Posted by NtzMom55 (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 1:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I think this project would be a big positive for our community. This will bring in so many more people from out of town, which will help our local economy. Water is always a big attraction, just look at San Antonio and the Ross Barnett Res. in Jackson.

Posted by Mucasplug (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 4:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

He does not understand erosion. Damning the creek would stop the erosion, as the water pressure on the banks would hold the soil as if thousands of pounds of pressure were on them. Mere boat waves would have little effect except on the land above. I applaud the efforts of our leaders who are working to bring this project to reality.

Posted by SayItRight (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 6:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

“It doesn’t warrant itself to have large boats there,” Gardner said. “It’s going to be more catered to canoes and (boats) that you can paddle, which would have minimal or any impact on the shoreline.”

Then make wake limit rules about motor speed and/or the size of boats that can be used on the waterway, or don't allow anything but hand propelled vessels. People who canoe & kayak would likely be more environmentally sensitive to the area than a motorboat full of beer drinkers out for a p-a-r-t-a-y.

Posted by mudzillaefi (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 6:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't agree with the non errosion thing. Loess soil is loosely packed and will become brittle after it gets water soaked. It will cave off cuasin loss of property for hundreds along the creeks banks. The banks and bluffs always cave off when there is lots of rain or high water. this is inevitable. Whether you want to admit it or not, this will become a party zone for tubing etc. It will create jobs howver and this in itself will be good in the shor term, but long term it is a bad idea.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 6:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It only cost 28 million to build Lake Okhisa. This must be a very nice plan. I hope the 55 million in state and federal funds includes a public fleet of canoes and kayaks for people who can't afford them.

How many areas of public access will there be? I thought most of the land bordering the creek was private property. And I wonder if the water will cover all the sand bars, if the only activity on the lakes will be boating. Overall it does seem like a very cool idea and if it doesn't erode the creek bank it should improve property values along the creek.

I wonder too if there is some plan to address the possibility of the lakes becoming stagnant, some way to insure the water flows continually from the upper lake to the lower.

Posted by ProNatchez (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 7:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Most of the creek bank looks like the photo above. I wonder if they will groom any of it to make it easily accessible to people on foot who would like to enjoy the creek or even fish from the bank.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 7:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

ProNatchez, The folks that like to walk are a doomed breed. The people that like to sit on their tails and move about (4-wheelers, 4-wheel drive, boats) are gonna squeeze us out. Pretty soon everything that isn't paved will be dammed up and drowned.

I have yet to hear about plans to improve the water quality. There is a landfill along the upper creek that leaves a distinctive smell in the creek water for miles after a heavy rain. And downstream from Foster Mound Rd there is raw sewage. But I'll be glad to go down and watch some of y'all go tubing......

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on May 19, 2008 at 8:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I would think that there should be a sixth dam/weir in St. Catherine Creek project. It should be around the Washington, MS area. The dam/weir would slow down the flow of the creek during heavy rains and would provide a constant flow of water to the lower pools during dry periods.

Posted by Oracle (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 8:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Surely our city engineer will traverse the creek northward into rural Adams County and stop the sewage being dumped into this creek before any "weirs" are built. They are numerous along with private trash dumps. Water quality of St. Catherine is very poor, especially during summer when coliform counts are extremely high.

An example of this project could be theSecond Creek Watershed Project of 40 years ago. Numerous dams (weirs) across small creeks throughout the county to "prevent erosion". Go look at them now. They are silted in shallow, muddy, litter laden, cesspools.

St. Catherine Creek is private land and loess soil. It will not handle a raised water lever well and with many of our current population seeking "early retirement" through the court system, just let a bank cave off on anyone or tree come down near anyone for that matter and watch the lawyers smile.

A very bad idea to pursue this project. Perhaps our city engineer needs "educating".

Posted by Preacher (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 8:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm still wondering if it will hold water. Most sand beds don't. They need to test a small area for about a year. It would be a great attraction for our area if it works, but it would have both a positive and negative impact on adjacent neighborhoods and land owners. The rules of the game need to be spelled out now, before the problems arise. As the feasibiliy of the project is determined and controls are put in place and shared with the public, hoepfully, the better the plan will be accepted.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

We might be able to get some Superfund money to clean up that landfill OldGrandDad. Over in Europe they are turning all manner of waste into fuel and perhaps Superfund money could move that landfill waste over to the IP site for Rentech to use.

As to those homeowners putting sewage runoff in the watershed, should someone go ask them to quit doing it, or should we just call the EPA first?

Posted by Preacher (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Good comment Oracle. I didn't know we already had a test case. We need all things considered before jumping into this. It sounds like a good idea on paper, but we need to determine its realistic possibility of success before wasting any money.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

For 55 million dollars it sounds like they considered a lot. I wish there were more details on the plan.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur, The landfill is in current use. Its not normal household garbage, I don't think. But whatever it is gets into the creek after a heavy rain and leaves a bad smell in the water for miles.

Oracle, I had not even thought about this being as bad as the 2nd Creek stuff. That really would be bad. And I question how well this would be maintained after it was created. Since its supposedly to be for paddlers (I'm one of them) I doubt much will be put into it. Its the motorboaters that always get the funds. This might be made with grant money but never maintained afterward. But then, it wouldn't last. Beaver dams in the creek are rare and when you find one it rarely lasts more than 6 months. Thats cuz St. Catherine is tougher than some folks think.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

How the heck do you know so much about St. Catherine's Creek OldGrandDad? I am impressed by your knowledge of it. Do you walk along it? How do you get to it? It has always looked so unattractive to me I never bothered with it.

Posted by mudzillaefi (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There are several areas that will require major cleanup before recreational activities can be enjoyed on this creek. One of the major issues is the sewage. It will cost many landowners some cash to put down sewer systems they have not had to have prior to this. I am not condoning this, just stating fact. Everyone should have sewage treatment. there is no way 55 mil will cover this project, no way. When it rains heavily, you can literally stanbd on the banks of the creek and watch the Loess bluffs and banks cave off. now grnated it mainly from the errosiveness of the moving water, but think what will happen when the water is there permenantly and is allowed to soak into the loess? Bye bye black bird.

Posted by Teach4Peace (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Can't they just do what they do to Under the Hill and place that material along the banks and sides of the creek, to avoid further erosion?

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur, I like walking and looking for special stones and artifacts. Some folks like to golf or ride 4-wheelers and I like to walk. Its slow and I tend to see everything. And i get to know it well. And I hate to see a good creek dammed up for just another piece of flat water. Below Foster Mound Road, maybe ok since its just a garbage and sewage dump anyway. But I enjoy the creek. I go over and under logs. I step around cottonmouths and quicksand. I go through thickets that a coyote will avoid. I get tired and sunburned and enjoy every minute of it. And its a rare day I see another human footprint. But the 4-wheeler tracks become more common every year.

I also have ridden (canoe) the high water of the upper creek after heavy rains. Its a nice tough ride. I guess i can't understand those flatwater guys......

Posted by waterbourne (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Simple, NO Power boats and motors!!!!

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I wonder if it would be more feasible to deepen the channel of the creek and preserve as much of the creek bed as possible for walking purposes OldGrandDad. That wouldn't cause an increase in water level but would permit paddling. If the channel were lined with something suitable heavy rains might help keep the paddling channel clear. You don't need much water to paddle anyhow.

Posted by 000117 (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 11:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

About this project the only thing that the one is favor of it is looking at are Dollar signs and nothing that you say will get them to see pass the Nose on their face .

Now about boats with motors. I think most of the people here have been young at one time.( some by the comments still are because most young people don't stop to think before they react. ) This will be a perfect place for the thrill of racing, to see who can go through the fastest with hitting something. If I was in my teens or 20s I know it would come in my mind.
Then let me bring up the point of the ones on Alcohol that don't think at all . ( THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER BRIDGE )

People get you Heads out of you POCKETS.
Any body with a First grade education will see that this is A BIG MISTAKE .

Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 12:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The negative concerns of most folks are misplaced on this project. The loess soils in the area do not extend to the bottom of the creek, but they do not stand up well to being agitated by waves like boat wakes. Plenty remains to be done before the project is started.

And anyone who would say that we shouldn't do the lakes project because too many sewers and dumps border the creek should ask their mama what "cleanup" means.

Comparing modern dam and wier construction with beaver dams is also lacking. There are ways to both keep a small lake flushing itself of sediment as well as ensure that the structures do not wash away themselves.

I swear Natchez is full of naysayers who seem to be consoling themeselves for shooting so low for so long.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 12:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I figure any grant money for this will also include water quality checks. After that, no money will be provided for it. I still don't understand all of this. I can see how the lower creek would be a good paddling spot but I would not eat its fish or tube in it because of the pollution. But we have SO MUCH paddling water available to us already that is within a few miles. Why must every flowing piece of water be dammed up?

Posted by frogprincenessntz (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 2:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am neither pro nor con, but that said, if any motors are to be allowed, it should be trolling motors only. That would protect the banks from waves and it would deter the crowd, who would do the most damage, from even getting in the water. They usually do not like to walk, paddle, or even go slowly.

I could be very wrong, but is not the whole eastern shore of the "Big Muddy", in Mississppi, loess soil?

Posted by pedro (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 2:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm all for any type recreation, especially fishing, that will help keep the kids off the streets. My main concern is the water quality of SCC and I'm sure this will be addressed. Hopefully this will happen. Natchez needs more places to enjoy the water and fish. Most cross the bridge to enjoy a day on one of the many Concordia Parish lakes. This would be a great thing for Natchez.

Posted by pedro (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 2:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

As far as not being for this project from fear that young people will act like "young" people, get a life. No matter what we do anywhere, wheater it's a gameroom, mall, swimming pool, etc... there will always be a few bad apples. I just picture this as a nice place to take the family. No use in being so negative from fear of teen agers acting their age. Some do crazy things, some don't. That happens everywhere...Did i really need to say that?

Posted by Whisper (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 2:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey OldGrandDad,,, you and I need to meet one day. My Mother and I have walked St. Catherine Creek for years. Finding fossils and artifacts. Our collections are so big. We don't know what to do with them. You can't find any younguns to pass them on to. I guess maybe one day, I will just have to give them all back to the creek.

Posted by Hardcorps (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Next time I go up the creek I'm taking a paddle.

Posted by NatchezEnema (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 4:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Take the 55 million and build the worlds largest water park, slide off of the bluff. There are plenty of places to canoe in this area and Mississippi for that matter. Chunky River, Oakatibi, Chickaswayhay, State park, the new lake in Franklin Co. Big Black, Okatoma, Buffalo. Or the Mississippi if you are brave. I have canoed every one of them. There is no shortage of places to canoe. I wonder besides researching how much it would cost, has Gardner researched the monetary impact or cost of upkeep? I highly doubt it. I wonder if he has ever canoed or knows of any of these places I mentioned. If this was built I don't think it would be used anymore than the 10 million $ convention center. Build a horse racing track or something that can be used all year all the time with potential to grow. There is a great canoe rental place in Hattiesburg on the Okatoma river. Call them and ask how much they do in rental during the winter months. Not too many people like being around or on the water when it is cold or they can't swim in it, especially in a canoe. This is already starting to sound like one of the Natchez cart before the horse ideas. Build it and they will come. Natchez getting into the canoe rental business, I don't think so.

Posted by CitizenSane (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 4:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Is this the part of the Creek that is a National Wildlife Refuge?

I didn't know that it was a National Wildlife Refuge until recently.

That's a big deal. You can read about it here on the Fish and Wildlife Service's website:

http://www.fws.gov/saintcatherinecreek/

Posted by ntzmom (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 6:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I was thinking it would be like Bogo Chitto, just canoes, kayaks and tubes.
It is great to hear that the people that can make this happen are in fact working on it!
Natchez REALLY needs something local for groups of people of all ages to do, and this would just be so perfect!

Posted by hopefloats (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

St. Catherine's is fun to canoe when the water is up. I think it would be a great place for whomever decides to use it.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 6:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

ntzmom, The Bogue Chitto, Okatoma and others have a serious water flow. This project will not provide running water. It will stop what little water flows through the creek. Go look off the bridge between the hospital and stines and you will see what it will look like.

Whisper, I've considered the same thing - Just throwing it back in one day. I doubt I will do that, but I've thought about it. The stuff I've found is like treasure to me. I'd hate for it to fall (inheritance) into the hands of someone who didn't care about it.

CitizenSane, The refuge is south of the creek.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 7:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That is what makes me wonder about this plan OldGrandDad. 55 million is roughly ten million dollars a mile. The only time you see an appreciable amount of water in the creek, apart from backwater in flood times, is when rain runoff is gushing down it.

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on May 19, 2008 at 7:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Can creek plan be bad idea?"

I think it is good idea BUT a better idea would be to dam up the Homochitto River at 61 South. The dam would back up the water to Rosetta. The water depth at the bridge on MS 33 would be no less than 10 feet deep.

Now, we are talking about recreational opportunities and we would have an asset to entice industry.

Posted by oldschool (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 7:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! COME ALL YOU WILL SEE (A WATER PARK)

Posted by oldschool (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 7:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I just don't see where it is going to cost that much money to do all that. There is only a slim few in Natchez and surrounding areas that will actually use this. Then we have this problem of the drinking on the creek and the kids bla bla. ANYWAY.... I think I am with Natchez enema.....BUILD A WATER PARK and things for our children to do KEEP them safe, give them something to do. This will also give some summer jobs etc.... I think This RETIREMENT town needs to think about all the young people that live here also..... Sure do a part of the creek to raft on but DON'T WAIST ALL THAT MONEY ON IT. The water park would add to the tourisim. Think about when you go out of town where do you wind up at, an amusement park and a water park, a beach, a casino, This would be great for Natchez!!!!!

Posted by oldschool (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 7:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! IF YOU BUILD IT THEY WOULD COME!!!!! COME ALL YOU WILL SEE (A WATER PARK

Posted by blackwood (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 8:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Gary, All running water need not be dammed up and impounded. The Homochitto is a great place to canoe and walk and swim. Lets not kill it.

Honestly, I've never understood the mentality of the people who first looked at the Tennessee Valley, Glen Canyon or the Hetch Hetchy and decided they would be even more beautiful if they were flooded. What is it about running water that irks some folks?

Marc Blackwood

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 8:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If they did something else though, oldschool, like build a world class whitewater training center on the creek capable of also training water rescue personnel a higher class of person would be attracted to the area than the type of people who would use a waterpark. Just look at the type of people who go down to Blue Bayou in Baton Rouge. Those people, bless their hearts, just don't have the kind of money that would do much for the local economy.

A project that would provide both entertainment and a useful social purpose would be much more attractive to federal and state stakeholders than a mere waterpark.

It really isn't for us to question or decide what gets built with state and federal funds though, we have leaders to make those decisions for us.

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on May 19, 2008 at 8:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Marc Blackwood

I doubt that the Homochitto River will ever be considered for a dam. Such an endeavor would be too expensive.

However, it sure would be nice to have a big recreational lake in southwest Mississippi. There would still be miles and miles of the Homochitto that would not be affected by a dam close to the mouth.

Oh, well, we may have to agree to disagree on this one. I figure your side will win, but please allow an old man to dream about what could be? :o)

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 8:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hey Gary, Lake Okhisa is a beautiful, brand new recreational lake in southwestern Mississippi, a dream that took 50 years to achieve. It's just forty miles from Natchez.

It is a beautiful example of social collaboration, and has area left for developers wishing to partner with the National Park Service in creating restaurants, hotels, and marinas on the lake.

Have you been up there yet?

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 8:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I always thought it would be a good thing to damn up Spanish Bayou...it would stop the erosion and give many folks an unexpected waterfront...er, or waterback mostly...LOL.

Jeez...oldschool, lighten up.

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on May 19, 2008 at 9 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur.

Sorry to say that I have not been to Lake Okhissa. It is 1,600 +/- acres and will be an asset to the Franklin area. However, it is a small lake.

My vision of the lake on the Homochitto would be 10s of thousands of acres. I have looked at the topo but I do not have a good idea about the surface area for the lake if the water were 10 feet deep at the MS 33 bridge.

Other than losing a part of a free flowing stream, just think about the possibilities for Adams and Wilkinson counties!

Posted by blackwood (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Gary, Spend some time on the Homochitto and I'm sure you will come to love it. After periods of no rain the water is crystal clear. And it has fish, snakes, gators, eagles and more. Even at the hwy 33 bridge, when no traffic is coming, you can listen and hear nothing. Its absolutely quiet. Most creeks are quiet. Lakes are noisy.

For something special, go back to the hwy 33 bridge after heavy rains. The water is from bank to bank, there are standing waves in the river and the sound is awesome.

Agreed with EnKiKur, our area does have a brand new lake which is very large and was built on a Homochitto tributary.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey Sam, through designing buildings for the day?

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

My word of warning on this is...look at what has happened to the Mississippi. If left to nature the Mississippi would have long since left its current (no pun intended) channel and gone down the Atchafalaya, thus replenishing the salt marshes with new sediment instead of all that sediment being shuted off the continental shelf. That sediment and the resulting salt marsh would have absorbed much of the Katrina surge.

Of course that would leave New Orleans and Baton Rouge high and dry, but relative to their recent experiences that would be a good thing, right. Besides, it would be a kind of retribution for Huey P. Long building the bridges so low that ocean going traffic couldn't come to Natchez...LOL.

Seriously, though, it's only a matter of time before the Corps can't forstall the inevitable any longer without spending sums too large for the voters to acquiese to.

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur...Yeah, I can only do so much to improve mankind's existence in one day...LOL.

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on May 19, 2008 at 9:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Marc Blackwood.

In my younger days, I fished the Saline River in Arkansas. We would put in at Ozment Bluff and fish the shoals down river. At times, we had to pull the boat over the shallows. Generally, we would beach the boat at the top of the shoal and fish down the sand bar on foot. Afterward, we got back in the boat to fish through the shoal and motored to the next shoal.

Man, those were fun trips for a teenager. However, I am to old and fat to make a trip like that now. Thanks for reminding me of the fun times on a free flowing stream.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You are right Sam. Left to its own devices the Mississippi would have transformed its entire basin into a nearly level plain. It would take a while, but the force behind it has till the sun burns out to accomplish the job.

Those big 13000 hp tows coming up the river can carry the same amount of stuff two or three ships capable of coming up to Baton Rouge can carry, but they don't bring much up to drop off in our area because there is no interstate once it gets here.

Did you know that by the Treaty of 1783 the British still have the right to sail warships all the way up to the head of the river Sam? I wonder why they never do it.

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

blackwood...I'm with you, the sandy banks of the Homochitto aren't something I would would like to lose.

I could see this working better on St. Catherine...I grew up on Morgantown Road and our property backed up to St. Catherine. Even though it was mostly an intermittent stream the 50 ft bluffs at the back of my Mom & Dad's property was always sloughing...from 1968 to 1998 we probably lost 100 linear yards to the creek in erosion.

If St. Catherine was dammed, the cutting curves would be eliminated for a distance and possibly save some real estate loss for the people on it's banks.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur, the Brits don't do it because they don't have the guts. Ain't you noticed? Give them a few more years. They are changing. Their accent is being replaced with a polish one and half of them pray facing Mecca. That's what their EU has accomplished for them.

Sam,
Thats what this article in the Democrat was about - Water standing against bluffs will erode them instead of upholding them. From experience I tend to agree.

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur...I imagine they're too embarassed to pass the battlefield at Chalmette...loss of face y'know.

The point I was making about Huey P. was that he did it intentionally, before the interstate system was even conceived...he purposely made the bridges at Baton Rouge too low for ocean going vessels to pass under.

Frankly, the interstate should have come down from Memphis to Vicksburg to Natchez and then to Baton Rouge replacing Highway 61, but I've been told that the Natchez powers that be at the time wanted no part of it. How's that for myopia?

To Huey, I say it's time for payback!

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I hope they give us time to get all those cannons that are stuck in the ground and the one pointed in the wrong direction at St Mary's Park moved up on the bluff where they need to be OldGrandDad.

You know, they used to say the sun never sat on the British Empire because God didn't trust an Englishman in the dark. I wonder if those millions of CCTV cameras they put up to watch themselves are a verification of that.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I didn't realize Huey did that on purpose Sam. It makes sense though. However, his plan only worked for a while. Once that new container port on Mexico's west coast gets hooked up to the TransTexas Corridor ship traffic to the Gulf Coast is going to dramatically decrease. The Chinese are going to be left in charge of a rapidly depreciating asset in that canal we are letting them run.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur, If the big brother nightmares that I hear from the brits are true, the real miracle is that they have not had their own revolution by now.

By the way, have you heard what those stuck-in-the-ground guns are worth nowadays? Mega bucks.

Sam, when were those interstate decisions made? The 50's?

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OldGrandDad...I don't think I agree with you on that. Loess is a sandy loam which has a lot of clay. When it's consistently exposed to water it tends to bond and compact, particularly if the water pressure is constant as in a lake situation.

The problem comes when it is exposed and then not, and then exposed again. Similar to the way wood will not rot if permanently submerged or permanently dry, but will decay at an advanced rate if the wet/dry cycle fluctuates.

Loess bluffs have a better chance of surviving if there is relatively immobile water pressing against them rather than if they are on the outside curve of a flowing stream as is the case of Natchez since the Giles Cutoff was instituted by the COE.

The best way to save a loess bluff is to keep the flowing stream current away from it and to keep water from above flowing back away from the edge and make sure it is vertical because any slope will aid erosion.

You can thank my Mom, the first female geology graduate from Milsaps for instilling that knowledge in me to pass on to you.

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OldGrandDad...that's my understanding, but I doubt there will be much, if any documentation...I can't divulge the nature of my knowledge, but it was word of mouth to me from very knowlegeable sources.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 9:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I spent most of the day reading about feudalism OldGrandDad. Under the fuedal system a freeperson, the highest level of peasant, would sometimes re-enter bondage upon realization or fear that he could not make his own way in life. I wonder if that is how the English people see themselves now.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur, recent polls show the 4th most common name for baby boys in England is Mohamed. And i'm told the poles are moving in like crazy. By the time Charles becomes king, he will not know what the heck he is king of. Their borders are almost as porous as our own......

Sam, I was just wondering about "when" in order to figure out "who". But i'll allow you to be diplomatic.

I'll bow to your expertise on the bluffs, but i would not want to have my house on a loess bluff. And I'd worry even more if it was being licked by water.......

Good night, all.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That is one way to fix the Palestinian crisis OldGrandDad. Let them move to England.

Night.

Posted by xfloodman (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You know it makes me wonder why Bobby C. was all for this at one time and now he has taken a 180 degree turn. Could there possibly be some money involved? NA' not in Adams County, right?????

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

xfloodman...Bobby C.?...to whom are you referring?

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EnKiKur...it occurs to me that this is a second Moorish invasion of Europe from a different direction...is it time for another Isabella and Ferdinand?

Posted by texasranger (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The creek has everything from dead cow,s,pig,s,raw sewerage and who knows what else. Beside what about the erosion. A lot of homes are setting on the banks. Plantation manor apartments would be flooded. Why don,t we build some more new bridges and erect some more monuments to the past and just waste the whole thing like we,re doing now. Make major street modifications after every major industry has left Natchez. Tear up the railroad tracks and put in more tall lights down the highway so we can see better at night,the few of us that are left. Our invest it in Rentech, that,s a booming metropolis. Our build more homes for the non existent tourists. More hotels and boats so we can lose more money that will be sent north. Or just give it away to the no pays and deadbeats who number in the thousands working the system in Natchez and steal what,s left or give away another $15,000 in car tags and let the person go.

Posted by NatchezEnema (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If anyone wonders about the durability of loess soil look at the picture at the top of this page. Or, better yet, go under the hill and look up at the millions of $ that were spent stabilizing the bluff that never had anything more than rain runoff going over it. This is not rocket science. Remember when several people were killed in the landslide in the 70's? If this town can't find anything better to do with 55 million $ than to build some mosquito ponds, this town deservers to rot on the vine. My gosh, is there any vision left in this area?

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 10:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

texasranger...whoa, dude, let's take one bitch at a time...do you personally know of dead cows, pigs and/or raw sewerage in St. Catherine? If so, have you reported it to the proper authorities?

We've been discussing the erosion already...read up and then comment.

Uh...don't know from your next sentence about bridges and monuments and waste exactly what you're railing about.

What have railroad tracks and tall street lights got to do with each other or anything else?

Your protests against Rentech? What are they?

No one builds houses for tourists, they are by definition, transient.

Do you lose money on the hotels or casinos, maybe you should stay out of them.

I agree that we have a lot of people nursing the system, but what the heck are you talking about with the $15,000.00 in car tags and letting someone go?

Please string this all together with a little more clarity.

Posted by jammin1 (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 11:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Years ago, lots of money was spent to drain Thornburg Lake. I got bait at Anna's Bottom and caught my very first fish in that lake. That lake would have been a great spot to have for recreation, now they want to spend 55 million dollars to bring lakes to a place that wasn't meant to have lakes. I'm shaking my head.

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 11:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NatchezEnema...still a disgusting moniker...loess does best when it shears vertically and no over-the-top water is allowed to erode it and no moving water undermines its base...the engineers corrected two of the three problems with the work they did...otherwise the landslide of the 70's would re-occur...only the COE can correct the fact we are now on the outside of the Mississippi River curve which constantly erodes our city.

It occurs to me that I've never seen you post one, not one, positive comment here...if you don't like Natchez and don't want to be part of the solution, then you're part of the problem so please leave.

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 11:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

jammin1...ah, those were the days...Anna Bottom and Thornburg Lake. Where did the 55 million figure come from? Did i miss something?

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on May 19, 2008 at 11:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"The entire project would cost $55 million."

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 11:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Gary...according to who?

Posted by jammin1 (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 11:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The next to the last line in the article sammohon. It states the entire project will cost that much.

Posted by gemccull (Gary McCullars) on May 19, 2008 at 11:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That is the estimate in the study I saw.

Weir 1 8.9 million
Weir 2 8.5 million
Weir 3 9.8 million
Weir 4 12.4 million
Weir 5 15.7 million

Total 55.3 million

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 19, 2008 at 11:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

jammin1...gotcha, I forgot...but I can't see that kind of expense returning the investment made...additionally, I have a problem with just how, from an engineering point of view, how the wiers would be anchored...guess I need to talk to Tony...he usually has a pretty good plan.

Posted by NatchezEnema (anonymous) on May 20, 2008 at 12:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If you would sit up and not condeme waste, eneptness, ignorance, or a misguided idea you are part of the problem. You type very eloquently, but I rarely ever read in any of your posts any true business mentality, just a lot of colorful descriptions. Let me tell you a thing or two. I am not against Natchez, I am for it. I have been in business here for over 20 years and I learned there are 3 things to business. 1st, education of your product or service that you want to sell, whether you are a doctor or a ditch digger. 2nd, dedication and desire to sell it, 3rd, location to sell it. There has been no research other than what it would cost to see this project through, the same as the convention center. There is a nice liability that promised an increase in visitors to Natchez. No research on the liabilities, upkeep, operation, or financial gain to this area. No research on how much it would cost, who, or how it would be controlled, operated or what laws would govern it. No research or guesstimate of how many people would even come to it in the warm months it was open. I hear a lot of people on this blog say they would love it and go to it. How many of these people here go and tour our historic homes on a regular basis. It's like people who live in Biloxi rarely go to the beach there, been there done that. I read a lot of ideas in these blogs, some good some bad, but I always look at them from a business stand point. There is a saying in new business ventures, is it gonna fly or die? How do you know that? Market research. This is why 80% of new businesses fail in the first 5 years. No education, dedication, or location. Show me a true business plan and I will consider it. Other than that if you want to follow the herd go ahead. The dog in front of the pack has a raw tip on the tail. I think everybody knows what all the rest of the pack has on their nose. CRAP! Leave the horse in front of the cart, don't put it behind it. We have had enough of that in Natchez.

Posted by 000117 (anonymous) on May 20, 2008 at 12:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NatchezEnema
THANK YOU

Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on May 20, 2008 at 3:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NatchezEnema...I do condemn waste, ineptness (this is the correct spelling), ignorance and misguided ideas, but I think this idea may have some merit.

I appreciate your compliment about my eloquence, but I didn't need the business 101 lecture.

I don't think we're that far apart on this...it needs a lot more study, planning and information before I can make up my mind about whether it is a good idea or not, but at first blush, as I stated before, I don't see the big price tag returning on the investment as much as if the money were used for other purposes. I also have reservations about the engineering of it.

I think the difference we have is that I'm willing to listen to the idea and the follow up before condemning it out of hand with insufficient evidence. Again, I still have heard nothing positive from you.