(Un)Making the Mississippi River and Louisiana's Coastal Marshes

• In Event: Greening Infrastructure Studies

Abstract

This paper explores a dispute over Louisiana’s coastal restoration efforts, which arise from different ontological understandings of the Mississippi River. Louisiana’s coastal marshes are disappearing from a combination of subsidence, erosion and relative sea-level rise. In response, the state has embarked on a $50 billion, 50-year Master Plan that would among other interventions divert Mississippi River sediment into adjacent marshlands. State-backed geologists and other restoration officials argue that the muddy river should return to its “natural” role of land building. However, diversions are opposed by downstream communities concerned that freshwater laden with nutrients will lower salinity and destroy seafood and oyster harvests. They are supported by research that warns freshwater nutrient loading from the river may accelerate land loss. Another study suggests that the vast majority of river sediment is currently absorbed in the river and sustains its path to the gulf. Instead of an a-priori river that also carries sediment, this zero-sum phenomenon posits that any sediment diverted upstream will result in a correlative undoing downstream. Downstream interests concerned about their aquatic harvests may face a greater existential threat from diversions. This conflict over the river’s role in restoration speaks to the basic ontology of the river, which is known differently by different disciplines – and various "transubstantiations" (like soil surveys, lab reports, computer modeling, etc.) that, according to Latour, puts the world into words. Such disagreements may be bridged through cross-disciplinary conversations through the rubric of science studies much like Latour’s trip to the Amazon in Pandora’s Hope.

Author

• Ned Randolph, UC San Diego