# ICW Dredging Adjacent To West Bay... AGAIN



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

The Army Corp. of Engineers are planning on dredging the ICWW from the Causeway to Bastrop, and I'll be damned if they're going to cover more North shoreline grass and oyster reefs in West Bay. 
All the interested parties like Galveston Bay Foundation & TP&W are on the same wavelength, looking for alternative disposal sites. 
I've contacted the GLO also, but ultimately the ACE can, and will do what they want without political pressure from the groups above and interested fishermen like us.
So far CCA has not been interested(and they weren't in 2012), so if anyone has a contact there, we could use some of their advocacy. Here's a link to the guy in charge of the project.The COE project manager for this segment is Seth Jones (409-766-3068; [email protected]). You may wish to contact him directly to discuss your concerns.


----------



## Texxan1 (Dec 31, 2004)

that totally sucks.... You can count on me to help anyway i can Kenny... That was BS last time and could be worse this time... 

Let us all know how to help.... 

I will start by making a few calls, since i was in on it the last time.


----------



## Stumpgrinder (Feb 18, 2006)

There are huge spoil banks in place & existing. Why can they not simply put the spoil atop the spoil bank ?


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

Stumpgrinder said:


> There are huge spoil banks in place & existing. Why can they not simply put the spoil atop the spoil bank ?


Apparently it's inconvenient for the contractor!:headknock
They want to use the silt to fill in gaps in the spoil banks and stabilize the banks.
This is the response from The GBF. It was involved in 2012 as well:See the following from Scott at GBF. He mentions working to find other spoil options including private land North of the ICW.

Hi Ken-
I have made inquiry with Bob Stokes, our president, but this week he has been out of the office more than in. I wanted to hear from him first if he was part of an agreement to place material in alternate locations before I checked with the agencies. He just sent me some correspondence from 2012 showing some recommendations that we shared with the Corps. They were:

a. The Corps will immediately do a seagrass survey at placement area (â€œPAâ€) 62 to determine how much seagrass is there and where it is located specifically. 
b. The Corps will monitor impacts at PA 63 where the dredging has already taken place so we have a formal record of what the long term impacts to the seagrass there are. 
c. The Corps will create an inter-agency coordination team to discuss the dredging on the Inter-Coastal between Sabine Lake and Matagorda ahead of time in the future and also develop a full monitoring plan for disposal at PA 63 and PA 62.
d. The Corps will attempt to minimize impacts to seagrass from the disposal that has yet to occur in PA 62. First, you will look at taking up to half the dredge material that is still set to be placed in PA 62 and place it on private property north of the intra-coastal as beneficial use material (this idea was actually first suggested by e-mail Thursday by Carolyn Murphy, rather than discussed in person Wednesday). Second, for what material still must go in PA 62, you will work to ensure the dredge material is placed on the upland part of the island and not directly into west bay. You will also move the dredge pipe multiple times to ensure no more than a thin layer will be placed onto any one area. 
e. If the monitoring shows that the disposal has killed any seagrass in the disposal areas, you will consider mitigation for those impacts. We did not discuss any details about what exactly that mitigation might be, but we agreed to discuss it in the future if it becomes necessary.

Not sure if you have already looked at it, but if you get a chance, take a look at the North GIWW Interagency Coordination Team info on the Corps Navigation webpage at http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Missions/Navigation.aspx and have looked at the Bellaire Environmental report. So, some of the items above were addressed.

I need to find out if the other recommendations were followed as well as get some answers to some related questions, so I just sent an email to staff at Corps, USFWS, NMFS, TPWD to see if the following questions can be answered; I gave them your email and I asked any staff that have an official agency response to cc me if they reply to you directly:

1. In the last round of maintenance dredging, was there an agreement made as a result of conversations by the Corps, resource agencies and perhaps GBF that the materials would be placed in alternate areas as Mr. Luce contends? I personally just recall email and conversations that the contractor would move the pipe around some so material did not pile up as much, but I am not sure if that recollection is accurate.
2. In the last round of maintenance dredging, did the contractor place the material as ultimately directed by the Corps?
3. In the last round, did agency personnel perform any monitoring of the contractorâ€™s placement of the material?
4. In this round, will agency personnel perform any monitoring of the contractorâ€™s placement of the material?
5. As a result of the last round of placement of material onto the seagrasses, will the Corps have the contractor do anything differently this round to minimize impacts?
6. How about in future rounds, i.e. will the ICT look into practices to further reduce or even eliminate impacts (e.g. lots of movement of the dredge material pipe so that material does not pile up any deeper than a agreed to depth, BU placement to the west of the GIWW, and/or placement into other areas that do not have seagrass?)
7. I see from the Bellaire report that there were some substantial impacts to seagrasses. Are we at a point where we can say those impacts are only temporary or are they permanent? If not, when might we be able to make that determination? If the impacts are temporary, will the Corps perform any type of mitigation for temporal impacts? If permanent, will the Corps perform any type of mitigation?

To me, the biggest questions are #4, #5, #6 and #7.

Will get back to you with any responses I receive. If you get any responses and I am not ccâ€™ed on them, can you forward to me?

We have been doing our best to make sure the impacts are minimized or eliminated, and will continue to do so. Woud be great to have some eyes on the work, but we first need to confirm what the placement plan is for this cycle, so folks will know if the contractor is doing the right thing.


----------



## okmajek (May 29, 2012)

Totally sucks ... it will definitely be way worse this time. ..
we spend a lot of time on the NS in the winter. . ! I'm for putting it on the north side of the ICW..


----------



## Clint Sholmire (Nov 9, 2005)

*West bay*

That spoil bank is from what I was told is a ducks unlimited refuge.


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*Spoils*



Clint Sholmire said:


> That spoil bank is from what I was told is a ducks unlimited refuge.


I might be wrong but I thought Halls Bayou Hunting Club owned most of it.


----------



## redexpress (Apr 5, 2010)

We could jam the ICW with center consoles and all of us wearing "I can't breathe" T-shirts. 
Somebody call Channel 13.
Seriously.


----------



## sea hunt 202 (Nov 24, 2011)

no justice no dredging.


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

gater said:


> I might be wrong but I thought Halls Bayou Hunting Club owned most of it.


They own property to the North (mainland marsh), but the State owns the spoils I think.


----------



## leadhead10 (May 14, 2010)

redexpress said:


> We could jam the ICW with center consoles and all of us wearing "I can't breathe" T-shirts.
> Somebody call Channel 13.
> Seriously.


Count me in for 25ft and 2 shirts!

Subscribed..


----------



## JimG (May 2, 2005)

I cannot believe it is happening again. It is unlawful to tear up seagrass with my prop, but the GBF, CCA etc lets them pump mud on top of it? Has any of the grass come back from the previous dumping?


----------



## planohog (Nov 1, 2006)

X2 22' for blockaid ( xl t-shirt ) why is TPWD not interested. unless they got paid.

--planohog


----------



## JimG (May 2, 2005)

Has the grass grown back like they said it would?


----------



## Brian Castille (May 27, 2004)

This may be a dumb question, but can they use the dredge material and make an island or two out in the middle of the bay somewhere? I'm sure more expensive to do so but could be used to make something beneficial to the ecosystem.


----------



## JimG (May 2, 2005)

Got a quick reply from Bob Stokes with the Galveston Bay Foundation. They are aware of it, and are working with the Corps to prevent the disaster we had last time...


----------



## capt. david (Dec 29, 2004)

Just this out!


----------



## Reel Threat (Aug 12, 2005)

According to the info. shown on the drawing, this is not a Corp. of Eng. maintenance project along the ICW. The purpose of this project is to cut a new channel and a work area into Greens Lake for Devon Energy Production Co. to drill an oil well. It appears that they will construct a "Beneficial Use Area" to pump the spoils into. This may be similar to what they did next to the "Goat Pen" (Hog Pen) area in East Bay where they created a bunch of small sand islands behind a geotube barrier. Once completed it looks like the total opening to Greens Lake will be reduced to less than 500-feet between the Beneficial Use barrier and the rock breakwater.

Even if this project is environmentally safe, Greens Lake is going to be a disaster zone for a long time during the construction phase and will never be the same after the well site goes into production.


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

Reel Threat said:


> According to the info. shown on the drawing, this is not a Corp. of Eng. maintenance project along the ICW. The purpose of this project is to cut a new channel and a work area into Greens Lake for Devon Energy Production Co. to drill an oil well. It appears that they will construct a "Beneficial Use Area" to pump the spoils into. This may be similar to what they did next to the "Goat Pen" (Hog Pen) area in East Bay where they created a bunch of small sand islands behind a geotube barrier. Once completed it looks like the total opening to Greens Lake will be reduced to less than 500-feet between the Beneficial Use barrier and the rock breakwater.
> 
> Even if this project is environmentally safe, Greens Lake is going to be a disaster zone for a long time during the construction phase and will never be the same after the well site goes into production.


What Capt.David posted is A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PROJECT.
*Galveston Bay Foundation, TP&W, and the GLO are on our side, and more or less in agreement that the designated spoil sites #62, #63, #64 should be avoided along the North shoreline of West Bay. They are all talking with the ACE about alternative sites.*


----------



## capt. david (Dec 29, 2004)

Yes it is different but just as bad. No matter where they dump the dredge material it will be bad. They ruined the fishing around Atkinson Island years ago with dredge material. Pushing those barges relates to big $$$. Never going to stop the dredging or some of the damage it may cause to the area. Corp will allow dredge company to mitigate some feel good project to offset the damage.


----------



## fishjunky (Jun 4, 2009)

Sigh, here we go again. I've been way more involved in the last 2 cycles than I care to admit. Time before last, Phil Glass was with NFW and worked a deal with the 19 landowners north of ICW to take most of the spoil. The remainder was deposited behind berms to build the spoil banks. 

Last cycle, ACE gave me a multitude of answers as to why they were doing it the way they were. Rebuild spoil-but they did not do it behind containment. Lay a thin layer to nourish seagrass- It has still not recovered in those areas. They were supposed to consult stakeholders in the future- Stokes of GBF, NFW, TPW, etc. to ensure it is done responsibly in the future. I paid to get their project documents, including their "latest" 1970's environmental impact study. I made several calls and spoke to their project manager, as well as legal. I paid to fly the area and take pics. I spoke with Stokes, I spoke with NFW, I spoke with TPW. I rattled all the cages a "little guy" could rattle. 

Hope someone more effective than me can guide this latest project. Look guys, this isn't going away. The ICW has to continue to be usable for its intended purpose. I personally have no problem with that. Please, please ACE do it in a responsible manner that helps north side landowners, rebuilds existing spoil banks (85% damage from barge traffic by ACE own accord)while protecting the seagrass and pocket oyster reefs along that stretch of WGB.

Just my 2 cents

fj


----------



## LosingNemo (Feb 6, 2012)

capt. david said:


> Yes it is different but just as bad. No matter where they dump the dredge material it will be bad. They ruined the fishing around Atkinson Island years ago with dredge material. Pushing those barges relates to big $$$. Never going to stop the dredging or some of the damage it may cause to the area. Corp will allow dredge company to mitigate some feel good project to offset the damage.


This is incorrect. USACE does not "allow" the dredge company to mitigate land reclamation. Keep in mind that the dredging contractor excavates and pumps where the Owner (USACE) tells them to do so.


----------



## let's go (Nov 14, 2005)

Just a note about capt. david's post regarding the oil well proposal. It'd dated 2005. 

Regarding the ICW, if they were doing this in the LLM and covering acres of grass there would be a much bigger uproar. Since it's "just Galveston" a lot of folks won't give a ****. ****** me off.


----------



## Profish00 (May 21, 2004)

let's go said:


> Just a note about capt. david's post regarding the oil well proposal. It'd dated 2005. .


Wonder if they moved it to where they are drilling now to the west.


----------



## 3CK (Oct 5, 2010)

capt. david said:


> Just this out!


Where did you find that?
Says 2005?


----------



## Profish00 (May 21, 2004)

Copyright 2014 Belaire Environmental,

http://www.belaireenv.com/projects/permitsupport/planning/


----------



## oldredsled (Oct 13, 2014)

kenny said:


> ...So far CCA has not been interested(and they weren't in 2012), so if anyone has a contact there, .......


However the CCA would like to remind you of the 2015 membership dues must be paid now, and and look for the 2015 banquet calendar, almost a banquet every week!!!


----------



## Solodaddio (Mar 22, 2014)

redexpress said:


> We could jam the ICW with center consoles and all of us wearing "I can't breathe" T-shirts.
> Somebody call Channel 13.
> Seriously.


Lol........ Good stuff!


----------



## OnedayScratch (May 23, 2012)

Brian Castille said:


> This may be a dumb question, but can they use the dredge material and make an island or two out in the middle of the bay somewhere? I'm sure more expensive to do so but could be used to make something beneficial to the ecosystem.


Your idea is a good one. However, they have determined that the spoil material is contaminated, typically. That is why there are permitted spoil dumping areas. The heavy metals sink into the silted in channels, thus having to be removed.
My question is this; is this a maintenance project or a construction project? If it is a maintenance project it will fall under existing environmental permits. A construction project will need new studies and permits. If it falls under the later, then the scope can be changed and the bid recended to the contractor. This may allow the public their 2 cents in voicing and even helping with the placement of the spoil.
Unfortunately, it sounds like the first option. The maintenance function of dredging a channel should have time limits. Every two years, maybe five or even ten. It depends on how the permit is structured.

Go hit up your county commissioners and judge. They love this kind of stuff.


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*Ok*



oldredsled said:


> However the CCA would like to remind you of the 2015 membership dues must be paid now, and and look for the 2015 banquet calendar, almost a banquet every week!!!


So what did CCA tell you when you called them about this upcoming dredging.


----------



## Profish00 (May 21, 2004)

They are out in front of deer island this morning.


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

The work has begun. I saw the dredge adjacent to Duck Hunter's Point in the ICW. I just got this back from Scott at GBF. 

"Thanks, Ken. They are supposed to do any work that would wind up placing material on any submerged seagrasses during the environmental window. Believe that is the end of this month. The good news is that I believe they were going to build berms in the placement area to better contain the material. I had originally heard that any berm building would only be for marsh cells in our Pierce Marsh, but it sounds like they will try some berms in PAs."

Keep an eye out if you're in that area. If you seeing them discharge spoil into the bay, I need to know ASAP.


----------



## buckweet (Aug 8, 2011)

*Dredge*

Saw it this morning, too foggy when I went by to get good look. 
Surprised heck out of me it was not there last week, pops out at you in fog. Last round was horrible, hope common sense is used this time


----------



## Profish00 (May 21, 2004)

They are making a mess of it just south west of greens a north side of west bay


----------



## topwatrout (Aug 25, 2009)

Soule posted some pictures from a plane today and looks like they already covered an area of grass in between Greens and Carancahua...not good not good


----------



## HMTF (Oct 31, 2011)

topwatrout said:


> Soule posted some pictures from a plane today and looks like they already covered an area of grass in between Greens and Carancahua...not good not good


Where can these pics be found? Would like to see them.


----------



## Goags (May 28, 2004)

HMTF said:


> Where can these pics be found? Would like to see them.


http://2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/showthread.php?t=1820458


----------



## BBCAT (Feb 2, 2010)

Seagrass lives matter!
Oyster lives matter!


----------



## shallowist (May 28, 2009)

If time permits, I will try to get pics with the water back up in the flats. It was very hard to see the extent of mud dispersion.


----------



## okmajek (May 29, 2012)

I'm going to fishing and looking Sunday. .
Doesn't look good. ..


----------



## kenny (May 21, 2004)

GOOD NEWS! 
It looks like we made a difference. Thanks to all of you that emailed and helped this cycle. Scott Jones at Galveston Bay Foundation did most of the heavy lifting and should be recognized for his hard work. Seth Jones at the ACE was very interested in our input and followed through. He is to be commended as well.

Hi Ken-
I just got off the phone with Seth Jones of the Corps. He provided a report on the West Bay GIWW dredging.

Based on his comments to me and some other preliminary info, it sounds like things ended up as we had hoped, with no visible impacts to the seagrasses this cycle. He sent the me the attached photo taken from the south that shows PA62 post-dredge placement. The berms appear to have held the material in place, with any discharge waters spilling over the weirs on the ends of the rectangular containment area they built. See the discharge in the foreground, which is the south end of the containment area. There is also a weir at the north end of the containment. The weirs were originally going to be located in three locations along the bay-side berm, but the Corps/contractor placed them on the ends instead so that any discharge would go through existing marsh, which provides more filtering. You can see that on the south side that is in the photo foreground.

Based on (1) what I see in the attached photo, (2) the fact that the forums have gone quiet, (3) my phone has quit ringing, and importantly, (4) you emailed me on 3/1 to let me know that you did not see any material on seagrasses, I think the Corps did a good job this cycle to improve on problems we found with the prior cycle.

Also, I spoke to Seth about the photo that was taken from the airplane and posted your forum. He was trying to match it up with existing imagery and believes that the area that fishermen see being covered with fresh dredge spoil is instead an area that has marsh and/or an area where dredge material was placed in the last cycle. He believes that was a low tide so it was exposed. Anyway, the attached photo he sent me makes me feel better that material was not discharged on the seagrasses this cycle. I have asked the resource agencies to go on site to ground truth it to confirm the info that I have received from you.

Heads upâ€¦ Note the northern end of this island (PA 62) in the background. It has eroded very badly and the Corps will likely have to address it the next dredging cycle, which is every 3 years in this section of this reach of the GIWW. I told Seth that GBF would like to be part of the planning effort so that any negative impacts from shoring up PA 62 could be minimized or eliminated. Also note that the Corps has a plan to restore the islands to the south of PA 63 and on down to the mooring basin by the mouth of Chocolate Bay. GBF will stay proactive and engaged in this southern reach as well.

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.

Have a good weekend-
Scott

Scott A. Jones 
Director of Advocacy

[email protected]
Phone: 281-332-3381 x 209 | Cell: 713-376-9686 | Fax: 281-332-3153
www.galvbay.org
17330 Hwy. 3, Webster, TX, 77598
http://galvbay.org/oldsite/enewslett...f_logo_sm2.jpg
Facebook Twitter Youtube
Protecting the natural resources of Galveston Bay since 1987

-----Original Message-----
From: Jones, Seth W SWG [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 3:57 PM
To: Scott Jones <[email protected]>
Subject: Emailing: DJI_0011.jpg

Your message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
attachments:

DJI_0011.jpg


----------

