CONSEQUENCES: EFFECTS ON NATURAL RESOURCE PRODUCTION 



Dr. James G. Gosselink, Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana State University 



There was general agreement among panelists that wetland loss has resulted in 

 changes in vegetation and changes in secondary consumers, such as waterfowl, alligators 

 and furbearers that use the marsh directly. In fact there was not much argument that 

 estuarine-dependent fish and shellfish resources have also already been affected. The 

 key to this estuarine dependence is habitat availability. If the habitats are available and 

 healthy, then their associated living resources will also be. The question then becomes 

 how to deal with the loss and change of habitat. 



I will not present a complete and coherent summary, but will highlight some of the 

 questions raised. What are the prospects for freshwater diversions? The prospects are 

 good for limited areas and for controlling saltwater intrusion but there appear to be 

 socio-economic limitations. What is the optimum marsh-water edge interface ratio and 

 can this be engineered in canal design? More broadly, can we manage the marshes for 

 improved habitat? What is the optimum type of marsh (e.g., brackish marsh) and can we 

 engineer to maximize this type of marsh? Who is the savior of the wetlands, in the sense 

 of their conservation and management? The feeling I get is that it better be all of us, 

 from the grassroots to the politicians and decisionmakers. 



In the long run, abandoned deltas will erode away. Is it economically sound to pour 

 money into them for freshwater diversion, etc., or would it be better to develop plans for 

 replacing eroding wetlands with new areas, such as in the Atchafalaya delta? 

 Considering, the relative value of wildlife and petroleum resources, how can 

 environmentalists hope to compete in the political arena of environmental conservation? 



I do not know how to answer all these questions, therefore I will try to relate my 

 personal perspective on our current situation as reflected in the conference. There is a 

 growing change in attitude toward the environment, which translates to political reality 

 in a new conservatism. Previously, environmentalists were on the defensive and 

 considered radicals. Resources were abundant and the popular and dominant paradigm 

 was that development was good, and that natural resources were plentiful and free, the 

 burden was on the environmentalist to show that an activity was destructive to the 

 environment and should be terminated. A new more conservative view is that as 

 nonrenewable resources are rapidly depleted, and reliance on renewable resources in 

 Louisiana becomes increasingly important, thus we must conserve and foster them. The 

 onus of environmental modification thus lies with the developer. He is now on the 

 defensive, must prove that the change is environmentally safe and must pay for the 

 whole cost of the change. 



CONSEQUENCES: SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC 



Mr. Edward W. Stagg, Council for a Better Louisiana 



The Council for a Better Louisiana and I have for sometime been interested in 

 water resource problems in Louisiana, particularly with regard to ground water and 

 surface water. These concerns share common ground with those concerns about coastal 

 erosion. In the past, our water problems were primarily two-fold: one, to get rid of it, 

 and secondly, to pray that we did not have a hurricane to give us too much. I believe, 



249 



