The WaterMarks Interview
Ted Falgout
Director, Port Fourchon
Q Ports and the maritime industry in general have been criticized for being indifferent to the fate of Louisiana's coastal wetlands. From your perspective as a port director, is there any validity to this assessment?
A Anyone in the maritime industry who doesn't recognize that protecting Louisiana's coast is in their own self-interest really hasn't thought the issue through. Port Fourchon, for example, depends entirely on Louisiana's Highway 1 to move every ton of cargo that comes through the port. There are no other options. Highway 1, however, is built on a thin strip of coast that in the past was protected by marsh. Today the marsh is gone - there's nothing left but open water on either side. As a result, the highway is extremely vulnerable, and that makes Port Fourchon vulnerable.
Q But isn't Port Fourchon a unique situation?
A Ports are the bridge between water and land. Take away their connection to the land-based roads, rail and support services, make them islands, and they no longer function.
"Anyone in the maritime industry who doesn't recognize that protecting Louisiana's coast is in their own self-interest really hasn't thought the issue through."
Q So why the indifference?
A I really disagree with the characterization. Our industry is far from indifferent. Port Fourchon has been aggressively working to maintain coastal wetlands throughout the entire 20 years I have been the director. We've built offshore breakwaters to protect coastal beaches, restored beaches with dredging spoil, and filled pipeline canals to marsh elevation. We've taken the initiative in putting together state, federal and port dollars to build embankments in an effort to protect Highway 1. We've put thousands of marsh plants into the ground to protect various parts of the coast. In fact, just last week the port awarded a contract of $25,000 for planting giant cutgrass to retard erosion from vessel traffic. We do this because we know we must if we are going to survive.
Q But what about involvement with projects coming out of the Breaux Act?
A We have been actively involved with the efforts coming out of the Breaux Act. The West Belle Pass Project is a good example. It had been stalled for two years because of oyster lease issues. We recognized the value of the project, felt we could be of assistance, and within two weeks, at our own cost, we had purchased all the oyster leases. The project was quickly back on track.
Q If you had an opportunity to send a message to federal agencies involved in coastal restoration, what would it be?
A If we're going to have any hope of handling the massive problem of coastal wetlands loss, it's going to be because the sometimes adversarial relationships between government and industries like ours have been replaced by partnerships. And that means that everyone has to focus on the big picture, which, I assure you, is lot easier said than done.
"The current level of $30 to $50 million a year simply won't cut it. Extraordinary needs demand extraordinary effort."
Q Give me an example of focusing on the big picture.
A Ports are water-dependent by nature of our business, which causes many of us to operate in environmentally sensitive areas. The cold fact is that we do impact wetlands. But it's equally true that because of an enlightened self-interest, we save many more acres than we ever harm. If regulatory agencies only focus on the negative impacts and don't look at the positive aspects, they're not looking at the big picture. When they impose regulations without properly evaluating the damage those regulations can do to an industry, they're not seeing the big picture. They're not seeing that they could kill the goose that lays the golden egg. A thriving maritime industry is absolutely essential to bringing the kind of dollars into Louisiana that we need to address coastal wetlands loss.
Q You mean the economic impact of the industry.
A Few people recognize that one in eight jobs in Louisiana is related to the maritime industry and that 28 percent of the gross product of the state is generated by ports. But as important as that is, it's not the economic engine I'm talking about. Today the U.S. Treasury receives over $3 billion a year in revenues from oil and gas located on the outer continental shelf off the Louisiana coast. Those incredible energy reserves are worthless and the revenues would be lost without the ships, ports, pipelines and other coast-based services needed to move them. Because our industry's infrastructure is threatened by coastal land loss in Louisiana, the state can make a powerful case to the federal government that a significant percent of that $3 billion should be targeted to coastal restoration.
Q And how much is significant?
A We're going to need big projects to achieve meaningful results, and big projects mean we need to be spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Anything less and we're not being realistic about the magnitude of the problem. The current level of $30 to $50 million a year simply won't cut it. Extraordinary needs demand extraordinary effort, and there are efforts underway that could yield this level of funding. But we haven't yet been able to build the coalition necessary to accomplish this task.
Q How will you ever convince a congressman from Minnesota that spending those kinds of dollars in Louisiana really makes any sense to his home state?
A He'd see how close to home Louisiana really is if a disaster shut down the gulf ports and pipelines for just one week. The result would be an energy crisis that would make the OPEC embargo seem insignificant by comparison. We don't have any choice but to convince that congressman before he's forced to learn the national scope of this crisis firsthand. And if that happens, as they say, it won't be a pretty picture.