Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Upper Comite Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ARBC withdraws Upper Comite clearing project after feasibility shows negligible benefit; residents and archaeologists had urged pause
Summary
After a feasibility study found clearing and snagging would deliver under 0.3% flood‑reduction effectiveness, the Amite River Basin Drainage and Water Conservation District voted to withdraw the Upper Comite River clearing project and keep $27 million in region 9 funding available for other uses; residents and experts had warned of erosion, habitat and archaeological risks.
The Amite River Basin Drainage and Water Conservation District voted Dec. 10 to withdraw a proposed Upper Comite River clearing and snagging project after a feasibility study and heavy public comment raised doubts about the work’s flood‑reduction value and environmental impacts.
Commissioner Parker summarized the feasibility work, telling the board the study showed the proposed clearing would be “less than 0.3% effective” for reducing flooding along the Comite and its tributaries and that parish officials may instead pursue buyouts for repeatedly flooded properties. After discussion, Commissioner Bailey moved to withdraw the projects and reallocate the region’s funds; Commissioner Raiford seconded. The motion passed by voice with no recorded opposition.
Why it mattered: multiple landowners, a state archaeologist and local scientists told the commission that mechanical removal of in‑stream debris risks serious erosion, habitat loss and destruction of unrecorded archaeological sites. Julie Doucette of the Louisiana Archaeological Survey and Antiquities Commission told the board that bringing vehicles and people into “pristine areas to do any work does almost as much damage as just leaving it there,” and said her office had no record of a required permit or review on the project.
Isis Longo, a multi‑generation Comite landowner and fisheries biologist, warned that dredging and snagging “turns a river into a ditch or a canal” and invites invasive species that are costly to control. Dr. Day, who supplied flood‑impact graphs from ARBC modeling, said channel lowering and head‑cutting have already threatened several homes and argued the proposed mechanical interventions would not reverse those trends.
The board recorded that the $27 million identified previously for the project will remain in Louisiana Watershed Initiative (LWI) Region 9 and be available for other projects. The chair also noted that written comments from people who did not speak at the meeting will be entered into the minutes.
Procedure and next steps: Commissioners invited residents to continue providing input at task‑force meetings and on the ARBC website. The commission did not adopt a new project at the meeting; instead it directed that the previously earmarked funds remain in the region for reallocation.
Outcome: The motion to withdraw the Upper Comite clearing/snagging proposal was approved by voice vote with no opposition.
