Requires that mitigation funding associated with the Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion project be used to compensate commercial fishermen for losses associated with that project
Impact
The enactment of HB 796 is expected to significantly impact Louisiana's commercial fishing industry, particularly as it relates to coastal management and environmental restoration efforts. By ensuring that commercial fishermen are compensated for losses stemming from the diversion project, the bill seeks to mitigate potential negative effects on the fishing community. This could lead to a restoration of trust between the government and local fishermen, and possibly promote future collaborations on coastal protection measures. However, the bill also implies an ongoing commitment to address the fishermen's economic sustainability amidst environmental changes.
Summary
House Bill 796 mandates that the mitigation funding allocated for the Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion project be specifically designated to compensate commercial fishermen for losses incurred due to this environmental initiative. This bill emphasizes the importance of recognizing the economic impact of large-scale coastal projects on local fishermen and aims to provide a safety net for their livelihoods. Under the bill, claims for compensation must be submitted to the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA), which will determine the compensation amount based on the fishermen's tax returns from the past seven years.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HB 796 appears to be largely supportive among the fishing community and environmental advocates who recognize the importance of safeguarding fishermen's livelihoods. This support may stem from a realization that while large-scale environmental projects can be necessary for long-term coastal sustainability, they often have immediate detrimental impacts on local economies. There is an overarching concern that without legislative protections like those in HB 796, fishermen could suffer irreparably due to state-regulated environmental efforts.
Contention
Despite the positive reception among specific stakeholders, there are potential points of contention. Critics may argue that the compensation process could become unwieldy or inadequate, particularly in verifying claims based on tax returns. There are also concerns regarding how effectively the CPRA will implement the rules and manage the mitigation funds. Questions about the sufficiency of compensation relative to the actual losses experienced by fishermen could arise, as well as debates over prioritizing environmental projects versus immediate economic support for vulnerable communities.
Requires that mitigation monies associated with the funding for the Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion integrated coastal protection project shall be allocated to the Lafitte Area Independent Levee District and used to complete levee improvements
Requires the Lafitte, Crown Point, and Barataria levee projects to be completed prior to the completion of the Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion project
Urges and requests the United States Army Corps of Engineers to reconsider the mitigation and stewardship plan for the Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion to include tidal levee protection for Lafitte, Barataria, and Crown Point
To urge and request the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority to report on potential liabilities to the state general fund if the Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion project is not timely completed (EN NO IMPACT See Note)
Requests the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority to include compensatory mitigation for fisheries impacts in the calculation of project costs for coastal restoration projects contained in the coastal master plan and annual plans
Requires the Office of Coastal Protection and Restoration to ensure compliance with federal mandates in the use of federal funds for coastal restoration and protection projects