of hydraulic data shown in Table A-k, page A-30, is not shown on any maps . c. The datum for the mean tide level should be shown in Table A-5, page A- 31. d. The period of record for the annual wave climate should be shown on Table A-6, page A-32. e. It is stated on page A-33, paragraph F-l, that cold fronts (during the winters) move southeastward through the area. These fronts are accompanied by high velocity northerly and northwesterly winds. It should be noted that during the winter, significant storms occur with winds blowing toward the shore, and that these winds can cause signifi- cant erosion along the Louisiana coastline. f . The EIS should contain specific information concerning the impact of project development on the endangered species listed. g. The term "eligible" used on page 6-3 to refer to the National Register of Historic Places is incorrect. This term is reserved to refer only to those sites determined to be so by the appropriate Federal agency . h. The statement regarding the length of time for dredged material to revegetate, page 3-7 » is not in agreement with the similar statement on page 6-2, i. The project depth for the deepening of Belle Pass should be -20 feet throughout the document. Several errors with regard to elevation are noted. K-6 j . On page A-i+1, it should "be noted that Spartina alterniflora does not require flooding "by saline water. k. On page A-58, it should he noted that speckled trout are not commonly regarded as completely estuarine dependent since they spend time in the shallow gulf. 1 . An existing control structure along the north side of the impoundment, which allows some fisheries utility, is not mentioned in the DEIS. m. The waterborne commerce statistics contained in "Section H: Transportation" are much outdated (1969; 1971; 1973). More up-to-date statistics can he obtained from the publication "Waterborne Commerce of the United States." £-4ec RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1. This draft EIS is intended only for the proposed action, Phase IV of the Port Fourchon Facility. It has been prepared following EIS development guidelines of the Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP) , Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 2. All necessary permits required for construction of Phase IV of the Port Fourchon Facility have been applied for, reviewed on their individual merit and granted by the New Orleans District of the Corps of Engineers. These permits are included on page A-47 and A-48. 3. The following has been added on page 6-3 under Economic and Social Impacts: "Indirect and secondary effects of the Port Fourchon Development Project are expected on employment, earnings, capital expenditure, total value added, total value of shipment, population, land values, economic indicators, and major economic activities (See Table 204) . The probable migration of people into the parish as a result of job opportunities would be considered an adverse impact only if it would create additional demands for urban developments and services to an extent which could not be feasibily met. According to a study by H. J. Kaiser Co. (1976) on the effect of Superport develop- ment on Louisiana refining, petrochemical, and related growth, most of the employment in Loop support-related jobs is expected to occur in Lafourche Parish, with some service, commercial, and residential development probably occurring in Terrebonne and St. Mary Parishes." A recent study by Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. (1977b) states that areawide hospitals , and wastewater treatment facilities appear to be adequate to accommodate the growth impact anticipated from port facility improvements. 4. The publication entitled "Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana," was developed at the time the Greater Lafourche Port Commission (GLPC) has applied for extra funding for the whole project. This draft EIS publication has been prepared by the Office of Coastal Zone Management, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce, and only applies to Phase IV of the multiport development facility. Phase IV is the only phase for which funding by the CEIP is presently under consideration. Section 1: General Project Description, A) Site, and B) Relationship of the Proposed Action to the Total Project, at the beginning of the publication adequately clarifies and explains the site, the proposed action, and the total port development. 5. Dredge material placement areas for the plans of the flotation canal are being shown in Figure 4-4, page 4-6. The dredged material will be deposited south of the Flotation Canal along the existing levee within the impounded area. In the event the 450 acres develop immediately, maintenance dredged material will be placed on existing U.S. Army Corps of Engineers designated spoil areas (See page 4-11 and 1-7). K-7 6. Drainage plans are to be accomplished by providing open swale ditches throughout the entire 450 acre tract which will collect run-off and dispose of it within the reservoir. The reservoir water will be pumped into the flotation canal by a pumping system with automatic controls (Piccola & Assoc. Inc., 1978). Precise water quality impacts from run-off would depend on the nature and amount of waste water and run- off water from future industrial facilities. Water quality standards of the State of Louisiana will be adhered to. Water Quality Impacts - the following paragraph has been added: "Although increased water turbidities and other problems related to dredging such as the release of organic materials and sometimes of toxic pollutants in the spoil are temporary, environmental impacts of short-term effects should be considered. Short-term effects include but are not limited to reduced light penetration, eutrophication, and accumulation of toxic substances by organisms. Precise water quality impacts from run-off would depend on the nature and amount of waste waters and run-off waters from future industrial facilities; however, Louisiana Stream Control Regulations would be adhered to." 7. The Lafourche Parish Police Jury has a flood control plan which the Greater Lafourche Port Commission will have to follow in detail (Picciola & Assoc, 1978). 8. Based on projections of present shoreline retreat, it would be necessary to construct groins and other shoreline protection devices by about the year 2025. Such measures would result in changes in the longshore move- ment of sand toward the west . The most comparable engineering structure in the area is the jetty at Caminada Pass on the western end of Grand Isle by the Louisiana Department of Public Works in 1972 at a cost of $994,000. It should be noted, however, that a severe threat to the project from erosion would not occur within a 50 year life span Of the project. 9. Increases in salinity are expected up the channel as a result of dredging operations. The saltwater wedge will move upward, creating a barrier for the movement of marine organisms (Clark, 1977). 10. Page 7-2, paragraph C - the following explanation has been added to the existing paragraph: "Port construction will increase turbidity in the aquatic habitats near the project area. This will temporarily decrease aquatic productivity. Once construction is complete and the area is revegetated, suspended sediments will sink to the bottom and aquatic production should return to normal. Removal and replacement of existing habitats due to spoil deposition in marsh areas and building construction will displace existing flora and fauna in the project area. Tage 7-4, Paragraph H has been rewritten as follows: "Filling of the wetland areas within the 450 acres on the upper part of the study area, which now serves as habitat for some fur-bearing mammals and for migratory waterfowl, would adversely affect the long-term productivity of this area's recreational resources. Lower water quality of the area due to increased vessel traffic in the waterways, and industrial runoff, air pollution . . . K-8 11. D Figure 4-2 has been replaced by an appropriate figure. Figure 4-3 shows typical roadway sections. 2) Figure 4-4 Typical bank stabilization along Pass Fourchon at the Port Fou chon Facility is now Figure 4-2. The figures mentioned on page 4-2 describing the dredging of -20 by a 40 ft T-slip are now Figures 4-4 and 4-5. 3) The jetties shown on Figure 4-5 are partially completed. The east and west jetty have to be extended some distances in order to be completed. 4) The proposed rip-rap is called GOBYMAT which is four (4) inches thick. This sentence has been added on page 4-11, paragraph four, and also to the figures. 5) A figure depicting three maps of the area before any port develop- ment, one with phases completed and another with future phases, will be included. It will be shown on Figure A-16... The datum for the mean tide level will be included in Table A-5. The period of record for the annual wave climate will be shown in Table A-6. Two sentences have been added to this paragraph. These read: "During the winter, storms with winds blowing toward the shore can occur. These winds can cause significant erosion along the Louisiana coastline. " The following has been added to the wildlife resources section regarding impact of project development on the endangered species listed: "Direct impacts to the aquatic system are to be short- term, and therefore are not expected to significantly affect grown pelican populations. Although bald eagles and peregrine falcons may on occassion pass over or feed in the area, the project is not expected to significantly affect these species or their habitat. A more detailed discussion of these species is included in the land use section. The term "eligible" has been changed to "probably eligible." The statement on page 3-7 has been changed to agree with the similar statement on page 6-2. These errors have been corrected. This data was obtained from Woodhouse, Seneca, Broome, 1974. K-9 The word "completely" has been deleted. The following has been added on page A~60: "... except for a water control structure on the northern edge of the impoundment area which still permits some movement of aquatic organisms." Tables H-l and H-2 have been changed to more recent statistics obtained from the publication "Waterborne Commerce of the United States" (USACE, 1976a) K-10 DATE: SEP 11978 UNITED STATES DL. A»,.MEI\IT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine F^fj&hfes Service Washington, D.G31 1978 SEP - 1 PM 1=53 MAIL ROOM F7/CW TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CZ - Robert W. Knecht -t^F ^TerSyL. Leitzell NOAA Review of Port Founchon Development Plan, La Fourche Parish, Louisiana DEIS Our comments on subject document are as follows: The Southeast Region of the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Environmental Data Service provided written comments as of August 28, 1978. The comments are offered for your consideration. General Comments Although phase four of the seven-phased total plan of development is being proposed for Department of Commerce financial assistance, the DEIS's title as well as Section 3 (project alternatives) implies that the total plan of development is being proposed and discussed. Accordingly, since only part of the development is being proposed at this time, the title should so indicate. Also, the discussion of alternatives in Section 3 be limited to phase four. The discussion of project impacts associated with phase four is adequate with regard to fishery resources under our purview. EDIS has reviewed the DEIS and offers no comment. cc: F F7 OM FAK FNE FNW FNW5 (Walter s ) FSE FSW AMERICAS FIRST INDUSTRY K-ll UNITED STATES DE m JENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Rockville. Maryland 20852 OAl AUG 2 5 1978 MEMORANDUM TO F - Robert F. Hutton FROM: jCS^ " Ricnard E - Hallgren SUBJECT : ' Draft Environment Impact Statement (EIS) on the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana The subject EIS has been reviewed within the areas of OAS responsibility! and in terms of the impact of the proposed action on OAS activities. The following comments are included for your consideration. Section A, Land Use, pages A-29 (Stages, Flows, and Tidal Effects) and A-30 (Tides and Wave Characteristics) are found to be slightly mis- leading, probably because of the lack of acceptable tidal terminology. It is difficult to ascertain when the author is addressing river effects or tidal fluctuations . These paragraphs should be revised and to assist in the revision, I have attached the publication, "Tide and Current Glossary." Another concern is the treatment of storm surge. Construction will be permitted below the flood plain (100-year flood) level, which does not conform to the National Flood Insurance Act. The Federal Insurance Administration specifies that any new construction must adhere to their standards in order to qualify for flood insurance. I assume this standard applies to the facilities at Port Fourchon. Attachment K-12 F7/CW SEP 51978 TO: CZ - Robert W. Knecht FROM: jgi^rrvALTTeitzell SUBJECT: Additional NOAA Comments on Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan DEIS, Lafourche, Louisiana Attached is a response from the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Services received after the NMFS and other MLC comments were sent for your consideration. We offer these additional comments for your consideration. Attachment cc: F F7 OM FAK FNE FNW FNW5 (Walters) FSE FSW T K-13 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (NOAA) NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES General Comments The new title on the EIS will read: "Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, Phase IV, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana." The opening paragraph of Section three (3) states clearly that this section will describe the range of options from which the proposed action (Phase IV) was chosen, the adverse and beneficial environmental impacts of those options, and the reasons the various options were not chosen. K-14 RESPONSE TO U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA Under stages, floods, and tidal effects, the first paragraph now reads: "Because of limited water diversion from the Mississippi River, stages in Bayou Lafourche are primarily determined by local rainfall in the upper port and tidal variation in the lower port." Under tides and wave characteristics, the first paragraph now reads: "Tides affect the coastal area by water level variation and water movement, and influence the mixing of seawater and freshwater, water depth for navigation, and dispersion of wastes. Tidal currents commonly attain velocities up to 3.5 knots during flood and 4.3 knots during ebb periods. Tides commonly inundate the coastal marshes to depths of 12 to 29 inches. Monthly data for tides along the central Louisiana coast are shown in Table A-5. This data shows that monthly mean tide levels range from 0.4 to 1.2 feet above MSL and that the monthly mean tidal range varies between 1.01 ft in June to 0.57 ft in September. The normal tide along this coast is. . . .' The Port Fourchon Development Program will follow the Lafourche Parish Flood Control Plan in all details (Picciola & Assoc. Inc., 1978). K-15 COMMENTS OF U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (NOAA) OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC SERVICE General Comments In our review of Department of the Army Applications LMNOD-SP (Pass Fourchon) 6, (Gulf of Mexico) 1242, and (Bayou Lafourche) 702, we commented on Phases 1-4 of the subject project, with the exception of parts d and e of Phase 4, and recommended modifications necessary to minimize impacts to marine fishery resources and their habitats. We do not anticipate adverse impacts on fishery resources from the work proposed in Phase 4, parts d and e, and believe that the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan could be environmentally acceptable pro- vided Phase 6 is deleted and the other Phases modified as discussed below. Specific Comments Phase 5 - Details of the location of the sewage treatment facilities and the proposed Police and Administration building are not presented. However, we recommend that these be located in non-wetlands Phase 6 - Increasing the channel dimensions to 30 ft x 500 ft from 20 ft x 300 ft has the greatest potential of the project's phases for adversely impacting marine fisheries. However, the discussion paper inadequately describes the need for the channel. K-16 RESPONSE TO U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (NOAA) OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC SERVICE General Comments This EIS only directly addresses Phase 4 of the Port Fourchon Development since it is the only phase for which funding by the CEIP office is pre- sently under consideration. Specific Comments Future Phases (5, 6, and 7) of the Port Fourchon Development will most probably require environmental impact statements before any funding or permit approval by any Federal agency. At this time details will be fully covered. K-17 United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY SOUTHWEST REGION POST OFFICE BOX 2088 ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO 87103 SEP 28 1978 ER-78/749 Mr. James Robey Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20235 Dear Mr. Robey: This is in response to your request for our review of the draft environmental statement for the Port Fourchon .Development Plan, La Fourche Parish, Louisiana We find that the statement can be improved in several areas and we offer the following comments. GENERAL COMMENTS It is indicated that the total scope of work for this project includes future additional activities (Phases 5, 6, and 7). This draft statement should ade- quately describe the construction features and impacts associated with these additional phases of the proposed project. The statement should fully de- scribe and discuss to the degree possible all anticipated project features and associated impacts. SPECIFIC COMMENTS Page xii, lines 1-3 - It is stated in the Summary that "New construction and improvements will require dredging a total of 2.957 million cubic feet of spoil which will result in an average increase in elevation of 3.84 feet at the spoil sites." Since the spoil sites will occupy 450 acres, it would require about 3 million cubic yards of spoils to raise the level nearly 4 feet. This discrepancy should be corrected in the statement. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION Page 1-7, paragraph 6 - Work at the flotation canal will involve spoil dis- posal along the shoreline. However, the acreage of wetlands to be filled as a result of this action is not indicated. The acreage of specific habitat K-18 types to be impacted by spoil deposition should be identified in the text, and the location of the proposed spoil site should be indicated in figure 1-4 ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY Page 6-1, Land Constraints and Resources - It is stated that 450 acres will be filled with spoil. It should be indicated how many acres of this total are wetlands. Page 6-2, Wildlife Resources - This section should include a discussion of the anticipated impacts of spoiling on wetland wildlife resources. It is incorrectly implied that the entire 450 acres have been previously used for spoil deposition. Page 6-2, Water Resources - Since it is recognized that turbidity increases due to dredging and spoil placement will temporarily affect water quality, measures such as silt screens should be considered for controlling migration of the increased concentrations of resuspended sediment. Page 6-2, Aquatic Resources - Spoil disposal in the impounded wetland within the development site (reference figure 1-3), related to construction of the port facility, will eliminate aquatic habitat in that area. A discussion of these impacts should be included. SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT Page 7-2, Aquatic Resources - This section should include a discussion of the anticipated destruction of aquatic habitat and associated fauna from the impoundment area as a result of spoil deposition in conjunction with con- struction of the port facility. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES Page 8-2, Aquatic Resources - The anticipated loss of aquatic resources from the impoundment area should be discussed in this section. FEDERAL AND STATE INVOLVEMENT Page 9-2, paragraph 1 - It should be noted in the statement that the Bayou Lafourche Auxilliary Channel project is now considered inactive, and is being considered for possible Congressional deauthorization. LAND USE Page 38 - It is noted that the project will result in industrial and commer- cial development on 450 acres of filled land for which the surface and perimeter levees will evidently not exceed a level of about 5 feet above sea level. The risk of flooding is discussed in the statement, and it is stated that storms may raise the water level to depths of 10 feet in the area. K-19 However, no discussion of the probable impacts related to storm-induced flooding, and no information on possible increased losses due to the pro- posed development in a flood prone area have been found. Page A-52, Non-Game Birds - It should be indicated that least terns nest in the Bay Champagne area southeast of the project site. Page A-56, paragraph 4 - The information regarding the status of the American alligator in Louisiana is not accurate. The American alligator is presently classified as threatened in most of coastal Louisiana and endangered in the remainder of the State. Page A-59, paragraph 1 - It should be stated that a water-control structure on the northern edge of the impoundment area still permits some movement of aquatic organisms to and from the impoundment. Page A-59, 60, Fishes - Sampling of aquatic organisms within the impoundment area should be performed to permit a more precise assessment of the impact of spoil disposal within this area. Such site-specific sampling would identify the extent to which estuarine organisms utilize this area. Page A-65 - It is stated that U. S. Bureau of Recreation has funded a boat- launch site in the project area* (Note: The functions of the former Bureau of Outdoor Recreation have been incorporated in a new agency, the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service.) The final statement should state whether the project will impact this facility. The facility received matching funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (L&WCF). The L&WCF Act of 1965, as amended, Section 6(f), states that no property acquired or developed with assistance from the fund shall be converted to other than public outdoor recreation uses without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. If such conversion is anticipated, the State official responsible for administering the L&WCF should be contacted to initiate the process for obtaining the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. In Louisiana, he is Dr. E. Bernard Carrier, Assistant Secretary, Office of Program Development (P. 0. Box 44247, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70804). SUMMARY COMMENTS Phase 4 of the port development is that portion of the overall project for which Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP) funds are presently being requested. In a letter dated March 8, 1976, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) recom- mended to the Department of the Army that the permit authorizing work on Phase 4 be denied unless the roadway on the northern perimeter of the development site was realigned to the south to exclude all open-water areas. The New Orleans District, Corps of Engineers, subsequently furnished the applicant a modified drawing realigning the proposed slip and road location, consistent with FWS recommendations. Based on figures 1-3, 1-6, and 4-3 of this state- ment it appears that the revised alignment has not been followed. Accordingly, we request that, prior to the granting of any Federal funds for implementation K-20 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR General Comments Since the application for funding from the CEIP, Office of the CZM, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce is only for Phase IV, this statement only addresses this phase of the total development. Specific Comments The statement has been corrected to read: "New construction and improvements will require dredging a total of 2.957 million cubic yards of spoil which will result in an average increase in elevation of 3.84 feet at the spoil sites." General Project Description Location of the proposed spoil site is indicated now in Figure 1-4. Acreage of wetland to be filled will be about 30 to 35 acres. The location will be along the flotation canal levee within the impoundment area. Environmental Summary Approximately 170 acres of these acres are wetlands. The statement has been corrected and now includes a discussion of the anticipated impacts of spoiling on wetland wildlife resources. This comment will be given to the Port Commission for their con- sideration. A discussion of this impact has been included. Short-term and Long-term Impacts of the Project A discussion of the anticipated destruction of aquatic habitat and associated fauna from the impoundment area as a result of spoil deposition in conjunction with construction of the port facility has been included. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources A discussion of the anticipated loss of aquatic resources from the impoundment area has been included in this section. Federal and State Involvement The statement reading: "Dredging of Lafourche Auxiliary Channel will be initiated contingent upon availability of rights-of-way and funds" has been deleted. A statement reading: "The Lafourche Auxiliary Channel project is now considered inactive, and is being considered for possible congressional deauthorization" has been added. K-21 Land Use The Greater Lafourche Port Commission will follow in detail the Lafourche Parish Police Jury flood control plan (Picciola & Assoc, Sept. 20, 1978 letter). A statement has been included indicating that least terns nest in the Bay Champagne area southeast of the project site. Paragraph 4 has been changed so that it will be understood that ih^ Louisiana the American Alligator is presently classified as threatened in most of. the coastal area and endangered in the remainder of the state. A sentence stating that a water control structure on the northern edge of the impoundment area still permits some movement of aquatic organisms to and from the impoundment area has been added. In 1974 some samples were taken from the impoundment area at Port Fourchon by pulling a 16 ft trawl for five minutes. The results were as shown in Table A- 14. Based on this information, the researchers con- cluded that they could not dispute the proposed uses of this area by the GLPC on environmental grounds (Whitehurst, Jan. 8, 1975). A sentence has been added stating that this recreational facility will not be adversely impacted by the project. Summary Comments The firm of Picciola and Assoc. Inc ., consulting engineers for the Greater Lafourche Port Commission, are not aware of this realignment. (Picciola & Assoc, Sept. 28, 1978 letter). K-22 U.S. fcrtTKRTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SECRETARY 9-C-18 FEDERAL CENTER 1100 COMMERCE STREET DALLAS, TEXAS 75202 August 16, 1978 Ms. Lisa Jorgenson Department of Commerce Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20235 Dear Ms, Jorgenson: Enclosed is a comment received from our Office of Deepwater Ports con- cerning the EIS covering Port Fourchon. We are awaiting review and comments from our modal administrations at the local level and will consolidate and forward them upon receipt. Sincerely, 4j . IJb^rJLt^ — U. Ragsdade Acting Senior Staff Assistant Enclosure K-23 Form DOT F 1320.1 (1-67) UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT M etnorandum DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OFFICE OF DEEPWATER PORTS date: August 7, 1978 subject: Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Port Fourchon Development Plan, Louisiana from : Deputy Director Office of Deepwater Ports In reply refer to: TO Acting DOT Secretarial Representative Region VI We have reviewed the subject Statement and offer the following for your consideration. Section 2, Article C, page 2-5: The estimate of 250 permanent, full time persons employed by LOOP, Inc., is in conflict with the figures in the final EIS for the deepwater port project. LOOP'S estimate (FEIS par. C. 8. 4. 2.1) is for about 139 permanent employment positions with a total annual payroll of $2,9 million. In addition, about 130 new jobs would be created in the region due to supplier and induced effects representing new earnings of $12 million. ^&uuuU>\ {.{z®****^ Ernest T. Bauer K-24 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, OFFICE OF DEEPWATER PORTS The estimate figures used in Section 2 were taken from the GSRI study of the Port Fourchon Development Program, 1974, although Loop, Inc., estimates that approximately only half of these employees (-130) are likely to reside in Lafourche Parish (Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 1977a) The figures in the final EIS for the deepwater port project (Department of Transportation, 1976) were developed later than the GSRI report (1974) . K-25 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD MAILING ADDRESS: U.S. COAST GUARD WASHINGTON. D.C. PHONE &WEP-7/73) 202-426-3300 *8 SEP 1978 • Ms Lisa Jorgenson Coastal Energy Impact Program Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 White Haven Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20235 Dear Ms Jorgenson: The concerned operating administrations and staff of the U. S. Coast Guard have reviewed the draft environmental impact statement for the proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. The Coast Guard has no objec- tions to the proposal since it will not significantly affect Coast Guard activities and responsibilities in the Lafourche area. The following comments are offered, however. Implementation of the proposal is expected to result in a minor increase in search and rescue and pollution incidents. These are expected to be manageable by increasing personnel at Coast Guard Station Grand Isle. The negative effects described on page 6-2 regarding water pollution from vessels can be mitigated by providing waste oil and sewage pump-off stations as part of the Phase 4 slip construction. The opportunity to review the environmental impact statement for this proposal is appreciated. Sincerely , BARROW vv. w. Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard Chief, Office of Marine Environment and Systems [55] It's a law we can live with. K-26 United States Region 6 Arkansas, Louisiana, Environmental Protection 1201 Elm Street Oklahoma, Texas, Agency Dallas TX 75270 New Mexico ssEPA September 20, 1978 Ms. Lisa Jorgenson Coastal Energy Impact Program Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Ms. Jorgenson: We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Port Fourchon Development Plan, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. The pro- posed project, Phase 4, is an addition to an existing complex. The total Port Fourchon development by the Greater Lafourche Port Commis- sion includes seven distinctive but interrelated phases, three of which have been completed. The fourth phase of the development program consists of: a) Dredging a channel and slip and fill in Pass Fourchon' s left de- scending bank, at a point about 1.7 miles above the mouth of the water- way, approximately 8 miles southerly from Leeville, Louisiana, in Lafourche Parish and relocating and maintaining an entrance channel at Bell Pass; b) stone jetty improvements at Belle Pass (Bayou Lafourche); c) floatation canal; d) drainage improvements, and e) bulkhead for docking. Phase 4, parts a, b, c, d, and e, have been granted permits from the Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District, under Section 10 of the River and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899 (dd U.S.C. 403), and under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (86 Stat 816, PL 92-500), according to the Draft EIS. We classify your Draft Environmental Impact Statement as L0-1. Specifi- cally, we have no objections to the project as it relates to Environ- mental Protection Agency's (EPA) legislative mandates. The statement contained sufficient information to evaluate adequately the possible environmental impacts which could result from project implementation. Our classification will be published in the Federal Register in accordance with our responsibility to inform the public of our views on proposed Federal actions, under Section 309 of the Clean Air Act. Definitions of the categories are provided on the enclosure. Our pro- cedure is to categorize the EIS on both the environmental consequences of the proposed action and on the adequacy of the Impact Statement at the draft stage, whenever possible. K-27 z We appreciated the opportunity to review the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Please send our office two copies of the Final Environmental Impact Statement at the same time it is sent to the Office of Federal Activities, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Sincerely, Adlene Harrison Regional Administrator (6A) Enclosure K-28 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE ACTION LP - Lack of Objections EPA has no objections to the proposed action as described in the draft impact statement; or suggests only minor changes in the proposed action. ER - Environmental Reservations EPA has reservations concerning the environmental effects of certain aspects of the proposed action. EPA believes that further study of suggested alternatives or modifications is required and has asked the originating Federal agency to re-assess these aspects. EU - Environmentally Unsatisfactory EPA believes that the proposed action is unsatisfactory because of its potentially harmful effect on the environment. Furthermore, the Agency believes that the potential safeguards which might be utilized may not adequately protect the environment from hazards arising from this action. The Agency recommends that alternatives to the action be analyzed further (including the possibility of no action at all). ADEQUACY OF THE IMPACT STATEMENT Category 1 - Adequate The draft impact statement adequately sets forth the environmental impact of the proposed project or action as well as alternatives reasonably available to the project or action. Category 2 - Insufficient Information . EPA believes the draft impact statement does not contain sufficient information to assess fully the environmental impact of the proposed project or action. However, from the information submitted, the Agency is able to make a preliminary determination of the impact on the environment. EPA has requested that the originator provide the information that was not included in the draft statement. Category 3 - Inadequate EPA believes that the draft impact statement does not adequately assess the environmental impact of the proposed project or action, or that the statement inadequately analyzes reasonably available alternatives. The Agency has requested more information and analysis concerning the potential environmental hazards and has asked that substantial revision be made to the impact statement. If a draft statement is assigned a Category 3, no rating will be made of the project or action, since a basis does not generally exist on which to make a determination. K-29 \ Environmental £ Defense * Fund 475 PARK AVENUE, SOUTH, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10016/212 686-4191 October 13, 1978 Miss Lisa Jorgenson Coastal Energy Impact Program Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street N.W. Washington, D. C. 20235 Re: Draft EIS, Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan LaFourche Parish, Louisiana Dear Miss Jorgenson: We have reviewed a copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement of the proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, La Fourche Parish, Louisiana (July 1978). We have also reviewed the comments of the Natural Resources Defense Council furnished to you by a letter dated September 29, 1978 and endorse those comments. We find the proposed use of federal funds to foster development in wetland and floodplain areas to be totally un- acceptable. The Louisiana Coastal Zone, which comprises some 25-30% of the country's coastal wetlands, is in a state of collapse, now exceeding 16.5 square miles per year. This collapse, which mani- fests itself in the form of land loss and severe water quality problems, results directly from man's intervention in the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Basin deltaic systems. Any further intervention in this system, particularly with the support of federal funds, must be evaluated in the context of the entire Louisiana coastal zone, other forms of interventions, particularly construction of canals, and their impacts. If this rate of collapse of the Louisiana coastal system is to be abated at all, all construction of additional shipping, port, transportation and utility services should utilize, to the maximum extent possible, existing corridors. This would mean that development would take place where degradation has already occurred, rather than introducing new degradation. In addition, such concentration of development would permit control of pollution and more efficient utilization of existing facilities. We question whether this Port Fourchon development plan is consistent with this overall criterion. Where any kind of development does take place, it must comply fully with existing laws and regulations regarding the protection of wetlands and floodplains. This proposal is not consistent with all such rules, regulations and Executive Orders, in particular Executive Orders 11988 and 1990. OFFICES IN: NEW YORK CITY (NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS); WASHINGTON, DC; BERKELEY, CALIF.; DENVER, COL. K-30 This proposed development, furthermore, is justified on the ground that some such alternative is necessitated by the Louisiana offshore oil port (Loop) . We find this kind of justification to be completely unacceptable. The Loop project can and should be designed in such a way that it makes use of existing facilities in established corridors such as the Mississippi River and the Port of New Orleans itself, rather than inducing the dispersion of development and establishment of new transportation and utility corridors throughout the Louisiana coastal zone. As far as the eveluation of this development plan is concerned, no particular design for the Loop project should be taken for granted. Federal funds in this kind of a program should be utilized to foster a design for the Loop project which will maximize use of existing, well-established transportation/pipeline corridors. Thus, the claim that destruction of wetland resources at Port Fourchon is necessitated by Loop is unacceptable. Yours very truly, s T. B. unsel K-31 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND** All along coastal Louisiana, wetlands and floodplain areas are to be found. On these grounds there would not be a suitable site to locate the proposed port development in Louisiana's coastal zone. The area chosen for the Port Fourchon development (at the end of an established development corridor, close to the Loop, Inc., project) seems to be the one that offers the least potential for environmental damage to Louisiana's coastal zone. The Port Fourchon facility is utilizing an existing corridor. The Bayou Lafourche corridor has been a development area since the early days of settlement. This proposed site has for some time been levied and used as a dredge spoil site. The proposed area, therefore, is no longer part of a wetland area nor has it been for more than 10 years. The levees protect the site from flood damages. The proposed site was reviewed under criteria established by the Department of Commerce Flood- plain and Wetland Guidelines and found to be adequate. The proposed development will follow and comply with the Lafourche Parish Police Jury Flood Control plan in all details (Picciola & Assoc. Inc., 1978). Several studies undertaken* before selecting a definite site for the Loop, Inc. project. Because of physical and environmental reasons the location of the offshore port off the mouth of Bayou Lafourche (19% miles S.E. of Belle Pass at Port Fourchon) was preferred. This is a fact that cannot be overlooked. Due to the distance and wetland areas in- volved from this site to the Port of New Orleans, it is not desirable or practical to use the Mississippi River development corridor, or the New Orleans Port facilities in connection with the Loop project. *Louisiana Superport Studies: Stone, James H. e_t al. , Report No. 3, Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana State University, prepared for the Louisiana Draft Harbor and Terminal Authority, October 31, 1973 Final Environmental Impact 14(f) Statement, Local Deepwater Port License Application, Deepwater Ports Project, Office of Marine Environment and Systems, Department of Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard, Vols. 1 & 2, 1976 ** This comment was received after the established deadline for receiving comments. K-32 Natural Resources Defense Coundil, Inc. 917 I5TH STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 802 737-50OO Western Office New York Office 2345 YALE STREET 122 EAST 42ND STREET palo alto, calif. 94306 September 29 1978 new york, n.v. 10017 415 327-IO80 212 949-OO49 Ms. Lisa Jorgenson Coastal Energy Impact Program Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20235 Dear Ms. Jorgenson, After reviewing the contents of the Draft Environmen- tal Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, La Fourche Parish, Louisiana, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (NRDC) must register its opposition to CEIP funding for the project. NRDC questions the necessity of the project and the validity and adequacy of the DEIS in several areas. Further, we believe that the Port Fourchon Development Plan is inconsistent with the objectives of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA) ; it is in direct conflict with the guidelines imposed by Executive Order 11988 on Floodplain Management. Finally, NRDC believes that allocation of CEIP funds in this manner actually fosters development in the coastal zone rather than mitigating the impact of energy development in the coastal area. Discussion of these areas of contention follow. Need for the Project NRDC is not convinced of the need for expansion of Port Fourchon by the evidence presented in the DEIS. Projections of potential users and their impacts contained in the 1974 Gulf South Research Institute (GSRI) study are probably invalid due to the age of the study (1974) and fundamental changes made, in the development plan since completion of the study. The Port Fourchon Development would supposedly serve the "needs" of the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP) as a major use of the project. Yet the DEIS, on page 2-3, only lists a small boat port to be used by LOOP, and ignores Tjfti 73 100% Recycled Paper ^ „„ Ms. Lisa Jorgenson September 29, 1978 Page 2 the impacts associated with LOOP'S onshore terminal location at Port Fourchon. Inadequate Areas of the DEIS Based on our belief that the projected uses of Port Fourchon are inflated, NRDC assails the lack of a non- structural alternative which reflects a reduced projected scope of uses. Nonstructural Alternative #3 on page 3-11 does not meet this need; it should include the erosion abatement measures rather than the barge slip. The asserted need for this barge slip is at issue; NRDC believes the present facilities should be protected by the erosion abatement procedures, without additional unnecessary construction. The DEIS also fails to adequately surmise the impacts of the port development in Brown Pelican habitat, or other impacts on local fauna. The unavoidable adverse impacts in hydrology, fauns, archeological sites and aesthetic quality all appear to be too great to justify the development. A cumulative review of such projects' impacts reveal the rapid decline in wildlife and their habitat along Louisiana's coast A potential benefit of the port expansion, that of con- centrating development in one area rather than allowing un- controlled development to spread in the surrounding vicinity, cannot be guaranteed. Since this consolidation would be a principal argument for the development, strict conditions that would limit expansion outside Port Fourchon should be incorporated as a minimum prerequisite to any development in Port Fourchon. NFIP/FDPA/E.O. 11988 Compliance As pointed out in the DEIS, the proposed development does not meet the guidelines of the National Flood Insurance Program or the Flood Disaster Protection Act. This is unac- ceptable. Because the area is flood and hurricaneprone, it is inappropriate for development on the scale proposed. The floodproof ing standards and the flood insurance rates under the Federal Insurance Agency that would be required for Port Fourchon are probably prohibitive to the potential users cited, and thus further erode arguments supporting the overall need for the project. K-34 Ms. Lisa Jorgenson September 29, 1978 Page 3 The strongest regulations that properly restrict NOAA's activities in regard to this project, however, are those promulgated to enforce President Carter's Executive Order 11988 on Floodplain Management. NRDC expects the agency to observe all the E.O. procedures and guidelines. We believe that this will preclude approval for CEIP funding for the project in its present form. In summary, NRDC opposes use of CEIP funds for the proposed Port Fourchon Development. The potential benefits of the project do not seem to outweigh its enormous adverse environmental impacts. Allocation of funds in this manner is inconsistent with the Congressional intent in creating the Coastal Energy Impact Program. Finally, Executive Order 11988 supports the national need to better protect our flood- plains, and seriously undermines any arguments for approval of the Port Fourchon Development. Thank you for the opportunity to review the DEIS; we hope you will seriously consider our objections to the project. Please contact us again for any further information deemed necessary to your final project evaluation. Peter S. Holmes Intern Atlantic Coast Project cc: James Trip, Environmental Defense Fund K-35 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. Need for the Project Projections of potential users and their impacts contained in the 1974 Gulf South Research Institute (GSRI) study were based on the assumption that 1,000 acres would be available for development. The fundamental change in the development plan since the completion of the study has been the decision to develop only 450 acres under Phase IV. Thus, there has been a reduction in plans and not an expansion. According to Mr. Irvin Melancon of Loop, Inc. (Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 1977), the anticipated uses of the Port Fourchon area associated with Loop, Inc., are as an initial staging area and logistical support center for crews and boats. If suitable fabricating facilities are made available at Port Fourchon, it is probable that a substantial amount of support work for pipeline and receiving facilities would locate at the port. Inadequate Areas of the DEIS The belief that the projected uses of Port Fourchon are inflated is an assumption not supported by facts. There is no nonstructural alternative #3 on page 3-11 or in any part of the DEIS. Strict conditions limiting expansion outside Port Fourchon is a matter under the jurisdiction of the Lafourche Planning Commission and the Lafourche Parish Police Jury. The parish is also now in the process of developing a coastal zone management plan which would contain specific guidelines related to development in their coastal area. Impacts related to endangered species and other local fauna are now covered in more detail in sections 6, 7, and in Appendix I. The natural hydrologic conditions of the study area have already been altered by previous construction activities such as leveeing the area and spoil deposition. Thus, it no longer functions as it did under primeval hydrologic conditions. A mitigation proposal for archaeological sites has been recommended (See page J-10) . From the aesthetic point of view, there is an existing oil related facility south of the impounded area to be developed. Oil rigs can be seen from the beach all along the horizon. Thus, the proposed facility appears not to be incongruous with the existing landscape. K-36 NFIP/FDPA/E.O. 11988 compliance All along coastal Louisiana, wetlands and flooplains are to be found. On these grounds, there would not be a suitable site to locate the proposed port development in Louisiana's coastal zone. The area chosen for the Port Fourchon development (at the end of an established development corridor, close to the Loop, Inc., project) seems to be the one that offers the least potential for environmental damage to Louisiana's coastal zone. The proposed development will follow and comply with the Lafourche Parish Police Jury Flood Control Plan in all details (Picciola & Assoc. Inc., 1978). K-37 Nicholls State University COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES * TECHNOLOGY THIBOOAUX. LOUISIANA 70301 DEPARTMENT OF NURSING I. AUOUSt 1. 1978 P. O. Box 2143 ALLIED HEALTH TECHNOLOGY nuyua w I, i^/u UNIVERSITY STATION Ms. Lisa Jorgenson Coastal Energy Impact Program Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Madam: Thank you for forwarding to me for review the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Port Fourcheon Development Plan, Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. I wish to express concern about two items, wastewater treatment and water supply systems as discussed in Section A, Item B--Impact on Other Community Facilities. Sewage There is a sewage treatment plant in Thibodaux and Lockport serving those populations. The balance of the parish population is untreated. I cannot agree with this input in that the current waste- water treatment system can accommodate this increment in growth. Water Supply The current water supply system is barely adequate in the communities of La Fourche Parish. It appears doubtful that neighboring communities could accommodate this increment of growth without expansion. Throughout the report, I fail to find input from the local Parish Health Unit regarding a climate for the health of the human residents. However, the wildlife residents are considered. Yours very truly, Mary G. Blackmon, Head Dept. of Nursing & Allied Health Tech. MB/dg K-38 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM NICHOLLS STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF NURSING AND ALLIED HEALTH TECHNOLOGY Sewage Part of Phase IV of the development of Port Fourchon facilities is providing suitable industrial and commercial sites for development. Pro- jected maximum population related to such actions is not expected to occur suddenly, but gradually. Future Phase V of the proposed total Port development calls for construction of a sewage system including sewerage treatment. Thus, the current wastewater treatment system would not have to accommodate the increment associated with the Port facilities. Water Supply The G.L.P.C. completed a water distribution system with a 300,000 gallon elevated storage tank during Phase I of its development. There are no residents in the Port Fouchon development area. There are, however, several wildlife species which use the area as their habitat K-39 OFFICERS EMILE E. PRATTINI. SR MEMBERSHIP JEFFERSON PARISH JAMES J. DONELON WILLIAM J. WHITE Mtyor. City of Gretna M. R. MclLWAIN FLOYD A. SINCLAIR ORLEANS PARISH ERNEST N. MORIAL Mayor. City of New Oilcans SIDNEY J. BARTHELEMY Councilmenat Large JOSEPH I. GIARRUSSO Councilman at La' ge EMILO J. DUPRE DR. LANG?TON F. REED ST. BERNARD PARISH ROY H. GONZALES Police Jury President JOHN A. METZLER GREG J. LANNES, JR. EMILE E. PRATTINI. SR. ST. TAMMANY PARISH EARL D. BROOM Police Jury President SHANNON E. DAVIS Police Jurot ERNEST COOPER Mayor. City of Covington JOHN B. IBOS RICHARD P. KELLEY STATE OF LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT GEORGE A. FISCHER August 16, 1978 Ms. Lisa Jorgenson Coastal Energy Impact Program Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehave Street, N.W. Washington. D.C. 20235 GONAL NNING MISSION I ;JEFFERSON • ORLEANS :BS*NARD • ST. TAMMANY PARISHES Dear Ms. Jorgenson: Subject: Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan. Lafourche Parish, Louisiana The Regional Planning Commission has reviewed the subject application which is being submitted to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Coastal Zone Management. It was determined at the Regional Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, August 15, 19 78, that the proposed project does not conflict with the regional comprehensive planning process in progress under the Regional Planning Commission's program. The proposed project has also been reviewed and recommended by the staff of the Regional Planning Commission. Sincerely, REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION