# cedar bayou



## cruss

Went to cb monday and the cut was silted in with no flow to the gulf. There was low tide conditions but seeing was disappointing.


----------



## gman1772

That is not news that I wanted to read. Hopefully some runoff will get the cut back in business.


----------



## Stalkin Spots

Hopefully it has more to do with the unusually low tides.


----------



## loco4fishn

*Hmmm*

Smoke screen??? No fish here. Move along


----------



## hanson696

its been like that for over 2 weeks


----------



## Flat's Hunter

. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk


----------



## Spec-Rig.006

Stalkin Spots said:


> Hopefully it has more to do with the unusually low tides.


I'd guess unusually low tides as well. They've been VERY low for 3 weeks. Hopefully that's all it is.


----------



## EliteBoatStorage

Hopefully the money earmarked for maintenance will be used productively!


----------



## Fish4Life

I was there today and you couldn't walk across the mouth without going over your head. Some of y'all will believe anything.


----------



## Taylor1981

Hrmm. I'm guessing an attempt to deter some from going out there?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## aktxla

If the purpose of the post was to deter people from going there, that is a sad statement.


----------



## Fishtexx

aktxla said:


> If the purpose of the post was to deter people from going there, that is a sad statement.


Seems these types are becoming more common on this site, nothing to contribute, nothing positive to add. Just troll, bash, or detract. Sad. I guess they think CB and probably other public water is "their" personal space, everybody keep out! Many of us have fished and shared those waters way before their daddy's...well, you know the rest and they make it obvious where the best part went.


----------



## Sgrem

Should be grounds for instant permanent ban to post known false reports such as this on purpose. Sad indeed. That is not the spirit of this 2cool family.


----------



## etexsaltycat

Maybe he was lost and thought he was in CB... If it's truly malicious then ban the dude.


----------



## SolarScreenGuy

I also thought this was a false report. If CB/VS had closed, it would be big news. Not funny to make a false report like that.
www.solarscreenguys.com
www.houstonshutterpro.com


----------



## cruss

*Reply*

First, I have been going to cb since the 60's so I know where it is. Second, I don't care if any of you idiots go there to fish and third, I was there Monday and there was no flow.the water was low and their was at leas five other boatloads of people their that commented on the lack of water flo. Maybe the low pressure system jacked the water later in the week but bot not Monday. Sad you make an honest observation and the village idiots come out of woodwork.


----------



## Rubberback

From reading about passes on this site I'd have to say a lot of folks want to close them. Just what I read. Personally I like passes.I don't normally fish the passes but all around them. Caught a lot of fish around rollover. 
I fished CB once it was wall to wall people. You know why the place holds fish. 
Don't want a cain but a little disturbance would really help CB.


----------



## Sgrem

Did any one of the six boatloads of yall take one picture?


----------



## SolarScreenGuy

cruss said:


> First, I have been going to cb since the 60's so I know where it is. Second, I don't care if any of you idiots go there to fish and third, I was there Monday and there was no flow.the water was low and their was at leas five other boatloads of people their that commented on the lack of water flo. Maybe the low pressure system jacked the water later in the week but bot not Monday. Sad you make an honest observation and the village idiots come out of woodwork.


FISHFORLIFE says different. The latest opening created at least a 6' channel. That does not close suddenly. 
www.solarscreenguys.com
www.houstonshutterpro.com


----------



## edwardg361

well i'm out here right now it's dark but looks like about 6 inch's of water running out of it, to dark for picture tried.


----------



## Slimshady

SolarScreenGuy said:


> FISHFORLIFE says different. The latest opening created at least a 6' channel. That does not close suddenly.
> www.solarscreenguys.com
> www.houstonshutterpro.com


I could see it happening at a low tide where it turns north and splits into two channels before turning back west. I agree its deep just past the mouth before Vinsons though.


----------



## Taylor1981

This is getting interesting... where is my popcorn.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## lurker

Is it 6ft or 6in?

If 6in, it probably won't be open much longer.


----------



## Spec-Rig.006

Holy **** ... ! Where's the Tylenol ...


----------



## Reel Paradise

Man I love how people just jump to conclusions so quickly. Poster (curss) did not say CB was closing, he said there was no water flow. I have there the past 3 weeks and I can confirm, the water is as deep or deeper than it has ever been but I can also confirm there is almost NO WATER FLOW. In the past it?s hard to stand in the current because it is so strong. The past three weeks there has been NO water flow. I had a piece of Grass in the channel where I was fishing and it did not move for 4 hours. No Flow. I do not know what that means. I hope it is just low tide. We will find out this weekend because there is should be the biggest tide change for the month of July this weekend. I can tell you when there is no water flow, it?s hard to catch fish at CB. I was there 1 month ago and we caught a lot of trout. Past 3 weeks nothing. A lot of boats and no one is catching. Again, I think it will change this weekend as there should be large title movement.


----------



## lurker

Reel Paradise said:


> Man I love how people just jump to conclusions so quickly. Poster (curss) did not say CB was closing, he said there was no water flow. I have there the past 3 weeks and I can confirm, the water is as deep or deeper than it has ever been but I can also confirm there is almost NO WATER FLOW. In the past it?s hard to stand in the current because it is so strong. The past three weeks there has been NO water flow. I had a piece of Grass in the channel where I was fishing and it did not move for 4 hours. No Flow. I do not know what that means. I hope it is just low tide. We will find out this weekend because there is should be the biggest tide change for the month of July this weekend. I can tell you when there is no water flow, it?s hard to catch fish at CB. I was there 1 month ago and we caught a lot of trout. Past 3 weeks nothing. A lot of boats and no one is catching. Again, I think it will change this weekend as there should be large title movement.


He said it was silted in


----------



## Stuart

Silted in is a subjective term.


----------



## Reel Paradise

I stand corrected. I went back and read the post carefully. It is no where near silted it. That said, I don't think he was trying to deceive people either.


----------



## RyanW

I've been out twice in last week. The first post is correct. There are deep spots in the bayou but the mouth is little over knee deep as well as other spots. It is open and there is flow but very shallow in areas. Vinsons is nearly silted in. Bout a 10-15ft wide cut less than knee deep. Could easily deepen back up with stronger tidal flow. Been very low tides and little movement last few weeks.


----------



## DUTY FIRST

RyanW said:


> I've been out twice in last week. The first post is correct. There are deep spots in the bayou but the mouth is little over knee deep as well as other spots. It is open and there is flow but very shallow in areas. Vinsons is nearly silted in. Bout a 10-15ft wide cut less than knee deep. Could easily deepen back up with stronger tidal flow. Been very low tides and little movement last few weeks.


That is to be expected, and was predicted in the engineering report. It's not going to have flow when current isn't flowing. All is well.


----------



## blackjack runner

I was there 07/06 and 07/11. I have been there many times before. There is water flow, but minimal due to the full moon, we have had an extremely low tide for the last several weeks. This has effected CB and VS. There are many areas that are above water due to this. There is no fork after vs with practically no water flow going into VS. The deepest water we found was waist deep which was at the first gut from the surf. Most all of the water was knee deep with minimal flow which early June would have been mid waist to chest with heavy flow. 
We went and waded to VS then the surf, and left due to lack of bent rods. Caught one trout, fat 19" between two of us and left. 
Second visit was roughly same levels. Did not fish the area.


----------



## CCJohn

I was flew over about a week ago with my cousin. Here's the pics if they post up correctly... looked like a minimal flow. Not a healthy opening for a fish pass. Pictures speak a thousand words:


----------



## djwag94

Great Pics, thanks for posting.


----------



## Trouthunter

Man the tide is really low in those pictures. Thanks for posting.

TH


----------



## bigfishtx

Trouthunter said:


> Man the tide is really low in those pictures. Thanks for posting.
> 
> TH


Wonder what time of the day that was? Last sat high tide was 8 am and low was later afternoon. Even at high tide the tide was pretty low. I have seen it a foot lower in August though.


----------



## Spec-Rig.006

... remember when y'all crucified the OP for a sky is falling post ... ?


----------



## pipeliner24

Spec-Rig.006 said:


> ... remember when y'all crucified the OP for a sky is falling post ... ?


Ancient history ðŸ˜Ž


----------



## Stuart

Preface: I like natural passes.

But I hope there are plans and funds already in place to maintain it because that thing will close back in at some point pretty soon. That is my opinion only just based on pictures posted here over the last few years. Looks like they may have already waited too long to float a smaller dredge in there so they will have to essentially cut through land again if it closes.

I know it's not the exact same scenario, but I saw the same thing happen with the mouth of the San Bernard. They cut through solid beach to open the mouth up and when they did holy cow the current absolutely ripped through there. It was scary at times. But ever so methodically the channel started to get a shoulder on it encroaching west to east or north to south just like Cedar Bayou is doing. The Corps could have brought a small dredge in before it got too bad, but didn't and now there is again a beach where there used to be a mouth. I know funds are limited but the millions spent opening went down the drain.


----------



## lure

You would think next time it gets dredged they would put some rock groins on the beach side to prevent this from happening as fast. the rock groins they put in Galveston did a great job slowing down the erosion and they are not even on a pass. Just my opinion, but if your going to spend millions of dollars on this pass every few years what's another million to add rocks and not have to do it nearly as often.


----------



## irbjd

lure said:


> You would think next time it gets dredged they would put some rock groins on the beach side to prevent this from happening as fast. the rock groins they put in Galveston did a great job slowing down the erosion and they are not even on a pass. Just my opinion, but if your going to spend millions of dollars on this pass every few years what's another million to add rocks and not have to do it nearly as often.


Cedar Bayou was engineered to allow/provide for the "mouth" to migrate up and down the beach. Putting in groins would defeat this purpose.


----------



## Spec-Rig.006

What if they installed some interior bulkheads ... ? Like Rollover ... I mean. All you really need is flow to flush the toilet ... doesn't need to be 22' deep ...


----------



## DUTY FIRST

irbjd said:


> Cedar Bayou was engineered to allow/provide for the "mouth" to migrate up and down the beach. Putting in groins would defeat this purpose.


That's right, but the ignorant ones just don't get it. They just gotta state an opinion, no matter how uninformed.

HEY FOLKS, IT'S NOT CLOSING UP. IT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE ENGINEERS PREDICTED! It's migrating as expected and will continue to do so. It will meander, and flow will fluctuate with time and tides. That's what keeps it open.

If you've never seen the engineering report, or talked to the engineers at Coast and Harbor Engineering (the folks who designed the project), Give it a rest !

I'm surprised I have to 'splain this to y'all.


----------



## lurker

DUTY FIRST said:


> That's right, but the ignorant ones just don't get it. They just gotta state an opinion, no matter how uninformed.
> 
> HEY FOLKS, IT'S NOT CLOSING UP. IT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE ENGINEERS PREDICTED! It's migrating as expected and will continue to do so. It will meander, and flow will fluctuate with time and tides. That's what keeps it open.
> 
> If you've never seen the engineering report, or talked to the engineers at Coast and Harbor Engineering (the folks who designed the project), Give it a rest !
> 
> I'm surprised I have to 'splain this to y'all.


It will eventually close without maintenance.


----------



## Blk Jck 224




----------



## Stuart

DUTY FIRST said:


> That's right, but the ignorant ones just don't get it. They just gotta state an opinion, no matter how uninformed.
> 
> HEY FOLKS, IT'S NOT CLOSING UP. IT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE ENGINEERS PREDICTED! It's migrating as expected and will continue to do so. It will meander, and flow will fluctuate with time and tides. That's what keeps it open.
> 
> If you've never seen the engineering report, or talked to the engineers at Coast and Harbor Engineering (the folks who designed the project), Give it a rest !
> 
> I'm surprised I have to 'splain this to y'all.


The engineers that designed the channel also said it would need $2.5m every five to nine years. I'm guessing it is more like every three to four years.

The Corps said the same thing about the San Bernard and it never got maintained and we watched it start to meander as you say down the beach trying to stay open and it eventually silted back in.

Hey, we could have the right kind of storms and tides and weather events that may keep it open for a while or we could have the opposite conditions that could give it the ole coup de grÃ¢ce.


----------



## bigfishtx

Blk Jack, when was that photo taken?


----------



## Spec-Rig.006

DUTY FIRST said:


> That's right, but the ignorant ones just don't get it. They just gotta state an opinion, no matter how uninformed.
> 
> HEY FOLKS, IT'S NOT CLOSING UP. IT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE ENGINEERS PREDICTED! It's migrating as expected and will continue to do so. It will meander, and flow will fluctuate with time and tides. That's what keeps it open.
> 
> If you've never seen the engineering report, or talked to the engineers at Coast and Harbor Engineering (the folks who designed the project), Give it a rest !
> 
> I'm surprised I have to 'splain this to y'all.


You mad bro?


----------



## gater

*Pass*

If that picture is recent that pass is not open. This is exactly why I was against spending (wasting) money on this project.


----------



## irbjd

Stuart said:


> The engineers that designed the channel also said it would need $2.5m every five to nine years. I'm guessing it is more like every three to four years.
> 
> The Corps said the same thing about the San Bernard and it never got maintained and we watched it start to meander as you say down the beach trying to stay open and it eventually silted back in.
> 
> Hey, we could have the right kind of storms and tides and weather events that may keep it open for a while or we could have the opposite conditions that could give it the ole coup de grÃ¢ce.


I think some of the issues with the San Bernard are (1) it wasn't fully engineered (i.e. when CB was opened years ago) and (2) the Freeport jetties have a big adverse impact. Kind of how the Galveston jetties contribute to erosion on Boliver and accretion on East Beach.


----------



## Trouthunter

> Kind of how the Galveston jetties contribute to erosion on Boliver and accretion on East Beach.


And like the POC Jetties have on Pass Cavallo.

TH


----------



## bigfishtx

irbjd said:


> I think some of the issues with the San Bernard are (1) it wasn't fully engineered (i.e. when CB was opened years ago) and (2) the Freeport jetties have a big adverse impact. Kind of how the Galveston jetties contribute to erosion on Boliver and accretion on East Beach.


Simple truth is, engineers are wrong all the time. I hope they are right on this one, but, it looks like it may end up closing if it is not "helped" out.


----------



## Trouthunter

> Blk Jack, when was that photo taken?


Looks like in December of 2007.

http://texascoastgeology.com/passes/cedarbayou12_16_07 13sm.JPG

TH


----------



## Blk Jck 224

bigfishtx said:


> Blk Jack, when was that photo taken?


Hail I don't know...LOL


----------



## irbjd

bigfishtx said:


> Simple truth is, engineers are wrong all the time. I hope they are right on this one, but, it looks like it may end up closing if it is not "helped" out.


I, too, hope they are right about CB. I also think a bull tide would be very helpful. A big volume of water moving through there would do wonders.


----------



## pipeliner24

spec-rig.006 said:


> you mad bro?


it looks like it!!!!!!


----------



## Rubberback

Place needs a good blow. Might happen.


----------



## Reel Paradise

Curious if anyone fished Cedar Bayou last weekend (7/22). I am interested to know if the current flow was any better than recent weeks. I know tides were still low but my tide app shows there should have been some good tidal movement this past weekend.


----------



## hanson696

It wasn't very great but better than it was 2 weeks ago.


----------



## Drundel

I was there for the first time (ever) last Friday (7/28) and there was no flow from the bayou into the gulf. Instead the bayou made its last turn that paralleled the beach front and stopped there. I have no clue if the tide was low or high for there, but there were plenty of folks fishing croaker in the surf (it was pretty rough) and in the bayou catching nice trout.

I was on a topwater mission and got nada. Anyone else there last Friday AM that saw the boat with the shark teeth wrap up front, that was us.


----------



## 2004tamucc

I fished over there sat and Sunday of last weekend. Trout have only been wanting live bait. Lots of rat reds and a few flounder hitting lures. Sunday there was no flow into cedar at the mouth or into Vincent. But over the years has been one of my favorite fishing holes. One day will look silted in a few days later deep guts again. I'm hoping this is just from the crazy low tides we have had and a big tide or storm will clean it back out again.


----------



## TrueblueTexican

*Its closed*

The onshore push from Harvey piled the sand up and into both Vinson's and Cedar Bayou, so much for all the money spent to open it -

Its sad to see it, but those with a little hydrology experience.on the Gulf Coast noted it would not remain open without REGULAR dredging.

Years ago there was enough back bay push to keep it flushed out, with additions of Packery, Aransas, and Matagorda ship Channels, there is just not enough back bay hydrology to move sand. Matagorda ship channel has now scoured to over 90' deep and moves much of the volume of water -- its caused sanding in of Pass Cavallo (although Harvey opened it up as well as cut Sunday Beach.)


----------



## Marker 54 Lures

Flat's Hunter said:


> Where did you see 12 surge? I saw 4.5 at port A and 2.5 at rockport. Port lavaca had 7 ft. Port O'Connor had like 3-4 from what I can tell. No where near what they were predicting. Was there actually that much surge? Or just enough to push the dunes into the mouth?
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


i head that but i could be wrong .. there was a ton of bad info right before and in the beginning of the storm


----------



## acoastalbender

Flat's Hunter said:


> Where did you see 12 surge? I saw 4.5 at port A and 2.5 at rockport. Port lavaca had 7 ft. Port O'Connor had like 3-4 from what I can tell. No where near what they were predicting. Was there actually that much surge? Or just enough to push the dunes into the mouth?
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


I'm on NPI and the high water marks around here show a 6ft-7ft surge despite being on the 'clean' side of the eye (this side the winds were actually coming from the N/NW and helping to keep surge down)... haven't actually seen with my own eyes but those that have interests in Port A have indicated an 8ft-10ft surge ... IDK

.


----------



## cab

Yesterday


----------



## cab

Vinson portion


----------



## cab

*Sept 11 photo cedar*

Taken this morning


----------



## southpaw

Thanks for posting those cab.

Good to see CB didn't completely silt in. Looks like that cut between Vinson's and CB is mostly silted in now but Vinson's looks like it's got its own cut now. Wonder what this will do to the hydrology of the area now and how long those passes can stay open before silting in completely.


----------



## Aggieangler

I'm with Southpaw in this one....very intrigued to see what the cut into Vinson's does.


----------



## Bull Red

Looks open to me. Thanks for posting, Cab.


----------



## Big Fish

*Cedar Bayou*

Awesome !


----------



## Anderson Guide Service

acoastalbender said:


> I'm on NPI and the high water marks around here show a 6ft-7ft surge despite being on the 'clean' side of the eye (this side the winds were actually coming from the N/NW and helping to keep surge down)... haven't actually seen with my own eyes but those that have interests in Port A have indicated an 8ft-10ft surge ... IDK
> 
> .


The whole area from Holiday Beach to Cavaso Creek was under a lot of water during the storm. Some areas hardly got anything and then other got slammed. It was really strange how it hit some places and others nothing.


----------



## Taylor1981

So I made a trip out to cedar today cause I wanted to put eyes on it myself, took some pictures but they won't reveal much more than the pictures already up from last week. The inlet has a decent gut to it for the 15-20 or so feet across it.... however.. past that into the cut not many areas get much over knee deep until you get on further in the bayou. I'd be surprised if it survives this fall when the winds change, I think it'll be done for. The 7 million dollar project cut from a couple years ago is completely gone harvey completely filled it in and rearranged things, can't even tell where it was anymore without really looking and knowing where your at.

I did however walk down to the new Vinsons pass and the pictures below are of that.

Also, if anyone ever wanted to find plentiful sand dollars... I walked away with 14 whole ones not even looking very hard... My grandfather always loved to collect shells and such from put there, I have the feeling he was smiling at me.

































































Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## saltwaterjunky

Well hell looks like I waited to long to go see it back in its glory days ,been 30 years =+since I seen it ..


----------



## Marker 54 Lures

if a hurricane can't cut it back open then perhaps its time to just move on -


----------



## jampen

Come on Vinson's. It always looked like the better path of least resistance....more of a straight shot.


----------



## Aggieangler

Anyone have a recent shot taken from the air? Just curious!


----------



## barronj

Saw a picture of Fulton Beach Rd in RP today and it had water over it (one part, at the bend) from high tide. SOMETHING is happening in CB, hopefully a little scouring this weekend and next week with the huge swings in tidal flows.


----------



## Gumby

Pictures taken on 15 September. Last few are of St. Jo Island near Port A. You can see where the eye wall pumped all that sand offshore and created those guts. Also reference the size of the guts by those 6 or so barges up on the island.


----------



## bigfishtx

Were those barges in thge Lydia Ann and ended up on the side of the island?


----------



## Gumby

They had to have been in my estimation. A truly amazing transformation of the beach and surf geography.


----------



## Its Catchy

It will not open back up without constant dredging. We've seen this with the San Bernard


----------



## chad

bigfishtx said:


> Were those barges in thge Lydia Ann and ended up on the side of the island?


Yes. They thought that would be a great place to ride out the storm. One of the tugs sunk in the channel and the other two ended up on the island. They removed the tugs from land within 2 weeks of the storm. I'm not sure what the timeline is for removing the barges.


----------



## FishAfrica

Impressive seeing those barges on the island, lucky they didnt roll up into someones house


----------



## Gumby

Flying back down to Port A on Friday. Will take some more pictures and post them up. I'll be doing this a lot over the next year as we rebuild our place down there.


----------



## bigfishtx

chad said:


> Yes. They thought that would be a great place to ride out the storm. One of the tugs sunk in the channel and the other two ended up on the island. They removed the tugs from land within 2 weeks of the storm. I'm not sure what the timeline is for removing the barges.


Chad, from what I remember there were some pretty decent dunes on the island there. I assume they are pretty much gone and that the surge covered St Joe in that area?


----------



## Aggieangler

Wow....google earth imagery shows the barges there...those new cuts/washout look like some really good spots to ambush some fish on a falling tide.....

https://www.google.com/maps/place/P...2934d3cbc07a2d!8m2!3d27.8339158!4d-97.0610994


----------



## JoshJ

FishAfrica said:


> Impressive seeing those barges on the island, lucky they didnt roll up into someones house


Any idea what the law is for recovery? Do they now belong to the Bass' if they decide they want them since they are on their private property? Is the barge company responsible for moving them? What happens if the Bass' wont allow access?


----------



## chicapesca

Aggieangler said:


> Wow....google earth imagery shows the barges there...those new cuts/washout look like some really good spots to ambush some fish on a falling tide.....
> 
> http://www.google.com/maps/place/Po...2934d3cbc07a2d!8m2!3d27.8339158!4d-97.0610994


Wow, cool!

I have a question about google maps. I pan out and move over to the PA harbor and can see wreckage from the hurricane, but when I pan out and go up the coast to POC, Sunday beach to be exact, it is pre Harvey. Do they patch images together from different periods of time?


----------



## bonkers

Every one of those barges sank with a tug attached? That is what I see in the link. You sure some of it is "ghost" imagery where they were there for one image and another is overlayed on it? Just curious as it looks like tugs and barges both underwater. 
The latest Google Earth image for that area is 8/2017.


----------



## lapesca67

chicapesca said:


> Wow, cool!
> 
> I have a question about google maps. I pan out and move over to the PA harbor and can see wreckage from the hurricane, but when I pan out and go up the coast to POC, Sunday beach to be exact, it is pre Harvey. Do they patch images together from different periods of time?


Yep....pay attention to the imagery date as you move around. It will change based on the date those images were taken and uploaded to the google earth servers. They have algorithms that overlay imagery based on gps data points.


----------



## Aggieangler

@chica....That's correct...I work in the GIS industry and used to do a decent amount of work with aerial photographs and then georeferenced digital imagery. That's the reason you can sometimes pan across a bay system, and suddenly the water changes color. Sometimes that even happens day to day when they are sensing (flying photos, or satellite) the images. When they go back and splice the imagery together in that spot, they may be using one image from a month later than another, so you may see more silt in the water column causing it to be more occluded, or disturbance on the surface of the water from wind that day causing the water to be a different color. It's all about conditions on the days they captured the data, from both sides of the photo, or along that split line.


Geekdom warning:
I took a class on Interpretation of Aerial Photography at A&M and it ranks as one of my favorite college courses. The professor was an older gent that had been interpreting photos in Vietnam era for the DOD, and he had all kinds of interesting stories to tell. Later in my career, I worked with a former full bird colonel that used to fly aerial imagery on hard drives, from the US to IRAQ and back, during the first gulf war. He had some interesting stories to tell also.


----------



## Aggieangler

@bonkers...I know that NOAA flew imagery the days after Harvey from down on PINS, up to POC at least. They had a site where you can see it in isolation. Since that is public domain data, I think google maps updated their imagery with it, so that it is more current.


----------



## lapesca67

chicapesca said:


> Wow, cool!
> 
> I have a question about google maps. I pan out and move over to the PA harbor and can see wreckage from the hurricane, but when I pan out and go up the coast to POC, Sunday beach to be exact, it is pre Harvey. Do they patch images together from different periods of time?


Yep....pay attention to the imagery date as you move around. It will change based on the date those images were taken and uploaded to the google earth servers. They have algorithms that overlay imagery based on gps data points.


----------



## ROBOWADER

I have been told those barges are going to have to be cut up and removed.


----------



## chad

There are also giant rolling airbag type devices for removing barges from land. I'm not sure if the terrain on San Jose will allow for the use of the air bags or not. Either way i suspect the barge line is going to have to negotiate some hefty terms with the Bass family before any kind of removal takes place. There are a total of 6 - 30,000 barrel barges up there. Each one is approximately 300' x 54' in size.


----------



## cab

anybody have any updates on cedar since the mini norther? the one next week should pull more water


----------



## Captin Academy

I can't see the barges on the island at all, zoomed in, out up, up, down...

I can see one image "stitched" that shows the big rips out of the front of St Jo, but no barges and straight beach.

PA harbor looks cleaned up too...


----------



## bigfishtx

bonkers said:


> Every one of those barges sank with a tug attached? That is what I see in the link. You sure some of it is "ghost" imagery where they were there for one image and another is overlayed on it? Just curious as it looks like tugs and barges both underwater.
> The latest Google Earth image for that area is 8/2017.


Where did you see this? The image posted just shows barges high and dry on San Jose.


----------



## Jeff SATX

You can see the NOAA harvey picture versus the Google "split" picture and the high and dry actual picture.


----------



## bigfishtx

I see no tugs


----------



## Gray Ghost

*Cedar Bayou after Harvey*

Any reports on how deep the channel is after Harvey????


----------



## barronj

bigfishtx said:


> I see no tugs


They're visible as white specs in the 2nd to last picture in the post above yours.

However, you can see them in Google Earth when you click on 'View' and select Historical Imagery, which will take you to current imagery and let you view a timeline of imagery.


----------



## barronj

Gray Ghost said:


> Any reports on how deep the channel is after Harvey????


See post #92


----------



## Gumby

Pictures taken Friday October 13th.


----------



## Gumby

Last two pictures are of the erosion at the South Jetties in Port A.


----------



## SSST

Wow on the South jetties!


----------



## barronj

Gumby, thanks so much! Those pics are awesome!


----------



## Taylor1981

Good photos. It actually looks like it wants to try and recover... but I know how shallow some of those pinch point areas are. Hope they are opening up some with the strong tidal flows that have been happening.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Topwatersonly

If those pictures were Friday that was on some high tides. That doesn't look to good for CB.


----------



## Gumby

They were taken Friday at 1pm.


----------



## bigfishtx

Thanks for pointing that out Barron. Did anyone hear, were those tugs manned the night of the storm? I assume they were all tied up to those moorings in the Lydia Ann. 
Man if anyone was on them, I bet it was a wild ride. 
I assume those barges don't draft as much is why they ended up on the island against the dunes.



barronj said:


> They're visible as white specs in the 2nd to last picture in the post above yours.
> 
> However, you can see them in Google Earth when you click on 'View' and select Historical Imagery, which will take you to current imagery and let you view a timeline of imagery.


----------



## cab

Saturday 2:00


----------



## Net N Yahoo

Interesting


----------



## irbjd

Here's a good podcast on the current state of Cedar Bayou, the engineering related to the re-opening, prior attempts to re-open, Harvey's impact, and how it is impacting the bay system.

http://www.ccatexas.org/coastal-advocacy-adventures-podcast-episode-21-cedar-bayou/


----------



## Rufneck

I just listened to the entire podcast. It is encouraging to hear the experts speak about it. 
What I gathered is that Cedar Bayou is fine and is acting as they expected it to even after Harvey. Their main point is that all that is required is around a foot of water to give the fry that are spawned offshore to get back into the bay.

They spoke about how the Cedar Bayou has been there thousands of years and will continue to be there. The only thing they didn't address that I wish they had is the impact that the Port A and POC jetties have on the water flow through CB. I think that opening CB is necessary because of those 2 waterflows that were not there 1,000's of years ago.


----------



## pocjetty

Rufneck said:


> The only thing they didn't address that I wish they had is the impact that the Port A and POC jetties have on the water flow through CB. I think that opening CB is necessary because of those 2 waterflows that were not there 1,000's of years ago.


I'm not saying that they are wrong, or suggesting any conspiracy theories, or any of that stuff. But I think what sets a lot of people off is when they see something like Pass Cavallo silting in the way it is. I don't know if you're familiar with POC, or Pass Cavallo - but the thought of it silting in like this is so alien that my brain almost can't take it in. It's such a big event that people like me can't believe that something isn't fundamentally different, and that whatever it is may not be healthy for the entire bay system.

They (whoever "they" are) may have planned for CB to be a trickle that allows fry to swim in from the gulf. But I think I speak for a lot of people in saying that we thought it was going to allow for a lot more _water_ exchange with the gulf, which would improve the overall health of the surrounding bays.

In fact, I'm sort of surprised to hear any "expert" say that the whole project was for the purpose of introducing more fish fry into the bay. First of all, it seems like an expensive project just to have more things to catch. Couldn't they have built a new hatchery in this area for that purpose? But beyond that, introducing more fish into a bay that may not be as robust as it could be might even be self-defeating.

A small cut a foot deep that allows a trickle of water is going to bring some fry into the local area. But a channel deep enough to drain a large amount of water would actually create a little bit of current flow for surrounding miles. That would flush some of the nutrients that help feed algal blooms, help stabilize salinity, and a bunch of other good stuff.

The experts may have expected a small cut a foot deep, I can't argue that one way or the other. But if that's what they expected, I'm disappointed. I guess if I'm being honest, I think that story may be a little bit revisionist, and they have re-defined what "success" means to fit what we're seeing.

The flip side of all that is that coastlines always change. Sand gets removed and re-deposited constantly. Always has, always will. We are taking so much water from our rivers that they barely flow into the bays anymore. That's got to have some impact on the flow out to the Gulf. Even things like bulkheads and piers affect the hydrodynamics in significant ways. I'm not saying they did anything wrong at Cedar Bayou. I just think that being honest and open helps us make better decisions. Sometimes I get the feeling that we spend too much time in CYA mode for that.


----------



## ROBOWADER

This is a picture of the overflight we did a couple days after Harvey came through.


----------



## irbjd

pocjetty said:


> I'm not saying that they are wrong, or suggesting any conspiracy theories, or any of that stuff. But I think what sets a lot of people off is when they see something like Pass Cavallo silting in the way it is. I don't know if you're familiar with POC, or Pass Cavallo - but the thought of it silting in like this is so alien that my brain almost can't take it in. It's such a big event that people like me can't believe that something isn't fundamentally different, and that whatever it is may not be healthy for the entire bay system.
> 
> They (whoever "they" are) may have planned for CB to be a trickle that allows fry to swim in from the gulf. But I think I speak for a lot of people in saying that we thought it was going to allow for a lot more _water_ exchange with the gulf, which would improve the overall health of the surrounding bays.
> 
> In fact, I'm sort of surprised to hear any "expert" say that the whole project was for the purpose of introducing more fish fry into the bay. First of all, it seems like an expensive project just to have more things to catch. Couldn't they have built a new hatchery in this area for that purpose? But beyond that, introducing more fish into a bay that may not be as robust as it could be might even be self-defeating.
> 
> A small cut a foot deep that allows a trickle of water is going to bring some fry into the local area. But a channel deep enough to drain a large amount of water would actually create a little bit of current flow for surrounding miles. That would flush some of the nutrients that help feed algal blooms, help stabilize salinity, and a bunch of other good stuff.
> 
> The experts may have expected a small cut a foot deep, I can't argue that one way or the other. But if that's what they expected, I'm disappointed. I guess if I'm being honest, I think that story may be a little bit revisionist, and they have re-defined what "success" means to fit what we're seeing.
> 
> The flip side of all that is that coastlines always change. Sand gets removed and re-deposited constantly. Always has, always will. We are taking so much water from our rivers that they barely flow into the bays anymore. That's got to have some impact on the flow out to the Gulf. Even things like bulkheads and piers affect the hydrodynamics in significant ways. I'm not saying they did anything wrong at Cedar Bayou. I just think that being honest and open helps us make better decisions. Sometimes I get the feeling that we spend too much time in CYA mode for that.


There is a school of thought that the opening of Cedar Bayou has contributed to the silting in of Pass Cavallo due to less water flow around POC. I can't speak to its truth, but there is a group of people that hold this belief.

If you listen to the podcast, the purpose of Cedar Bayou is to be a fish pass. The intent was not necessarily for it to only be a few inches or a foot deep, but rather they state that is a sufficient depth for it to serve its purpose - to allow recruits access to the area. Also, its depth will change with seasonal tides and its designed movement up and down the beach.

Finally, the consensus from all on the podcast was that opening Cedar Bayou has had a positive impact on the surrounding area. From the presence of more grass, to increased water flow, to more fish.


----------



## pocjetty

irbjd said:


> If you listen to the podcast, the purpose of Cedar Bayou is to be a fish pass. The intent was not necessarily for it to only be a few inches or a foot deep, but rather they state that is a sufficient depth for it to serve its purpose - to allow recruits access to the area. Also, its depth will change with seasonal tides and its designed movement up and down the beach.
> 
> Finally, the consensus from all on the podcast was that opening Cedar Bayou has had a positive impact on the surrounding area. From the presence of more grass, to increased water flow, to more fish.


That's fair, and I admit that it's hard to remember who said what in the past. I remember a fair amount of discussion about the need and benefit of a significant amount of water flow through CB, and I agreed with that. Maybe none of that was from "official" sources. I don't think so, but maybe.

My own opinion - I don't think CB is behaving the way they expected, or the way they wanted it to. And I think that defining it that way is a little disingenuous. I've never had much patience for CYA. But then again, I've never had much use for finger-pointing and the Blame Game. If this is what CB was intended to be, then everything is fine I guess. But if we made some mistakes, we need to figure out what they were, and whether there's anything to be done about them in the future.

The one thing I don't see any way to argue around is the trajectory of Cedar Bayou. Even if it's current state is acceptable, it's hard not to think that it's declining at a pretty rapid pace. Maybe there's nothing to be done about it. If they just say that, we can move on. But I don't think they ever would say that, just because of the finger-pointing. Which means that we learn nothing for the future, and other similar projects.


----------



## Rufneck

I tend to agree, it appears maybe they are moving the goalposts now to align with what has happened. I am familiar with Port Oâ€™Connor and what happening to Pass Cavallo. Nobody will ever convince me that the water flowing through Cedar Bayou has had an impact on Pass Cavallo anywhere near to the extent of the POC jetties. I have personally charted water depth over 100 feet inside the jetties. It is so close to Pass Cavallo that has to be the cause for whatâ€™s going on there.

The impact of the POC jetties on Pass Cavallo and on the entire ecosystem is significant and I would guess detrimental. I wonder why nobody has ever proposed a class action lawsuit against the corp of engineers to force them to reduce the depth of water inside the POC jetties and Return the ecosystem closer to what it was prior to the jetties being opened.


----------



## Captain Nathan Beabout

I guess y'all didn't hear this pod cast that took place with Aaron Horine, Quentin Hall, Captain Jay Watkins, John Blaha and Shane. This answered a lot of questions on where CB came from to where it is going. As well as it's intended purpose. Give it a listen.

http://www.ccatexas.org/coastal-advocacy-adventures-podcast-episode-21-cedar-bayou/


----------



## pocjetty

Captain Nathan Beabout said:


> I guess y'all didn't hear this pod cast that took place with Aaron Horine, Quentin Hall, Captain Jay Watkins, John Blaha and Shane. This answered a lot of questions on where CB came from to where it is going. As well as it's intended purpose. Give it a listen.


The problem, I think, is that the intended purpose is not what many of us thought when they were opening CB to begin with. Maybe it was a lack of understanding. Maybe it was a failure to communicate. Maybe it's revisionist history. I'm not sure it matters anymore. I'm not interested in finding fault. I just wanted CB to provide more water interchange than it currently has.

I will say this: I don't believe that they spent all that money, and jumped through all those hoops, just to provide a foot of water to move fish fry from the Gulf into the bays. Introducing fish fry is something that could have been done with hatcheries. They could have easily built a hatchery in the area for the money they spent. I think there was more intent than that, when they were selling the idea.

I understand CYA, because there is also so much finger-pointing. I don't care for either one. I still think the bays in this area would benefit from more water interchange with the Gulf. And I think that CB is on a trajectory that will see it fully closed off in the reasonably near future. Maybe that's just the way it has to be.


----------



## chad

The bayou has been open for a little over three years now and my understanding from the get go was that it would need some maintenance dredging from time to time. I personally know the contractor who dug it and he said the same thing "no way will this last forever without some maintenance dredging."


----------



## JoeintheBackyard

chad said:


> The bayou has been open for a little over three years now and my understanding from the get go was that it would need some maintenance dredging from time to time. I personally know the contractor who dug it and he said the same thing "no way will this last forever without some maintenance dredging."


Correct, there was a plan being discussed prior to Harvey for hitting some problem areas with a maintenance dredging as the original permit is in good standing with the COE for a couple more years, Harvey took several hundred feet of beach front and deposited it into where the channels had migrated to so the next project will have to be much larger now which will require money that isn't there at this point. All comes back to money or a lack of, engineer admitted in the podcast they wanted basically double the size of the channels but they had to settle for as small as they could go and still have a viable plan due to money, I thought the podcast did a great job answering a lot of the questions all key board engineers and biologist have been bringing up, some listened and obviously some didn't.


----------



## pocjetty

JoeintheBackyard said:


> all key board engineers and biologist have been bringing up, some listened and obviously some didn't.


You know, Joe... it really is possible for two people to examine the same set of facts and reach different conclusions. Even two reasonably intelligent people. One of the things that sends these discussions off the rails is unnecessary "gotcha" comments.

Here's a little food for thought:

The engineers wanted the channels to be double the size of what was eventually built. I understand - lack of funds. But they wanted the channels larger for some reason... right? And there is some reason why they are explaining that fact now.

It seems to me that if the channels had been double the size, we would probably not be having this discussion right now. The alternative is that the engineers would have gotten exactly what they wanted (double-size channels), and CB would still be silted in to a foot deep now, which would mean that they were wrong in spending lots of extra money making the channels bigger.

I'm a big believer that you can't have things both ways. You can't use lack of funds for bigger channels as an explanation for a problem, and at the same time deny that there is a problem.

And just for the record, a lot of us have been running these bays for a long, long time, and understand perfectly well the concept of "maintenance dredging". Sometimes, an engineer's job is to say that a project just isn't feasible on the allowed budget, and not agree to do half the job they believe is necessary. That's what is known as kicking the can down the road.

Does all that make me a "keyboard engineer"? I'll show you my degrees if you show me yours.

[Edit: One more thing, Joe. I wasn't going to get into this, but what the heck? Doubling the width of the channels would have meant the removal of four times the amount of sand - unless they made them wide and shallow, which they wouldn't. That's four times the initial dredging. They weren't even close to having the budget to do what those engineers, themselves, said needed to be done. Not even close. But we went ahead with the project anyway. So I guess what we're seeing now really is exactly what they "expected". I don't believe that makes it a good thing. You obviously see it differently.]


----------



## Trouthunter

> I tend to agree, it appears maybe they are moving the goalposts now to align with what has happened. I am familiar with Port Oâ€™Connor and what happening to Pass Cavallo. Nobody will ever convince me that the water flowing through Cedar Bayou has had an impact on Pass Cavallo anywhere near to the extent of the POC jetties. I have personally charted water depth over 100 feet inside the jetties. It is so close to Pass Cavallo that has to be the cause for whatâ€™s going on there.


Of course the POC Jetties have an impact on Pass Cavallo. From the get go when the ship channel was built Pass Cavallo started losing flow from the bay on an outgoing tide. But to say that the Jetties/ship channel is detrimental to the bay system is a stretch. More water flow in and out is a good thing for the bay.

Cedar Bayou has no bearing on Pass Cavallo at all in my opinion.

TH


----------



## JoeintheBackyard

They also said they wanted the depth of the channels to be two times deeper but money did not allow for that, they presented the specifications for the optimum project at first, that goes back to the SCBI days. The budget for such a project was out of line with what the county thought they would come up with so they we're asked to streamline the plan and shoot for something that would function as it had historically ( it always opened and closed on it's own throughout 1900's) and to shoot for something that would exchange water and biomass for a 5 to 7 year period between maintenance dredging efforts. None of the above was hid from anyone, some of the nay sayers knew it and would throw it out there as a reason not to do the project at all. The goals above are still happening today despite a serious blow by Harvey, Texas A&M Corpus was out at the site a couple weeks ago and they pulled nets that were full of juvenile redfish, numbers that are unmatched anywhere on the coast they say. To say one could spend the money that was spent on the project on hatcheries and replicate the the biomass that has come through the passes is hilarious, you couldn't hatch out the flounder alone that enter through there much less the reds, trout, crabs, shrimp, baitfish, ect not to mention the habitat improvements that it has made, remember the vast dry salt flats on St Joe?. I don't remember anyone selling the project off for more than it was supposed to be "A Fish Pass", a inlet for fish and other marine life to enter and exit the bay and for an exchange of water between the gulf and Mesquite and Aransas Bay systems, anyone that fishes those areas knows the differences the increase water exchange has had along St Joe, the back lakes on St Joe, Carlos, Spalding, the eastern side of Mesquite, Ayres, etc. I think the project was worth doing, the vastly improved fishing tell me that, the increased hotel occupancy tax revenues tell me that, the guides I know tell me that, the biologist I know tell me that, etc. Mother nature is still finding a way out there, I had a buddy out in VS the other day that couldn't cross the gut in places cause it was too deep, they caught fish one after another he said, when the low winter tides finally bottom out, all water exchange may stop and sanding will take it's toll as it is already starting as the gulf wants to replace the beachfront that was lost with Harvey and if it so much the spring tides can't clear the sand then I'll be doing what I can personally and professionally to try and shine a spotlight on the need to help out the area in any way we can while some will be cheering that they told us so, I have little use for the latter.


----------



## bonkers

What is the easiest way to get to CB by kayak?


----------



## KDubBlast

bonkers said:


> What is the easiest way to get to CB by kayak?


Launch from Goose island state or st. charles bay ramp.


----------



## bigfishtx

bonkers said:


> What is the easiest way to get to CB by kayak?


Find a guy with a powerboat to let you load it up on the way over. It is a LONG way to paddle, better take plenty of food and water if you do.


----------



## bonkers

Thanks!


----------



## padrefigure

Why couldn't a demolition expert use a series of shaped charges to blow out the CB channel relatively quickly and inexpensively? I get that fish, shrimp, crabs, etc. in the immediate vicinity would be decimated, but I think a couple of guys with relatively light equipment could do this in a couple of weeks. I would think the biomass affected would be less than blowing a rig offshore. 

Probably a dumb idea, but there has to be a better way than barging over huge earthmoving equipment for months.


----------



## Captain Nathan Beabout

I have talked to heads of CCA and number 1, they were waiting till after hurricane season to use the re-dredge funds. Yes Harvey didn't help matters, but we all know it was getting narrow before the storm, that we all agree on. It was a good thing the re-dredge money didn't get used before the storm or it would have been a waste. Number 2, is their hands are tied this time of year because of the migratory birds that use Mat/St. Jose island as nesting grounds. Nothing can be done until the late Spring.

Now I don't know how much any of you folks on here fish, but as a guide in the San Antonio Bay region, I can tell you that we are still seeing very many positive affects from the bayou. Since about June our fishing from Twin 1, east towards POC went cold, and Mesquite bay and the southern shell of SA bay has been where I have traveled since. The only way i can explain the abundance of life in our southern region, is because CB still has water flow. Now I agree that our tides rise and fall, especially this time of year with cold fronts. But, there is still enough water flow to keep life pouring into our bays. To see ballyhoo thicker than mullet in areas of Ayers, Mesquite and Carlos bay tells me CB is still working. I have caught more 25-28" trout this year and all summer long than any other year. Some will call it luck, but I say it is because our ecosystem has changed. How else do you explain the dead zone between Seadrift and POC. POC fishing is good i.e they have water flow. and South SA bay to Carlos is great, i.e. water flow.

Yes I did enjoy taking customers to CB and walking the bayou and catching trout and reds, but when I think about the bigger picture that it is still feeding life into the bay system I am fortunate enough to make a living on, I'll take it. There are still a lot of redfish in the surf at CB, you just have to catch the weather right. Those fish wouldn't be there if the bayou wasn't flowing, pushing and pulling bait. 

This last front we had did drop our water a couple feet, but it only lasted a few days. Our water as of today is a little higher than normal, and from fishing down in the Mesquite area the bait is still there, water color looks great and fish were hungry.

I'm sure many of y'all remember 6-8 years ago what the water looked like in Mesquite bay region. It was very stagnant and brownish looking, the water down there still is what we all know as trout green, and I know it wouldn't look like that if CB was actually closed off.

This is just my 2 cents, and we need to stand behind CCA and everyone involved with whatever plan they come up with.


----------



## JoeintheBackyard

padrefigure said:


> Why couldn't a demolition expert use a series of shaped charges to blow out the CB channel relatively quickly and inexpensively? I get that fish, shrimp, crabs, etc. in the immediate vicinity would be decimated, but I think a couple of guys with relatively light equipment could do this in a couple of weeks. I would think the biomass affected would be less than blowing a rig offshore.
> 
> Probably a dumb idea, but there has to be a better way than barging over huge earthmoving equipment for months.


Feds would never go for it, the area is home to 3 protected species, the hoops the permit holder had to go through between the protected species and mitigation of grass that was displaced added literary millions of dollars to the price tag of the project. Several folks have said they should have put the concrete from the old copano causeway out there, besides the fact the channels need to migrate along the beachfront the material in the old causeway had hazardous waste in and on the structure which would mean the feds wouldn't let them use it out there even if it would have helped keep it open which wouldn't have.


----------



## cruss

*channel*

what would happen if they dredged a channel from the intercostal through mesquite bay to cedar bayou? Would this help keep the pass open?


----------



## Trouthunter

Anyone been down to Cedar Bayou lately?

TH


----------



## Aggieangler

Trouthunter said:


> Anyone been down to Cedar Bayou lately?
> 
> TH


I hope someone can post up with an update soon. I'd like to know what is going on, also.


----------



## Capt. Dually

This was supposedly taken 1-31-18. It was on Facebook. Credited to Bert Smith.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gulfgoose

Capt. Dually said:


> This was supposedly taken 1-31-18. It was on Facebook. Credited to Bert Smith.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Looking good!


----------



## irbjd

Here's a GoogleEarth image from this month.


----------



## Topwatersonly

Those two pictures are the San Bernard river mouth.


----------



## Capt. Dually

Topwatersonly said:


> Those two pictures are the San Bernard river mouth.


Youâ€™re right. I did some more research into it. My bad.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## irbjd

Topwatersonly said:


> Those two pictures are the San Bernard river mouth.


Picture I posted from GoogleEarth is of Cedar Bayou. Here it is zoomed out.


----------



## barronj

irbjd said:


> Picture I posted from GoogleEarth is of Cedar Bayou. Here it is zoomed out.


When I click on that with Historical Imagery checked, it rolls the date back to 4/2017. There was a punch through straight to the gulf from Vincent Slough after Harvey, that's not in that pic.

Scroll south to Long Reef, it looks unchanged, but there's a gut cut right throut the point on Long Reef, deeper than I am tall. That whole area got scrambled, but the reefs in northeastern Aransas, just west of Spalding and south of Carlos Bay fingers, appear untouched, fished them a bit last Sunday.


----------



## jerry61

Trouthunter said:


> Anyone been down to Cedar Bayou lately?
> 
> TH


I was there Sunday 2-4-18, water was beautiful and the trout were biting. Didnâ€™t go all the way to the end, just about 1/4 mile in.


----------



## Trouthunter

Thanks Jerry!

TH


----------



## Net N Yahoo

I am happy to report that Cedar Bayou is still flowing. I was out Saturday morning on an out going tide and there was quite a bit of flow. The fishing was slow. Not a lot of baitfish in the area other than mud minnows. Looking good for this summer though.


----------



## [email protected]

Good news...thanks for report!


----------



## Puddle_Jumper

Net N Yahoo said:


> I am happy to report that Cedar Bayou is still flowing. I was out Saturday morning on an out going tide and there was quite a bit of flow. The fishing was slow. Not a lot of baitfish in the area other than mud minnows. Looking good for this summer though.


Thanks for the report !! Awesome news !!


----------



## Rufneck

I'm bumping an old thread so my apologies if there is a more recent one.....

What is the status of CB? Still open?


----------



## Puddle_Jumper

I e mailed the CCA awhile back and was told there is money to open it again and make some changes but the exact date was not determined at that time


----------

