Writing a coastal proscription, an “unplan”

in People Issues by Admin — September 7, 2009 at 9:00 am | 4 comments

Editor’s note; my most recent post involved diagnosing and prescribing for coastal problems and this Labor Day post continues that theme. At the September 1st meeting of the southeastern Regional Stakeholder Workgroup (RSW) one of the presenters commented that it is far too late to go back to a blank sheet of paper, a new coastal plan. This comment got me thinking about writing an “unplan,” not a prescription but a proscription for the coast.  

A familiar proverb says: The very best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago and the second best time is today. About 18 years ago I dug a small pond and planted four live oaks, ten baldcypress, a pond cypress, a Tupelo-gum, a swamp maple and a river birch in what had been a traditional rectangular suburban yard in Baton Rouge.

Most of these trees are now large* and I’m feeling a little smug. It’s never too late to do the right thing, which applies to coastal planning as well as planting.

A consistent theme of this blog is to hold a public mirror up to what as late as 2007 was called a comprehensive $14 billion coastal restoration program for the entire Mississippi River delta. The program has morphed into what is now referred to as a $100+ billion coastal protection and restoration program. I feel obliged to comment regularly on whether in my humble opinion our coastal emperor is clothed or naked. I see a lot of sunburn.

On that note, a wise friend who shall remain nameless recently confided that he hears some readers of my posts complain that I’m overly critical and pessimistic. He diplomatically suggested that I might consider writing less about problems and more about solutions. I take the comment seriously and this post ends on a constructive note.

No matter what we do or don’t do, south Louisiana faces a much “slimmer” and wetter future in 2100 than in 2009. I say this with great confidence in the geoscience that underlies recent sediment budget data compiled and analyzed by noted geologists Blum and Roberts. These figures are necessarily very imprecise but probably not inaccurate.

The bottom line of Blum and Roberts’ projection is that to prevent the continued loss of portions of south Louisiana through the 21st century would necessitate finding, moving and placing from 40-54 Superdome equivalents (SDEs) of clay, silt and sand each year to offset the volume that sinks and washes away. That scenario is patently absurd.

Nevertheless, the primary reaction to Blum and Roberts’ scenario (see map) is to deny and promulgate a protection plan to lock in place what for seven thousand years has been a dynamic deltaic landscape. This plan would involve rock jetties, concrete flood walls, earthen dikes, floodgates – and huge pumps, all of which deny the reality of geological constraints, climate change and energy availability.

The scientific approach to sustaining parts of the coast has consistently focused on re-managing the lower river, beginning at the Old River Control Structure. Large scale river diversions and other non-structural approaches remain on the table but structural solutions are rapidly taking center stage, and they currently account for 86% of the now $100 billion coastal budget. 

Beginning in 1954 the citizens of Holland dedicated as much of their GDP to pay for structural coastal flood protection as we spend proportionally for national defense. My sense is that Americans would never commit comparable resources to save the poor red state of Louisiana, no matter how effectively we market the national significance of our energy coast.

I’m not advocating giving up. I’m as committed as ever to the cause of saving a sustainable Mississippi River delta but I don’t think we should fight to save the entire landscape in its current form. At this late date our state master plan should be adaptively managed to reflect not what is popular but what is plausible.

Back to the tree planting parable; we’ve squandered a lot of time but it isn’t too late to do the right thing. 

I’m not so naive as to think that the public would agree with scrapping the master plan and writing a new “scrip” to save the coast. Instead I propose to commission a proscription, an outline of what is not possible, given the three “esses:” subsidence, sea level rise and sediment availability.

I propose seeking truly expert advice on what specific portions of the delta landscape cannot realistically be sustained for at least thirty years (the lifespan of a traditional mortgage) and to proscribe costly and futile engineering efforts within those zones. This unplan would include not what we should do but what should be ruled out. Obviously such a “do not resuscitate” proscription would not be popular with those whose property is deemed indefensible. The amazing uproar swirling around an innocuous end-of-life counseling feature of health care reform provides a clue.

I can personally relate to the opposition. In fact I plan to post soon on my beloved moneypit retirement condo on the north shore of Lake Pontchartrain near Madisonville that will presumably fall into an indefensible zone. On the other hand the public at large deserves a realistic appraisal of what to expect within at least a 30 year mortgage horizon. 

Len Bahr

*I also planted a black willow, which very curiously died after only about five years!