The Incorporation of Subsurface Geology through Cooperative

Engagement with the Oil and Gas Industry into Louisiana’s

Comprehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast

A submittal to the RESTORE Act Center of Excellence

Chris McLindon
New Orleans Geological Society
November 29, 2018
This proposal is presented in response to the solicitation of feedback on a draft Research Needs document
developed by The RESTORE Act Center of Excellence for Louisiana (LA-COE). This proposal will focus on
the need to incorporate Subsurface Geology into the conception, planning, design and implementation of
Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan, but in doing so it will also outline the necessity of a cooperative working
relationship among the oil and gas industry and the rest of the stakeholders in the coastal community. It
is not considered possible to effectively incorporate Subsurface Geology into the Master Plan in the
absence of a cooperative working relationship with the oil and gas industry, and the need to establish that
relationship is presented here as an essential research need in its own right.

Premise

Our collective understanding of the natural systems around us, and the application of science to our
successful existence within those systems is not uniformly distributed. Some system components are less
well understood than others. This is the case with Subsurface Geology in coastal Louisiana in particular.
For a number of reasons Subsurface Geology has been generally omitted from the conception, planning
and implementation of coastal sustainability projects (commonly called coastal restoration projects) over
the past few decades. Nobody has stated the situation more clearly than Dr. Len Bahr, who between 1993
and 2008 held the positions of Executive Assistant to Governor, Office of Coastal Activities, or Director,
Governor’s Applied Coastal Science Program under four governors. Dr. Bahr ended his May 2013 blog
post with these two paragraphs:

“As important as wetlands are, their function is limited by the sediment platform on which they
grow, a platform that formed over 6,000 years of net deposition of Holocene mineral sediments
from the Mississippi River. Since its very inception in 1989 Louisiana’s coastal restoration program
has been dominated by coastal wetland ecologists like me, folks who deal in relatively short-term
surface processes, not the long term geophysical and riverine processes that underlie the delta. In
other words, the planning expertise has been dominated by those who deal primarily with surface
processes on the visible veneer of the delta, not the riverine hydrodynamics and sedimentary
processes that created the delta and the underlying tectonic processes and shallow and deep
subsidence to which the delta ultimately responds.

It’s a pity that the folks who described in great detail the ontogeny of the largest delta in North
America and who performed the forensic work on delta dysfunction were only recently invited to
the planning table…after key restoration plans had already been drawn up.”

It is a premise of this proposal that one of the principal reasons that the application of Subsurface Geology
has been lacking in the coastal program is that “the folks who described in great detail the ontogeny of
the largest delta in North America” worked primarily in the oil and gas industry. For much of the last
century thousands of geoscientists in the oil and gas industry have spent millions of hours interpreting
billions of dollars worth of seismic surveys and tens of thousands of wells to produce a collective
knowledge base. This knowledge base has made the Gulf of Mexico Basin in general, and coastal Louisiana
in particular, the most well-understood geological provinces in the world, and yet, almost none of this
knowledge base has been incorporated into coastal sustainability planning.

Dr. Woody Gagliano, CEO of Coastal Environments Inc, and recipient of the Coalition to Restore Coastal
Louisiana’s Lifetime Achievement Award, wrote in The Louisiana Civil Engineer Journal of the Louisiana
Section of The American Society of Civil Engineers:

pg. 1
 “Remarkably, there has been an information disconnect between the geologists and geophysicists
working in the petroleum industry and the community of scientists, engineers and planners
engaged in coastal restoration. The restoration community is largely oblivious to the tectonic
dynamics of the region. A major goal of the research reported herein is to apply the knowledge
gained from the interactive tectonic depositional model, as derived from the rock and landform
record, to a better understanding of modern coastal change. This in turn will strengthen the basis
for planning and design of coastal restoration projects.”

There are a number of potential reasons that the geological knowledge base of the oil and gas industry
has not been available for coastal sustainability planning, including the fact that much of the data and
interpretation has been held confidential by oil and gas companies. The lack of information sharing
between the oil and gas industry and other stakeholders was recognized as a barrier to communication
by the 2018 Consensus Study Report of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine:
Undestanding the Long-Term Evolution of the Coupled Natural-Human Coastal System: The Future of
the U.S. Gulf Coast:

Barrier 3: The size and complexity of the energy industry, as well as apparent limitations to
information sharing, present a barrier to effective communication between the energy industry
and other stakeholders.

Opportunity 3: Create an incentive structure that fosters information sharing between the energy
industry and other stakeholders, as well as protocols for how to engage more effectively to
facilitate information sharing. This process could be facilitated by a third party such as a boundary
organization.

This proposal will make specific recommendations about both the research needs for incorporating
Subsurface Geology into Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan, and specific methodologies for information
sharing through which to engage the oil and gas industry in that incorporation. The methodologies for
information sharing will be presented here in a form that can be incorporated into future “Requests for
Proposals” (RFP) for the LA-COE.

Principal Research Needs Incorporating Subsurface Geology

Subsurface Geology is considered to be a foundational scientific discipline essential to the understanding

of all other natural processes in coastal-delta environment. This proposal would contend that Subsurface
Geology should warrant a separate heading in the list of research needs enumerated in the LA-COE
Research Needs draft document. Short of that, Subsurface Geology should be considered for
incorporation into each of the other research needs listed therein:

1. Hydrology and Hydrodynamics of Riverine, Estuarine, and Coastal Systems

2. Estuarine and Coastal Ecology
3. Geotechnical, Structural and Coastal Engineering
4. Deltaic Geology, Geomorphology, Subsidence and Sediment Dynamics
5. Human Dimensions

pg. 2
The consideration of the interdependency of Subsurface Geology with each of these other topics and the
opportunity for cross-disciplinary research among them will have no value if it is restricted to the
theoretical or hypothetical realms. The incorporation of Subsurface Geology as a research need will
require real and tangible actions to insure full and accurate integration. These are the three primary
actions necessary to support the research needs outlined in this proposal:

1. Data Collection – the paucity of accurate, reliable and consistent data in the Louisiana coastal
zone reveals what is by far the greatest research need for the effective implementation of
Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan. Each of the twelve research gaps recognized by the Consensus
Study Report of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine: Undestanding the
Long-Term Evolution of the Coupled Natural-Human Coastal System: The Future of the U.S. Gulf
Coast reflects in some way a need for data collection. There are three principal needs for
subsurface geological data collection:
a. Direct Measurement of Short-Term (Current) Rates of Subsidence - the importance of
subsidence will be addressed more fully in another section, which will stress the
importance of measuring current subsidence rates. The most accurate and reliable
methodology for measuring short-term subsidence employs GPS (Global Positioning
System) elevation measurements. An alternative or supplemental methodology would
employ campaign-style geodetic measurements of each monument in the Coastwise
Reference Monitoring System (CRMS) network. Periodic resurveying of CRMS sites could
provide valuable short-term subsidence data. The primary objective of this data
collection would be to allow for detailed mapping of variations of short-term (current)
subsidence rates for integration with subsurface geological interpretations. Areas
targeted for future research would include comparisons of areas of higher and lower
subsidence based on historical rates, and high-density measurement across surface-
expressed faults and in the planning areas of major projects. The ultimate longer-term
objective of subsidence data collection should be to produce a detailed map of the
variation in short-term subsidence rates across the coastal plain, and to provide a sound
basis for predictive modelling of subsidence rates.
b. Sediment Core and Boring Collection and Compilation – sediment cores and borings have
primarily been used in the coastal zone to measure and evaluate geotechnical parameters
in association with project engineering and design. The subsurface stratigraphic
information contained in cores and borings has significant application in the
interpretation of depositional environments of the Holocene strata and in the integration
of these interpretations with maps of faults and variations in short-term subsidence rates
to determine their interdependencies. Core and boring information can be used to
measure and map the total thickness of the Holocene, the thickness of the “topstratum”
of the Holocene, the environments of deposition of sedimentary strata in the Holocene
topstratum, and variations in the thickness of highly organic clay peat layers contained
within those strata. Chronostratigraphic age determination of sedimentary layers can be
used to determine rates of sediment accumulation, and potentially to infer longer-term
historical rates of subsidence and fault slip. These interpretations could be used to better
understand the nature of shallow aquifers and the subsurface flow of water adjacent to
river channels, the relationship between subsidence rates and the thickness of the

pg. 3
 Holocene, and the relationships between faults, peat thickness and subsidence. Areas
targeted for future research would include an effort to compile all existing core and boring
data into a comprehensive library for researchers, and the collection of new cores and
borings in areas between the concentrated coverage around major projects. The ultimate
longer-term objective of core and boring data collection should be to develop a network
of stratigraphic information across the coastal plain.
c. High Resolution Seismic Data Acquisition – the mapping of faults and Quaternary
sedimentary layers with oil and gas industry data, as described in the next section, can be
significantly enhanced and supplemented by the acquisition of high-resolution seismic
data in specific areas. Oil and gas industry data allows for subsurface geological mapping
in the lower Quaternary across large portions of the coast, but the data lacks the
resolution to make definitive determinations about the Holocene. High resolution seismic
data targeted at areas where faults can be reasonably extrapolated to the surface can be
used to measure the offset of seismic reflectors in the Holocene. If combined with
chronostratigraphic age determination from sediment cores, high-resolution seismic data
can be used to estimate rates of sediment accumulation, rates of historical subsidence,
and differential rates of subsidence across faults. Areas targeted for future research
would be the speculative acquisition of high-resolution seismic data grids across all major
engineering projects in the coastal zone, and selected areas where faults appear to extend
to the surface based on the interpretation of oil and gas industry data. The ultimate
longer-term objective of high resolution seismic data collection should be the imaging of
all major fault systems that extend to the surface.

2. Data Integration and Mapping – the effectiveness of incorporating collected data and the oil and
gas industry knowledge base into Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan will be determined by the
degree to which it can be integrated and presented in map form. Data presented in map form
can provide the basis for cross-disciplinary research with Hydrology and Hydrodynamics,
Estuarine and Coastal Ecology, Geotechnical and Structural Engineering, Geomorphology and
Sediment Dynamics, and Human Dimensions.

a. Pre-Quaternary Subsurface Geology – oil and gas industry seismic data and well data can
be used to map salt domes and faults that appear to extend to the surface. Figure 1 is a
map of some of the faults and salt domes in southern Plaquemines and Jefferson Parishes.
Faults are represented by yellow contours and salt domes are presented by green
contours, each indicating depth below the surface. The blue lines indicate the “surface
trace” of each fault, which is coincident with the zero depth contour of the fault plane
map. The blue squares attached to each surface trace indicate the dip of the fault plane
and thereby the down-dropped direction of the fault. Other surface fault traces are also
indicated in this figure even though the fault plane contours are not presented. There is
a tendency for faults to interconnect the salt domes creating a subsurface structural
framework. The faults and salt domes can be mapped with oil and gas industry seismic
data and well log data. It is necessary to do some interpretation of pre-Quaternary
stratigraphic intervals in order to produce the fault plane and salt dome maps, but in
general interpretation of the structural and stratigraphy below the base of the

pg. 4
 Quaternary is not necessary to provide a subsurface structural foundation. The Barataria
fault labeled in Figure 1 will be used as an example in several sections of this proposal.
The Barataria fault connects the Lake Washington and the Bay de Chene salt domes. The
subsurface depth contours shown here were mapped with 3-D seismic data and well log
correlations from a depth of about 20,000 feet up to a depth of about 1,500 feet below
the surface (Mclindon, 2017). The surface trace of the fault was extrapolated from the
fault plane map, and it can be seen to roughly conform to the northern edge of Barataria
Bay.

Figure 1

b. Quaternary Subsurface Geology – the base of the Quaternary can be reliably mapped
with oil and gas industry data across most of coastal Louisiana. A network of subsurface
well log correlations has been published by McFarlan and LeRoy (1988) (Figure 2). From
this network detailed maps of the base of the Quaternary surface can be mapped across
most areas of coastal Louisiana. Subsurface structure maps in the lower Quaternary have
two principal purposes in coastal research. First, a subsurface structure map on a lower
Quaternary stratigraphic horizon provides a detailed structural framework within which
to interpret the Holocene interval and the relationships between Subsurface Geology and
modern coastal ecosystems. As will be seen in a subsequent section, there are strong
indications that the subsurface structural framework of coastal Louisiana has had an
interdependency with patterns of delta deposition and ecosystem evolution throughout

pg. 5
the late Holocene. The structural framework created by the Barataria fault and the Lake
Washington and Bay de Chene salt domes will be used as an example. Second, subsurface
structure maps of the lower Quaternary can be used to determine total thickness of the
Quaternary. Variations in thickness of the Quaternary stratigraphic interval may be
indicative of patterns of long-term subsidence and differential subsidence due to fault
slip. Figure 3 is a subsurface depth map on the base of the Quaternary generated from

Figure 2

Figure 3

pg. 6
 the interpretation of oil and gas industry 3-D seismic and well log data (McLindon, 2017).
Oil and gas wells are indicated on the map by the circular symbols. Straight lines
connecting symbols indicate directional wellbores. Because this map also illustrates the
thickness of the Quaternary, it can be used to show that the Barataria and the Lake Five
faults were active during the Quaternary. The interval thickness of area immediately
downthrown to the Barataria fault is over 200 feet greater than the upthrown side of the
fault. There is similar thickening across the Lake Five fault. There are also indications of
thickening in the grabens adjacent to the Lake Washington and Bay de Chene salt domes.
The domes also indicate interval thinning toward the crests of the domes, which may be
indicative of active haloekenisis (or salt movement) during the Quaternary. These
indications of fault activity in the Quaternary are significant because they may allow for
the inclusion of these faults in the U.S.G.S. Quaternary Fault and Fold Database.
Currently, the U.S.G.S. Database is restricted to the inclusion of faults that show evidence
of having been seismically active during the Quaternary. It is likely that the movement of
faults in coastal Louisiana, as indicated by this thickness map, is aseismic, or slow-slip,
fault movement. If it can be demonstrated that slow slip fault movement continued to
occur episodically throughout the Quaternary, then the inclusion of the faults in the
U.S.G.S. Quaternary Fault and Fold Database could bring greater focus and resources to
the study of these faults.

c. Holocene Subsurface Mapping – subsurface geological interpretation of the Holocene

interval is one of the most underutilized research components in the coastal zone.
Thousands of cores and borings have been collected across the area over the past several
decades, but they tend to be scattered among innumerable individual, and generally
isolated, research and engineering projects. Many of these cores and boring penetrated
the entire Holocene interval, but were used only to evaluate geotechnical parameters of
the sedimentary layers. There are three primary research objectives for Holocene
subsurface mapping
i. Thickness of the Holocene – (or depth to the top of the Pleistocene). A
compilation of all direct measurements of the depth of the top of the Pleistocene
from cores, borings, cone penetrometers and geophysical logs would be a very
valuable component to an overall subsurface geological evaluation. A preliminary
compilation map was published by the Louisiana Geological Survey (Heinrich et
al, 2015). In an effort get a broad base of coverage, this map appears to have
incorporated data values that were not direct measurements of the top of
Pleistocene as described here. There are many more direct measurement values
from cores, borings and cone penetrometers taken for the evaluation of
infrastructure projects by CPRA and DOTD that could be incorporated into
mapping the depth to the top of Pleistocene. A thickness of Holocene map could
be used in combination with thickness of the Quaternary maps, depositional
environments of the Holocene (delta lobe maps), fault maps, and peat thickness
or organic content maps to determine relationships between faults, subsidence,
rates of deposition and ecosystem evolution.

pg. 7
ii. Holocene Depositional Environments – the interpretation of depositional
environments of the Holocene from cores and borings by David Frazier (1967)
provided the foundation for our understanding of the construction of the coastal
wetlands by a succession of Holocene delta lobes of the Mississippi River.
Fraizer’s work also provided the basis for understanding the delta cycle that drove
the progression of ecosystem evolution throughout the Holocene. Many more
cores and borings of the Holocene have been collected since Frazier’s initial work,
and they should be incorporated into expanding and refining his interpretations.
Some researchers have suggested that it may be possible to delineate sub-lobes
to each of Frazier’s principal delta lobes. An improved understanding of
stratigraphy and depositional environments of the Holocene through the
integration of existing and newly-acquired cores and borings would improve our
understanding of historical rates and patterns of land-building and land-loss in
the delta environment. A better understanding of the stratigraphy and
depositional environments could also be incorporated with interval thickness
maps, fault maps, and peat thickness maps to examine their interdependencies.

Figure 4

iii. Thickness of Organic Clays and Peats – Harold Fisk (1944) provided the basic
model for the accumulation of highly organic soils in a coastal delta environment
(Figure 4). This model is closely tied to the delta cycle model, as defined by
Penland and Blum and Roberts (2012), and it defines the succession of ecosystem
evolution through the progression of both models. The progression of the delta
cycle, the succession of ecosystem evolution throughout that cycle and the
accumulated thickness of peats are all driven by subsidence. The measurement
of the accumulated thickness of organic clays and peats from cores and borings
is an essential component to understanding patterns of subsidence and its

pg. 8
 Figure 5

relationship to ecosystem evolution. Mapping peat thickness may also provide

insights into patterns of wetlands submergence. Given that the accumulation of
peat is driven by subsidence, a map of the thickness of accumulated peat may be
used as a proxy for historical rates of subsidence. Areas of thick peat
accumulations are therefore not only predisposed to subsidence as indicated by
the accumulation, the highly compactable nature of the soils means that these
areas may be susceptible to current and future subsidence. The ability to
evaluate subsurface geological parameters such as interval thickness and peat
thickness is primarily dependent on data density. In the area of the Bayou Dupont
Marsh Creation Project and the proposed Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion
there is an adequate data density from cores and borings to attempt a peat
thickness map. Figure 5 is a contour map of peat thickness values measured in
cores and borings taken for these projects. As Fisk’s model would predict, thicker
peat accumulations are found in the interdistributary areas between the natural

pg. 9
 levees of the distributary channels. There appears to be a relationship between
peat thickness and historical patterns of wetland submergence. The hotspots of
wetlands loss indicated on the U.S.G.S. Land Area Change Map (Couvillion et al,
2017) tend to coincide with the thick accumulations of peat in this area.

d. Map, Data, and Cross-Disciplinary Integration – the real value of data collection, mapping
of faults and salt domes, mapping Quaternary structure and thickness, and mapping
Holocene thickness, depositional environments, and peat thickness comes from
integration. Quaternary thickness maps can be integrated with Holocene thickness maps
to study long term patterns of subsidence and deposition. Fault and salt dome maps can
be integrated with depositional environment maps to study the interdependencies
between patterns of delta development and Subsurface Geology. Short-term rates of
subsidence can be mapped and integrated with surface fault trace maps and peat
thickness map. Each of these examples will discussed in more detail with examples after
the more detailed discussion of subsidence.

3. Predictive Modelling – data collection, mapping and integration all provide the necessary
foundation for accurate predictive modelling. Current modelling capabilities are challenged by
severe limitations of these three foundational components. The 2017 Coastal Master Plan Flood
Depths Map (Figure 6) is a predictive model based on data inputs for rates of subsidence across
the coastal plain and global sea level rise. This map is in effect a forecast map, which can be

Figure 6

pg. 10
 compared to a weather forecast map. Direct measurements of current short-term rates of
subsidence are collected at twelve continuously operating reference stations (CORS) across the
area of this map. These stations are a part of the GPS network. By comparison, weather forecast
maps collect data from over 200 stations across the same area. The recommendations for this
proposal are to provide for a dramatic increase in the direct measurement of current short-term
subsidence rates, and to integrate that data into sets of subsurface geological maps that can be
used to extrapolate the known data points into patterns that reflect geological controls on
subsidence. This approach could be significantly enhanced through the use of neural network
modelling. A neural network model would use the subsurface geological mapping to create a
mechanical model of the coastal plain. This mechanical model could then be used to study the
patterns of land-building and submergence in the historical deltas of the Holocene through the
integration of the depositional environments of the Holocene stratigraphy. The likely patterns of
ecosystem evolution that would have accompanied the patterns of land-building and
submergence for each of these deltas could then be integrated into the model. A neural network
model would then attempt to use the relationship between the historical patterns of
submergence and ecosystem evolution, combined with patterns of current rates of subsidence,
to predict future patterns of submergence in the coastal plain. This proposal recommends that
this type of predictive modelling should be one of the ultimate objectives of the LA-COE research
effort.

Outreach and Public Education

In addition to the three primary actions recommended here to incorporate Subsurface Geology into
Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan, it is recommended that LA-COE provide resources for outreach and public
education on the subject matter. The principal goal of this effort would be to improve science literacy
about the natural systems of the coastal zone and coastal sustainability. The 2016 National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering and Medicine report Science Literacy – Concepts, Contexts and Consequences
outlined the importance of science literacy as a component of scientific research:

“The value of community participation in scientific research is widely recognized and supported by
evidence. Community involvement can bring new questions to light, provide data that would
otherwise be unavailable, encourage the integration of qualitative and observational data with
experimental data, increase the robustness and public relevance of data collection strategies,
garner political and community support for conclusions, produce new instruments and
technologies, and build community awareness and knowledge.”

Three areas of focus for outreach and public education are recommended as they relate to Subsurface
Geology: subsidence, cooperative engagement with the oil and gas industry, and understanding the
relationship of scientific research in Subsurface Geology to coastal sustainability.

1. Subsidence - the 2018 Consensus Study Report of the National Academies of Science, Engineering
and Medicine: Undestanding the Long-Term Evolution of the Coupled Natural-Human Coastal
System: The Future of the U.S. Gulf Coast recognized subsidence as the second principal research
gap in the coastal system:

pg. 11
 “Research Gap 2: The causes, rates, and patterns of subsidence along the Gulf Coast are
not sufficiently well understood to allow for accurate prediction at the local to regional
scale.”

The maps in Figure 7 capture the current status of our understanding of subsidence in coastal
Louisiana. Aside from the direct measurement of short-term subsidence rates by the GPS stations
in the CORS network, these are the four principal methodologies for measuring or estimating
subsidence rates. It is important to recognize the value and the limitations of each of these
methodologies, and to recognize two principal observations from a comparison of the maps. First,
where they agree – each map and each underlying methodology recognizes that subsidence is
intensely heterogeneous – that is, SUBSIDENCE RATES ARE VARIABLE ACROSS SPATIAL
DIMESIONS. The range of values for rates of subsidence are also comparable among the

Figure 7

methodologies. In most cases the high-end values of subsidence rates (generally greater than 20
millimeters per year (mm/yr)) tend to be concentrated in discrete hot spots. On the larger scale
maps the areas of investigation tends to be covered by larger areas of subsidence rates at the low
end of the scale (less than 10 mm/yr). Generally speaking, these maps indicate that the high-end
values of subsidence rate are concentrated in relatively small hot spots, and much of the rest of
the area exhibit relatively low subsidence rates. Second – how the maps are different. They don’t
all agree. Clearly none of these methodologies is perfect, and some may be producing erroneous
information. One methodology may indicate a hot spot of subsidence where another does not.
The integration of short-term subsidence rates measured by new GPS stations, as recommended
in this proposal, should help to resolve some of these differences. The values of subsidence rates
produced by each methodology are also time dependent. Tide gauge and geodetic leveling data

pg. 12
produce a range of subsidence values over a period of several decades. CRMS and InSAR data
produce short-term values measured over a period of a few years. The subsidence rate values

Figure 8

produced by the tide gauge and geodetic leveling methodologies shown on the maps in Figure 7
are the maximum values recorded at each location over the total time span. The graphs in Figure
8 show the range of subsidence rate values measured at the Grand Isle tide gauge between 1950
and 2000 by Kolker et al, 2011 and the range of subsidence rate values measured by resurveying
231 elevation benchmarks on a line between New Orleans and New Iberia in five epochs between

pg. 13
1955 and 1995 by Shinkle and Dokka, 2004. It is clear on these graphs that SUBSIDENCE RATES
ARE VARIABLE ACROSS THE TEMPORAL DIMESION. It is significant that both graphs suggest the
episodic nature of subsidence. The tide gauge and geodetic leveling data indicate an event in
which subsidence rate values reached a maximum between 1960 and 1980, and have generally
decreased since then. This pattern is supported by the evaluation of the data from several more
tide gauges in the coastal zone by Penland et al, 1989. The pattern of decreasing rates of
subsidence over the past few decades is also supported by the fact that current short-term rates
of subsidence measured by CORS stations are to the low end of the range of historical values
measured by other methodologies (generally 3 to 6 mm/yr).

There are several aspects of our collective understanding of subsidence that could be improved
by outreach and public education efforts:

a. Subsidence is the (negative) vertical velocity of the surface of the earth – unnecessary
confusion has been created around subsidence by the use of the phrases “shallow
subsidence” and “deep subsidence”. These phrases cannot be accurately defined
through any rigorous application of the principles of physical geology. There are
numerous agents that contribute to the value of subsidence measured at the surface of
the earth at any point in time. Some may be due to processes that are occurring a great
depth (lithosphere flexure – Ivins et al. 2007), and some may be due to compaction of
the shallow Holocene stratigraphic interval (Kulp, 2000). There are not, however,
different measurements of subsidence for each of these processes. The collective
effect of every agent that may be contributing to subsidence is measured as a single
value at the surface. Byrnes et al, 2015 successfully measured variations in rates of
compaction in the near-surface sedimentary column, but these were variations in rates
of compaction, not rates of subsidence.
b. Most fluid extraction does not cause subsidence – one of the most commonly quoted
and poorly studied aspects of subsidence in coastal Louisiana is the relationship
between fluid extraction and subsidence. Fluid extraction is not, in and of itself, a cause
of subsidence. Subsidence may be induced by fluid extraction if the removal of fluid
from an aquifer or reservoir induces compaction of the reservoir. Induced compaction
in subsurface sedimentary strata requires a change in the effective stress within the
strata. In a very shallow aquifer, which may have intergranular porosities up to 40%,
the overburden is not fully supported by grain-to-grain contact of the matrix. Or in
other words, the interstitial fluids between the grains may be supporting some portion
of the overburden. The removal of fluids (generally groundwater) from very shallow
(less than 2,000 in depth) aquifers of this type may cause a change in effective stress in
which the grains rearrange themselves into a more stable configuration and induce
compaction of the aquifer. In these cases subsidence at the surface may be caused by
the compaction of the aquifer in the subsurface, and it may be said that the extraction
of the fluids caused the subsidence. As sedimentary layers subside and are buried to
greater and great depths, they continually compact. At depths greater than about 2,000
feet the grain-to-grain contact within aquifers and reservoirs is generally great enough
to fully support the overburden, and the movement of fluids through the pores does

pg. 14
 not affect the effective stress of the reservoir as a whole. At these depths a change in
effective stress adequate to induce compaction in the reservoir can only be caused by
a significant change in reservoir pressure. All known and postulated cases of extraction-
induced compaction (e.g. Chan and Zoback, 2007) in the Gulf Coast Basin at depths
greater than about 2,000 feet are related to reservoirs that have experienced significant
reductions in reservoir pressure throughout their productive lives. Across coastal
Louisiana the number of oil and gas reservoirs that have exhibited sufficient decreases
in reservoir pressure to have caused a change in effective stress and induced
compaction of the reservoir is small (less than 10% of all reservoirs). Outreach and
public education efforts should strive to make the public aware that the overwhelming
majority of oil and gas reservoirs across coastal Louisiana are not candidates to have
caused induced subsidence due to extraction, and the phenomenon is generally not
applicable to most areas of the coast in which subsidence can be measured at the
surface.
c. Spatial and temporal variability of subsidence – Attachment C2-2: Subsidence to the
2017 Coastal Master Plan included the map shown in Figure 9. This map divided coastal
Louisiana into 17 different geographical regions to which plausible ranges of subsidence
rates were applied. In general the ranges of subsidence rates within each region
reflected both historical rates derived from tide gauge and geodetic leveling surveys
and short-term rates from InSAR and GPS measurements, and ranged between the
outer limits of 0 and 35 mm/yr. Subsidence was integrated into the 2017 Master Plan

Figure 9

by applying an average value of 20% of the range for each geographic region across the
entire area of the region. The practice of averaging subsidence velocities over large
areas will generally tend to over-estimate rates of subsidence across most of the area,

pg. 15
 and under-estimate the rates of subsidence in the hot spots. This practice can lead to
overly pessimistic predictive models about large portions of the coast, and overly
optimistic models about hot spots where proposed projects tend to be located. A part
of the outreach and public education effort should be to make the public aware of the
variability of subsidence rates over time and across the span of the coastal plain.
Existing data can be used to demonstrate that the highest subsidence values in the
coastal plain appear to be associated with episodic subsidence events over a limited
span of time and within discrete hot spots covering relatively limited areas. Much of
the coast is covered by areas that have much lower current short-term rates of
subsidence than the average values used in the 2017 Master Plan. Forecast models of
the impacts of subsidence, such as the Flood Depth Map in Figure 6 tend to be
pessimistic because of the application of averaged values of subsidence rates.

2. Cooperative Engagement with the Oil and Gas Industry – most of the data and the knowledge
base necessary to meet the research needs in mapping faults, salt domes and Quaternary
subsurface structure outlined in this proposal reside within the oil and gas industry. The National
Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine Consensus Report recognized the opportunity
for information sharing with the industry, and recommended to “Create an incentive structure
that fosters information sharing between the energy industry and other stakeholders, as well as
protocols for how to engage more effectively to facilitate information sharing”. The report
further recognized that “This process could be facilitated by a third party such as a boundary
organization”. Since 2015, the New Orleans Geological Society (NOGS) has been acting in the role
of a boundary organization, as envisioned by this report, to facilitate information sharing between
the oil and gas industry and universities in the Louisiana coastal zone. NOGS is a non-profit
organization founded in 1941, and historically its contribution to the study of Subsurface Geology
has been through the construction of atlases of subsurface geological interpretations of oil and
gas fields and salt domes.

In 2015 NOGS began a program to coordinate access to oil and gas industry data for university
research projects examining the relationships between Subsurface Geology and surface coastal
processes such as subsidence and wetlands loss. Access to geological and geophysical data under
this program has come primarily through direct donations of seismic surveys to the University of
New Orleans (UNO) and Tulane University and through internships at oil and gas companies for
graduate student researchers at UNO and the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (ULL). Since
2012 a total of eight university research projects have used oil and gas industry data to study the
relationship between Subsurface Geology and coastal processes in south Louisiana. The principal
investigation has been to map geological faults that appear to extend to the land surface. These
faults, which have been mapped in every project, appear to play a significant role as a cause of
subsidence and to affect both rates and patterns of subsidence across the local study areas. To
date three of these research projects have resulted in completed Master in Science theses, one
of which has been published in a peer-reviewed technical journal. It is anticipated that most of
the other theses and dissertations currently utilizing oil and gas industry data under this program
will eventually produce peer-reviewed scientific publications, and that collectively this body of

pg. 16
research will have significant effect on the application of Subsurface Geology to coastal
sustainability planning.

Figure 10

The total combined area of investigation of the eight projects shown in Figure 10 is about 2,000
square miles. While these projects have begun the process of working toward a more complete
comprehension and prediction of subsidence on a local scale, the scope of the research needs to
be significantly expanded to begin to address the regional scale, and to contribute to
comprehensive, coast-wide modeling efforts of the integrated natural systems. NOGS is
continually working with universities to develop opportunities for new research projects that will
utilize oil and gas industry data.

In January 2018 NOGS joined with Louisiana Geological Survey (LGS) in the development of The
Louisiana Coastal Geohazards Atlas Project (the Atlas). The Atlas project is intended to combine
the strengths of each organization to produce a comprehensive assessment of the Surface
Geology and Subsurface Geology of south Louisiana. It is anticipated that the Atlas will have wide-
ranging applications in the planning, design and construction of infrastructure for transportation,
flood protection and sustainability. It is also anticipated that the Atlas will provide the
foundational subsurface geological evaluation of the coastal zone that can be integrated into the
study of subsidence, wetlands management and coastal ecology.

The Louisiana Coastal Geohazards Atlas project team was assembled in January 2018:

Dr. Charles Groat - Acting Director of LGS, former CEO of TWIG, former director USGS
Dr. Jeff Hanor - Professor Emeritus, LSU Dept of Geology & Geophysics
Dr. Woody Gagliano - CEO, Coastal Environments, Inc.
Dr. Gary Kinsland - Professor, ULL School of Geosciences
Dr. Nancye Dawers – Chair, Tulane School of Earth and Environmental Sciences

pg. 17
 Dr. Mark Kulp - Director of the Coastal Research Laboratory, UNO
Dr. Raphael Gottardi – Assistant Professor, ULL School of Geosciences
Dr. Karen Wicker – Senior VP, Coastal Environments, Inc.
Dr. Elizabeth McDade - Geological Consultant, 30 years oil and gas industry experience
Mr. Chris McLindon – Vice President, New Orleans Geological Society
Mr. John Johnston - Geological Review, Louisiana Geological Survey
Mr. Rick McCulloh - Research Associate, Louisiana Geological Survey
Mr. Paul Heinrich - Research Associate, Louisiana Geological Survey
Mr. Michael Merritt – Retired SLFPA-W

NOGS is currently engaged in the development of a program that has the potential to dramatically
expand access to oil and gas industry seismic data for university research projects. NOGS has
submitted a proposal to LGS based on the development of this program for data access. If the
program is successful, industry seismic surveys may be provided to universities for research
projects that can contribute to the Louisiana Coastal Geohazards Atlas. As it is currently
conceived, the program will provide seismic surveys to participating universities through a set of
task orders associated with each set of seismic surveys. It is recommended here that this
arrangement will provide an excellent opportunity for the direct association of Requests for
Proposals (RFP) from LA-COE with task orders offered by LGS. In each case a research project that
would contribute to the research needs in Subsurface Geology defined here could be coupled
with seismic data provided by the NOGS-LGS program and additional funding provided by LA-COE.
This would allow for directly addressing the research needs identified here plus the research gaps
identified by the Consensus Report of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and
Medicine through the Opportunity for Communication with the energy industry identified in the
same report.

This proposal recommends that an outreach and public education effort in support of cooperative
engagement with the oil and gas industry would help to expand the scope and pace of university
research to allow for comprehensive mapping of faults, salt domes and Quaternary subsurface
structure in the coastal zone. There would be significant value in LA-COE, as well as The Water
Institute of the Gulf and C.P.R.A. making public statements in support of cooperative engagement
with the oil and gas industry.

3. The Relationship of Scientific Research in Subsurface Geology to Coastal Sustainability – the

research needs necessary to integrate Subsurface Geology into the Louisiana Coastal Master Plan
through data collection, data integration and mapping, and predictive modelling have been
outlined here. Fostering public support for these research efforts through outreach and public
education will be essential to fully meeting these research needs. Scientific research is
significantly undervalued not only in the general public, but within the coastal community itself.
A typical response of a resident of coastal Louisiana to the idea of expanding the scope of research
on coastal sustainability would be to roll their eyes with an exasperated expression of “another
study?”. Most of the residents of the coast would be likely to tell you that they would rather be
“turning dirt” than conducting any more research. It will be vitally important over the next few
years to make the case through outreach and public education that research, and in particular

pg. 18
research on Subsurface Geology, has the potential to dramatically improve the effectiveness and
the efficiency of coastal sustainability planning. The investment in research on Subsurface
Geology over the next decade will be repaid many times over in the succeeding decades. Four
critical areas for increasing public awareness (also areas for future research) are recognized here:
the relationship of faults to ecosystem evolution, the relationship between faults and
infrastructure sustainability, the relationship of peat thickness to subsidence, and the importance
of being open to the integration of new data.

a. The Relationship of Faults to Ecosystem Evolution – the framework for presenting the
relationship between faults and ecosystem evolution is the NOGS Working Fault-Salt
Map in Figure 11. This map is a work-in-progress compilation of published maps of salt
domes and surface fault traces, the preliminary results of the ongoing university
research projects supported by NOGS, and the interpretations by NOGS geologists for
the original NOGS Fault Atlas proposal document, which provided the basis for the
Coastal Geohazards Atlas Project. Salt domes are shown with color codes indicating
their depth – cooler colors are deeper and warmer colors are shallower. The map is
incomplete and probably inaccurate in some areas, but it provides the best working
compilation with which to assess the relationships between faulting and ecosystem
evolution. Five of the primary faults on this map have been the subjects of published
research on faults and ecosystem evolution – the Lake Hatch fault, the Montegut fault,
the Golden Meadow fault, the Empire fault (referred to as the Adams Bay fault in the
NOGS project), and the Bastian Bay fault. These faults have also been referred to
collectively as the Golden Meadow fault zone (Gagliano et al, 2003).

Figure 11
The black square symbols adjacent to the fault traces indicate the downthrown
direction of the faults. Four fairly distinct fault trends are apparent on this map. In the
northeast corner of the map faults along the northern edge of Lake Pontchartrain are

pg. 19
the eastern extension of the Baton Rouge (or Tepetate) fault system. These faults are
generally considered to have a genetic relationship to the Cretaceous shelf edge, which
they parallel, and they generally do not exhibit the same magnitudes of slip rate or
differential subsidence as faults to the south. A trend of faults running WSW – ENE
from Four League Bay to the Delacroix are all down-to-the south. These faults are
coincident with a ravinement surface named the “Teche Shoreline” (Kulp et al, 2012),
which marks and important ecosystem boundary. Two tends of E-W trending faults
cross the southern portion of the map. The northern of these two trends are down-to-
the-south faults, and the southern of the two are down-to-the-north faults. These
faults form the boundaries of the “Terrebonne Trough”, a structural graben which has
been active for at least 20 million years. Some of the faults in these trends can be
grouped into conjugate pairs of faults in which down-to-the-south faults are paired with
down-to-the-north faults in what appear to be genetic relationships. In Figure 12
several of the major Holocene delta lobes numbered 1 through 16 by Frazier (1967) are

Figure 12

pg. 20
shown with sets of conjugate faults highlighted with blue and red dashes. There
appears to be a genetic relationship between the delta lobes and the fault pairs in which
the faults provide the accommodation capacity necessary to accept the sedimentary
deposits of the delta. This type of relationship can be seen in a more detailed
examination of the Bayou des Familles delta lobe shown in Figure 13. Flocks et al, 2006

Figure 13

delineated the framework of the Bayou des Familles delta lobe with high resolution
seismic data. As their series of block diagrams show, the delta built out into the open
body of water in Barataria Bay creating emergent new land. After abandonment of this

pg. 21
delta lobe the land area was submerged by subsidence and some of the sediments were
reworked in the subaqueous environment. The boundary along which submergence of
this delta lobe occurred was coincident with the surface trace of the Barataria fault. It
appears that the structural configuration of a receiving basin created by the Barataria
fault and the Lake Washington and Bay de Chene salt domes controlled the
configuration of the Bayou des Familles delta lobe. Figure 14 illustrates the
reconstructions of submergence of three successive delta lobes in the vicinity of

Figure 14

Barataria Bay. In each of the three sequences shown in this figure a delta lobe retreats
from it maximum extent back to a boundary that is generally coincident with the

pg. 22
northern fault trend of the Terrebonne Trough. The sedimentary deposits of each delta
are shown in a core profile across southern Barataria Bay. The deposists of each
successive delta stack vertically one on top of the other. The Barataria fault has been
drawn onto Frazier’s profile. It appears that the relationship between faults and delta
lobes encompasses the entire delta cycle. That is to say that the delta lobes seek out
the accommodation capacity provided by the faults and tend to deposit their sediment
between conjugate pairs of faults. Subsidence along these same faults (probably
accelerated by the sediment load of the delta) drives the submergence component of
the delta cycle, thereby controlling the succession of ecosystem evolution during each
turn of the cycle.

Figure 15

Figure 15 combines the two-dimensional model of ecosystem evolution with

subsidence developed by Fisk, and shown in Figure 5, with an active fault slip model. In
the final stage of this cycle, before a new delta re-enters the area, the surface fault trace
forms the marsh edge. There are several well-documented marsh edges across coastal
Louisiana that are coincident with surface fault traces, and they reflect the pattern of
ecosystem evolution shown in Figure 15. Figures 12 through 15 demonstrate the
relationship between Subsurface Geology and delta lobe deposition. It can be seen that
faults are an integral part of the delta system. Faults appear to play a role in where
delta lobes build new emergent wetlands, and the process by which those wetlands
follow a succession of ecosystem evolution. Figure 16 shows the coincidence of the

pg. 23
 ecological boundary of the Teche Shoreline and the trend of surface fault traces. Across
this boundary ecosystems rapidly transition from emergent freshwater marsh and
forested wetland to submerging intermediate, brackish and saline marsh. The faults
bounding the Terrebonne Trough and their surface expressions can also be seen in the
block diagram in Figure 16.

Figure 16

b. The Relationship between Faults and Infrastructure Sustainability – the most direct
evidence for episodic fault slip events came on the morning of April 12, 1943 at the
Laura Plantation near Vacherie Louisiana. This event also made clear the importance
of understanding faults and fault slip in the context of infrastructure sustainability.
Figure 16 shows an interpretation of the Vacherie Fault and the Hester salt dome. This
interpretation, which shows the subsurface depth contours of the fault plane and the
top of the salt dome was made with oil and gas industry data. The fault plane on this
map extends from a depth of 9,000 feet up to the surface, and it intersects the southern
flank of the salt dome. The surface trace of the fault, which is coincident with the 0-
feet-depth contour, ruptured on the morning of April 12, 1943 offsetting the land
surface by 8 inches. This appears to have been an aseismic fault slip event, as there was
no seismic response recorded at a seismograph at Loyola University, just 50 miles away.
The rupture along the surface trace of the fault was over a mile long, and it extended

pg. 24
to within about one-third of a mile from the Mississippi River. The surface fault trace
was also coincident with the axis of a historical crevasse of the river that once flowed
into Lake des Allemands. A profile of cores taken across the fault showed definitively
that the fault had been active earlier in the Holocene (Fisk, 1944)

Figure 17

It appears likely that there is a genetic relationship between the Vacherie fault and the
historical crevasse. It also appears likely that if the surface rupture created by the fault
had reached the river, it would have reopened the crevasse potentially causing a

Figure 18

pg. 25
 catastrophic flood event. The NOGS Working Fault Map indicates several other
locations where there are indications of surface fault traces adjacent to the Mississippi
River, as seen in Figure 18. It will be important to make the public aware of the potential
impacts of faults on transportation and flood protection infrastructure associated with
the river. These faults also provide an opportunity for future cross-disciplinary
research. It is possible that the subsurface flow of water in near surface aquifers may
affect the potential for slip on faults that extend to the surface. The flow of water from
the river into near-surface aquifers during flood events may change the pore pressure
in those aquifers, which could in turn increase the probability of slip on faults that
intersect the aquifers. The locations shown if Figure 17 should be considered for further
investigation of these processes.

c. The Relationship of Peat Thickness to Subsidence – as discussed in the section on

Holocene subsurface mapping, the progression of the delta cycle, the succession of
ecosystem evolution throughout that cycle, and the accumulated thickness of peats are
all driven by subsidence. The measurement of the accumulated thickness of organic
clays and peats from cores and borings is an essential component to understanding
patterns of subsidence. Outreach and public education efforts should strive to make
the public aware of the important implications of mapping peat thickness. Gagliano et
al, 2003 provided the core profile shown in Figure 19. The cores were taken across the

Figure 19

Montegut fault in Terrebonne Parish. Fisk’s model shown in Figures 4 and 15 illustrates
the relationship between peat accumulation and subsidence. In Figure 19 it is obvious
that fault slip or differential subsidence across the fault must have been active during
the time period over which the peat layer accumulated. Due to the general lack of core
data there are only a few documented cases of changes in peat thickness across faults.
The peat thickness map in Figure 20 is based on a working model that peat

pg. 26
accumulations will tend to be thicker off the flanks of the distributary channel natural
levees and downthrown to surface fault traces. The red polygons delineate areas that

Figure 20

pg. 27
 are both downthrown to surface fault traces and adjacent to distributary channels. The
model is based on the premise that these areas have experienced higher historical rates
of subsidence, which would be generally supported by a comparison to the tide gauge
and geodetic leveling maps in Figure 7. It is significant that most of the hot spots of
wetlands loss shown on the U.S.G.S. Land Area Change Map (Couvillion et al, 2017) are
coincident with areas of thicker peat accumulation delineated in the peat thickness
model. This would tend to suggest that subsidence due to fault slip and compaction are
the primary causes of wetlands loss in these hot spots.

A logical conclusion of these apparent relationships between faults, peat thickness,

subsidence and historical wetlands loss is that areas along the downthrown sides of
surface fault traces where thicker peat accumulations are likely to occur are less
sustainable than the more stable marsh platforms upthrown to the faults. The Teche
Shoreline boundary is easy to discern on all three maps in Figure 20. A thorough
subsurface geological investigation of coastal Louisiana integrating all of the proposals
for research listed here is likely to conclude that sustainability will generally be easier
and more effective north of the Teche Shoreline than to the south, and the probability
of success of any give project is likely to be greater if it is north of that boundary.
Outreach and public education efforts that can begin the process of making the public
aware of these relationships should help to improve understanding about the relative
sustainability across the coast. Conceiving, designing and implementing projects in
areas that are more sustainable will improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the
entire program. It is important for the public to understand that sustainability of coastal
environments is achievable in some areas, and probably not achievable in other areas.

d. The Importance of Being Open to the Integration of New Data - while the concept of
recognizing that some areas of the coast are not sustainable may at first seem to be a
negative perspective, it is also important to be open to the integration of new data.
This is particularly true when the new data appears to offer a more optimistic
perspective on the sustainability of the coast. Outreach and public education efforts
based on the principles of Subsurface Geology outlined here would be very useful in
promoting an optimistic outlook on coastal sustainability through the integration of
new data. There are three primary areas in which new data or interpretation offers a
positive perspective on coastal sustainability.

The episodic nature of wetlands loss – it has been demonstrated in this proposal that
historical subsidence data measured by tide gauge and geodetic levelling showed
maximum rates of subsidence (15–20 mm/yr) between 1960 and 1980. Both
methodologies showed decreasing rates of subsidence after that, and the current short-
term rates of subsidence measured by GPS generally do not exceed 8 mm/yr.
Preliminary subsurface geological evaluations indicate that this was an episode of
subsidence, and that the high subsidence rate values were concentrated in hot spots
generally along the downthrown sides of surface fault traces. Figure 21 shows that this
episode of accelerated subsidence coincided with an episode of accelerated wetlands

pg. 28
loss, as measured in the U.S.G.S. Land Area Change Map study (Couvillion, 2017). The
graph in Figure 21 shows the subsidence rate values derived from the Grand Isle tide

Figure 21

by Kolker et al, 2011 (shown in Figure 8). This graph also shows the finite-difference
approximation estimates of long-term wetland change rates (with wetlands loss shown
as positive values) for the Barataria Hydrologic Basin as defined in Couvillion et al, 2017.
The wetland change rate data shows the coincidence of a land loss episode with the
subsidence episode. Almost all of this land loss in the Barataria Basin occurred in the
orange and red hot spots seen in Figure 20. Over the past three decades land loss rates
have decreased significantly. In fact, the Coastwide Totals of observed wetlands area
shown in the table in Figure 22 indicate that between 2008 and 2016 the total observed
wetlands are increased from 14119.66 to 14710.66 square kilometers, or a net gain in
total wetlands area of about 200 square miles. These data indicate a relative stability
of the coastal zone over the past few decades, and a logical reason for optimism about
the sustainability of the coast. It is important for the public to be aware of these new
data, and to understand their potential implications.

Accretion and marsh elevation data – the CRMS network has been collecting surface
elevation, accretion, water elevation, surface and porewater salinity, vegetation and
soil characteristics, and land change data at 390 sites for about a decade. Sharp and
Stagg (2018) used CRMS data to show that wetlands loss in the deltaic plain portion of
the coast is, in general, not associated with elevation loss, suggesting the edge erosion,
not subsidence, may be responsible for most of the land loss that has been measured

pg. 29
 Figure 22

over the last decade. Only 14% of the CRMS sites have shown continuing land loss over
the last decade, and 10% of the sites have measured gains in land area. The data also
showed that 75% of the CRMS sites have exhibited “positive surface elevation
trajectories” (increases in elevation). The CRMS network clearly illustrates the value of
data collection, but it is essential that this data be put into some meaningful context
and presented to the coastal community and the general public. It is possible that the
reduction in land loss rates and the gains in surface elevation measured by CRMS are
related to sediment accretion being measured at most stations.

Bianchette et al, 2015 used CRMS data to study the role of hurricanes in sediment
accretion in the marsh. They focused on a time periods in 2012 before, during and after
Hurricane Isaac. Their results showed that accretion rates averaged about 2.89 cm/year
from stations sampled before Isaac, 4.04 cm/year during the period encompassing
Isaac, and 2.38 cm/year from sites established and sampled after Isaac. They found
“Accretion rates attributable to Isaac’s effects were therefore 40% and 70% greater
than before and after the event, respectively, indicating the event’s importance toward
coastal land-building”. The importance of accretion should be given much more
attention in outreach and public education efforts, and it should also be more directly
incorporated into predictive models for the coast.

Historical stability of marsh platforms - the reconstruction of the Holocene delta

sequence and the patterns of the delta cycle and ecosystem evolution over the past
two decades have indicated a fairly striking stability of the marsh platforms north of the
Teche Shoreline. The reconstructions in Figure 14 show that while the delta cycle has
seen the complete submergence of two delta lobes south of the Teche Shoreline, the
area to the north appears to have remained emergent throughout those cycles. In fact
all published reconstructions of delta lobes and delta cycles appear to indicate that the
marsh platforms north of the Teche Shoreline have remained emergent for much of the
last 3,000 years. If correct, this is a significant testament to the stability and

pg. 30
 sustainability of these marsh platforms. A better understanding of the long-term
stability of marsh platforms relative to the hot spots of subsidence where wetlands loss
tends to be concentrated will provide a much more optimistic outlook on the
sustainability of the coast than most of the public currently appreciates.

Conclusions

There are significant research needs for the integration of Subsurface Geology into Louisiana’ Coastal
Master Plan. This integration can most effectively accomplished through a cooperative engagement with
the oil and gas industry. The long-term impacts of integrating Subsurface Geology into the Master Plan
are the potential to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the program, and to provide for an
optimistic outlook on the sustainability of the coast.

pg. 31
 References

Armstrong, C., Mohrig, D., Hess, T., George, T., Straub, K.M., 2014, Influence of growth faults on
coastal fluvial systems: Examples from the late Miocene to Recent Mississippi River Delta,
Sedimentary Geology, v. 301, p. 120-132

Bianchette, T. A., Liu, K-b., Qiang, Y., Lam, N. S.-N., 2015, Wetland Accretion Rates Along Coastal
Louisiana: Spatial and Temporal Variability in Light of Hurricane Isaac’s Impacts, Water, v. 8 no. 1, 16
pgs. doi:10.3390/w8010001

Blom. R., Chapman, B., Dokka, R., Fielding, E., Ivins, E., Lohman, R., 2009, Gulf Coast Subsidence,
Crustal Loading, Geodesy, and InSAR, GCAGS Transactions, v. 59 p. 101-114

Blum, M.D. and Roberts, H.H., 2012, The Mississippi Delta Region: Past, Present, and Future, Annual
Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, v. 40, p. 655‐683

Byrnes, M. R., Hedderman, C., Hasen, P. E., Roberts, H., Khalil, S., Underwood, S., 2015, Differential
Sediment Consolidation Associated with Barrier Beach Restoration: Caminada Headland, South
Louisiana, The Proceedings of the Coastal Sediments, 14 p. doi:10.1142/9646

Chan, A. W., and M. D. Zoback, 2007, The role of hydrocarbon production on land subsidence and
fault reactivation in the Louisiana coastal zone: Journal of Coastal Research, v. 233, no. 3, p. 771–
786, doi: 10.2112/05-0553.

Couvillion, B.R., Beck, H., Schoolmaster, D., and Fischer, M., 2017, Land area change in coastal
Louisiana 1932 to 2016, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3381, 16 p. pamphlet,
doi.org/10.3133/sim3381.

Dixon, T.H., Amelung, F., Ferretti, A., Novali, F., Rocca, F., Dokka, R., Sella, G., Sang-Wan, K.,
Wdowinski, S., Whitman, D., 2006, Subsidence and flooding in New Orleans, Nature, v. 441, p. 587-
588

Dokka, R.K., 2006, Modern-day tectonic subsidence in coastal Louisiana, Geology, v. 34, p. 281-284.

Dokka, R. K., G. Sella, and T. H. Dixon, 2006, Tectonic control of subsidence and southward
displacement of southeast Louisiana with respect to stable North America, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33,
L23308, 5 p.

Dokka, R.K., 2011, The role of deep processes in late 20th century subsidence of New Orleans and
coastal areas of southern Louisiana and Mississippi, Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 16, 25 pgs.

Flocks, J.G., Ferina, N.F., Dreher, C., Kindinger, J.L., Fitzgerald, D.M, Kulp, M.A., 2006, High-
Resolution Stratigraphy of a Mississippi Subdelta-Lobe Progradation in the Barataria Bight, North-
Central Gulf of Mexico, Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 76, p. 429-443

Frazier, D.E., 1967, Recent deltaic deposits of the Mississippi River: their development and
chronology, Trans. G.C.A.G.S., v. 17, p. 287‐315
Gagliano, S.M., et.al., 2003. Active Geological Faults and Land Change in Southeastern Louisiana.
Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District, Contract No. DACW 29-00-C-0034.

Gagliano, S.M., et.al., 2005, Effects of Earthquakes, Fault Movements, and Subsidence on the South
Louisiana Landscape, The Louisiana Civil Engineer Journal of the Louisiana Section of The American
Society of Civil Engineers Baton Rouge, Louisiana Volume 13, Number 2, pp. 5-7, 19-22

Heinrich, P., Paulsell, R., Milner, R., Snead, J., and Peele, H., 2015, Investigation and GIS
development of the buried Holocene-Pleistocene surface in the Louisiana coastal plain: Baton
Rouge, LA, Louisiana Geological Survey-Louisiana State University for Coastal Protection and
Restoration Authority of Louisiana, 140 p., 3 pls.

Ivins, E.R., Dokka, R.K., Blom, R.G., 2007, Post-glacial sediment load and subsidence in coastal
Louisiana, Geophysical Research Letters, v. 34, L16303, 5 p.

Jones, C.E., An, K., Blom, R.G., Kent, J.D., Ivins, E.R., and Bekaert, D., 2016, Anthropogenic and
geologic influences on subsidence in the vicinity of New Orleans, Louisiana, Journal of Geophysical
Research: Solid Earth, v. 121, DOI: 10.1002/2015JB012636.

Karegar, M.A., Dixon, T.H., Malservisi, R., 2015, A three-dimensional surface velocity field for the
Mississippi River Delta: Implications for coastal restoration and flood potential, Geology, v. 43, p.
519-522

Kolker A.S., Allison, M.A., Hameed, S. 2011. An evaluation of subsidence rates and sea-level
variability in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Geophys. Res. Lett. V.38:L21404

Kosters, E., 1989, Organic-Clastic Facies Relationships and Chronostratigraphy of the Barataria
Interlobe Basin, Mississippi Delta Plain, Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 59, no. 1, p. 98-113

Kuecher, G.J., Roberts, H.H., Thompson, M.D. and Matthews, L., 2001, Evidence for Active Growth
Faulting in the Terrebonne Delta Plain, South Louisiana: Implications for Wetland Loss and the
Vertical Migration of Petroleum., Environmental Geosciences, v. 8, p. 77‐94

Kulp M. 2000. Holocene stratigraphy, history, and subsidence of the Mississippi River delta region,
north-central Gulf of Mexico. PhD thesis. Univ. Kentucky, Lexington. 283 pp.

Lopez, J.A., Penland, S. and Williams, J., 1997, Confirmation of Active Geologic Faults in Lake
Pontchartrain in Southeast Louisiana, Trans. G.C.A.G.S., v. 47, p. 299-303

McCulloh, R. P. 1996. Topographic criteria bearing on the interpreted placement of the traces of
faults of the Baton Rouge system in relation to their fault-line scarps. Open-file series no. 96-01.
Baton Rouge: Louisiana Geological Survey. 13 pp.

McFarlan, E., and LeRoy, D.O., 1988, Subsurface Geology of the Late Tertiary and Quaternary
Deposits, Coastal Louisiana and Adjacent Continental Shelf, Trans. G.C.A.G.S., v. 38, p. 421-433

McLindon, C.D., 2017, History of fault slip and interaction with deltaic deposition from the middle
Miocene to the Present – Barataria fault, coastal Louisiana, poster session, American Geophysical
Union, annual meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Meckel, T. A. 2008, An attempt to reconcile subsidence rates determined from various techniques in
southern Louisiana, Quaternary Science Review, v. 27, p. 1517–1522

Morton, R.A., Buster, N.A., Krohn, M.D., 2002, Subsurface Controls on Historical Subsidence Rates
and Associated Wetland Loss in Southcentral Louisiana, GCAGS Transcations, v. 52, p. 767-778

Morton, R.A., Tiling, G., Ferina, N.F., 2003, Causes of hot-spot wetland loss in the Mississippi delta
plain, Environmental Geosciences, v. 10, p. 71-80

Morton R.A., Bernier, J.C., Barras, J.A., Fernina, N.F., 2005. Historical Subsidence and Wetland Loss in
the Mississippi Delta Plain, GCAGS Transactions, v. 55, p. 555-571

Morton, R.A., Bernier, J.A., Kelso, K.W., 2009, Recent Subsidence and Erosion at Diverse Wetland
Sites in the Southeastern Mississippi Delta Plain, USGS Open-file Report 2009-1158, 39 p., plus app
(p. 41-221)

Morton R.A., Bernier, J.A., Kelso, K.W, Barras, J.A., 2010,. Quantifying large-scale historical formation
of accommodation in the Mississippi Delta, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 35, p. 1625-41

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018, Understanding the Long-term
Evolution of the Coupled Natural-Human Coastal System. The Future of the U.S. Gulf Coast:
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press’ doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/25108

Nienhuis, J.H., Tornqvist, T.E., Jankowski, K.L., Fernandes, A.M., and Keogh, M.E., 2017, A new
subsidence map for coastal Louisiana, GSA Today, v. 27, DOI:10.1130/GSATG337GW.1.

Penland, S., Ramsey, K.E., McBride, R.A., Mestayer, J.T. and Westphal, K.A., 1989, Relative Sea Level
Rise and Delta Plain Development in the Terrebonne Parish Region: Coastal Geology Tech. Report.
No. 4, Louisiana Geological Survey, Baton Rouge,Louisiana. 121 p.

Sharp, L. A., and Stagg, C., 2018, Surface Elevation Change and Land Change Observed Using CRMS
Data, abstract, State of the Coast Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Shinkle, K. D., and R. K. Dokka, 2004, Rates of vertical displacement at benchmarks in the Lower
Mississippi Valley and the northern Gulf Coast, NOAA Tech. Rep. 50

Yeager, K.M., et.al., 2012, Significance of active growth faulting on marsh accretion processes in the
lower Pearl River, Louisiana, Geomorphology, v. 153-154, p. 127-143

Yeager, K.M., et.al., 2012, Significance of active growth faulting on marsh accretion processes in the
lower Pearl River, Louisiana, Geomorphology, v. 153-154, p. 127-143

Zou, L., Kent, J., Lam, N. S.-N., Cai, H., Qjang, Y., and Li, K., 2016, Evaluating Land Subsidence Rates
and Their Implications for Land Loss in the Lower Mississippi River Basin, Water, v. 8, 15 p.