Intervention record · CHANGE4PLANET

The intervention

TIMELINE

WHAT WAS DEPLOYED

The Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion was a gated structure through the Mississippi River levee in Plaquemines Parish, designed to route up to 75,000 cubic feet per second of river water, sediment and nutrients into the Barataria Basin so that the river would deposit new wetland the way it built the delta [1]. The Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group evaluated it in Final Phase II Restoration Plan #3.2, September 2022, and stated it would build and sustain more than 13,000 acres, or 20 square miles, of wetlands [1]. The operator put the figure higher, at up to 26,000 acres of wetlands [6][7]. Total project cost was USD 2.92 billion: USD 2.26 billion of Deepwater Horizon natural resource damage assessment funding approved on February 1, 2023 [1][2], plus USD 660 million from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund, sourced from criminal fines [13]. Of the natural resource damage funding, USD 378 million was dedicated to mitigation and stewardship, raised from a lower figure in response to public comment on the draft plan [1]. The trustees recorded in advance that the project would harm resources that depend on higher salinity water, naming dolphins, brown shrimp and oysters, and would raise water levels near the diversion [1]. The Army Corps of Engineers issued its Record of Decision and permits on December 19, 2022 after a Draft Environmental Impact Statement in March 2021 and a Final Environmental Impact Statement in September 2022 [6]. Construction broke ground on August 10, 2023 and was expected to take about five years [3][7]. It did not run five years. Plaquemines Parish, the host local government, issued a stop-work order on February 28, 2024, the second in three months according to the report, the first being undated in the sources fetched, its president putting the local rise in base flood elevation at a foot and a half to as much as three feet and objecting on fisheries grounds, and it won a pair of state appeals court rulings placing its challenge in its own parish court rather than in Baton Rouge [10]. On April 5, 2025 the head of the Governor's Office of Coastal Activities ordered a 90-day suspension of all work, citing cost: an original estimate of USD 750 million against a current figure of USD 3.1 billion, and idle plant on site [9]. On April 25, 2025 the New Orleans District commander suspended the Department of the Army permit, citing the state's actions including failures to act, its public statements and positions, and changed circumstances since permit issuance [11]. On July 17, 2025 CPRA and the Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group agreed to terminate the project, cutting the authorized natural resource damage budget from USD 2.26 billion to USD 618.52 million to reflect funds already disbursed and to fund closure activities [4][5]. No water was ever diverted and no wetland was ever built by the structure. The state reinstated a smaller alternative, the Louisiana Coastal Area Medium Diversion at Myrtle Grove with Dedicated Dredging [5].

HOW IT WORKS

Physical: a gated intake set through the Mississippi River levee at River Mile 60.7, feeding a conveyance channel about two miles long inside a corridor 1,600 feet wide running west from the river to the Barataria Basin, crossing a highway and a railway on replacement bridges, and discharging through an outfall into the basin [3][13]. Peak design capacity was 75,000 cubic feet per second of river water carrying suspended sediment and nutrients [1][13]. Operation was seasonal and river-driven rather than continuous: gates were to open when Mississippi River flow reached 450,000 cubic feet per second or more, typically December to June, with up to 5,000 cubic feet per second reported as continuing through the channel to keep it clear of sediment [13]. The restoration mechanism is deposition, not planting: sediment carried by the river settles in the receiving basin, raises bed elevation and converts open water to marsh, and continued sediment supply is what sustains the marsh against subsidence and sea level rise [1]. Administrative: CPRA was lead implementing trustee for construction inside the Deepwater Horizon natural resource damage assessment structure, spending funds released by the Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group, with NOAA as co-lead trustee holding the plan record and the budget [1][4]. Federal authorisation ran through an Environmental Impact Statement, a Department of the Army permit and permission to alter a federal levee, all issued together on December 19, 2022 [6]. Local authorisation was never settled: the host parish asserted its own permitting authority and used it to stop work twice [10]. A mitigation and stewardship programme of USD 378 million was attached to the project to address impacts on fisheries and communities [1].

The measurements

2 OUTCOMES

OUTCOMES

METRIC	VALUE	METHOD	MEASURED BY	INDEPENDENT	PERIOD	SRC
Wetland area built or sustained by operation of the diversion		No measurement campaign exists and none was possible: the structure was never completed, never conveyed river water and was terminated during construction	No measuring party. The absence is established by the July 17, 2025 termination agreement [4] and the never-completed construction record [3][5]	○	August 2023 to July 2025	[1]
Authorized natural resource damage assessment budget after termination, reflecting funds already disbursed and closure costs	618520000 USD, reduced from USD 2,260,000,000 authorized on February 1, 2023 · baseline 2260000000 (February 1, 2023 funding approval)	Budget modification recorded in the termination agreement; CPRA and NOAA state that a final budget reconciliation will follow once termination activities are complete. CPRA, the operator, is a member of the Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group, so this figure is not independent of the operator.	Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group and NOAA	○	July 17, 2025	[4]

● independently measured○ operator-reported· not stated in any source

COST BASIS

CAPITAL: USD 2,920,000,000 (2023)
OPERATING: not published
FUNDING: 1 · 2260000000
13 · 660000000
1

No source fetched publishes a cost per acre of wetland, and none is calculated here. The natural resource damage assessment component of USD 2.26 billion was stated to cover restoration planning, mitigation, monitoring and construction, and included USD 378 million for mitigation and stewardship; CPRA was made responsible for securing any further funds needed [1]. One trade press account gives the mitigation and flood mitigation allocation as USD 360 million rather than USD 378 million [13]; the trustee fact sheet figure is used. Spend before termination is not established by a single audited figure. The authorised natural resource damage budget was reduced to USD 618.52 million on July 17, 2025 to reflect funds already disbursed and to cover closure, which sets the disbursed natural resource damage total at or below that figure, with a final reconciliation stated to follow [4][5]. Independent accounts published in 2025 give more than USD 500 million spent [11] and roughly USD 560 million on permitting and design [12]; both are approximations and neither is coded as an exact figure here. Spending from the separate USD 660 million National Fish and Wildlife Foundation award is not disclosed in any source fetched. The state's own stated cost trajectory was an original estimate of USD 750 million against USD 3.1 billion at suspension [9]; no document fetched shows the basis of either end of that comparison.

The assessment

PRECONDITIONS

A large sediment-laden river running immediately alongside the basin to be restored: the intake sits on the Mississippi at River Mile 60.7 and the receiving basin is two miles away [3][13]
River flows high enough to carry sediment for a usable part of the year: the design opened the gates only above 450,000 cubic feet per second, in practice December to June [13]
Authority to cut and alter a federal flood control levee, obtained here through Army Corps permits and permission issued with the Record of Decision [6]
A completed Environmental Impact Statement able to withstand a contested comment record: over 140 organizations responded to the draft plan and approximately 40,000 comments were filed [1]
Local government consent in the host jurisdiction, or a settled legal answer on whether local permitting applies: the absence of this produced two stop-work orders [10]
A funded mitigation programme for the fisheries and marine mammals harmed by lowering salinity, budgeted here at USD 378 million and still contested [1][9]
Capital on a settlement or national scale: USD 2.92 billion from two federal funds, outside any municipal or state recurrent budget [3][13]
Political durability across at least one change of state administration and one full construction cycle of about five years [3][9]
Acceptance that water levels near the diversion will rise, a change the trustees recorded in the approved plan and the host parish president put locally at a foot and a half to as much as three feet of base flood elevation [1][10]

FAILURE ANALYSIS

Five mechanisms are documented, and they compound. (1) Change of state administration. The project was approved, permitted and started under one governor and suspended and terminated under the next; the suspension order came from the new administration's coastal office on April 5, 2025 and the termination agreement followed on July 17, 2025 [9][4][5]. The stated grounds at termination were cost, permitting and litigation, and the chairman's later account added scientific modelling and concerns raised by the Army Corps and the trustees [5][8]. (2) Cost escalation across a very long development period. The state's public comparison was an original estimate of USD 750 million against USD 3.1 billion at suspension [9]; no source fetched documents the basis of either figure, but the escalation argument was the one the state led with. (3) Unresolved local government authority. The host parish used its own permitting to halt construction twice within three months, the second time on February 28, 2024, its president putting the local rise in base flood elevation at a foot and a half to as much as three feet and objecting on fisheries grounds, and litigation over venue and authority was still live when work stopped [10]. A project of this scale had reached construction without a settled answer to whether the host jurisdiction could stop it. (4) Distributional harm designed into the intervention. The trustees recorded in the approved plan that the diversion would damage higher salinity resources including dolphins, brown shrimp and oysters and would raise water levels near the structure, and increased mitigation and stewardship funding to USD 378 million after public comment [1]. That mitigation did not convert the affected fisheries into supporters, and the state's own case for stopping used the same harms [9]. (5) Loss of the regulator. The Army Corps suspended the permit on April 25, 2025 on the basis of the state's actions and failures to act [11]. Once the state had publicly stepped back, the federal authorisation that made the project legal was withdrawn, which removed the option of resuming later on the existing approvals. The consequence is a sunk cost with no delivered outcome: the authorised natural resource damage budget was cut to USD 618.52 million to cover funds already spent and closure, against USD 2.26 billion authorised, and independent accounts put spending at more than USD 500 million [4][11].

Stated by the parties themselves. The operator, at termination and afterwards [5][8]: the diversion at this scale was no longer viable on cost, permitting and litigation taken together; the chairman's later account cited uncertainty about environmental outcomes raised by the Army Corps, the trustees and scientific modelling, and the state reinstated a smaller alternative, the Louisiana Coastal Area Medium Diversion at Myrtle Grove with Dedicated Dredging, in its place [5][8]. The head of the state coastal office framed the affordability finding directly, saying "It's to a point you cannot afford to build the large diversion", and set the design question for any successor as which diversion flow can be run without killing shrimp, oysters and bottlenose dolphins [9]. The host parish did not ask for cancellation: its president said the parish wanted a different way of doing the project rather than an end to it, and its objection was quantified as local base flood elevation rise [10]. The funding trustees recorded no design change of their own; their action was to cut the budget to disbursed funds plus closure and to return the balance to the Louisiana restoration area for reallocation through the normal planning process [4]. For an implementer, the transferable lessons are structural rather than technical: settle host jurisdiction permitting authority before construction, not after; treat a 15-year development period as a political risk to be priced; and do not assume that a funded mitigation programme converts the parties it compensates into supporters.

TRANSFERABILITY ASSESSMENT

AXIS	SCORE	RATIONALE
CAPITAL INTENSITY	○○	Total cost USD 2.92 billion, funded entirely from two federal pots created by a single oil spill: USD 2.26 billion of natural resource damage settlement money and USD 660 million of criminal fine money [1][3][13].
GOVERNANCE DEPENDENCY	○○	Required federal permission to alter a Mississippi River flood control levee alongside a Clean Water Act permit and a full Environmental Impact Statement [6], and even with those the host parish asserted its own authority and stopped work twice [10].
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIFICITY	○○	Works only where a large sediment-carrying river runs beside a subsiding basin: the intake is at Mississippi River Mile 60.7 and the gates were to open only above 450,000 cubic feet per second of river flow [3][13].
SKILLS AND MAINTENANCE	○○	Delivery ran through a national engineering and construction team, AECOM as lead designer with 15 design and 19 construction services firms, and Alberici and Archer Western as lead construction contractors, with 16 subcontractor firms involved in construction [13]; operation would have required decades of monitoring and adaptive management funded inside the restoration plan [1].
FUNDING REPEATABILITY	○○	One-off by construction: the money came from a legal settlement and criminal fines for one 2010 spill, with CPRA carrying responsibility for any shortfall [1][13], and the legislature was asking in 2024 what the state general fund would owe if the project stalled [14].
POLITICAL DURABILITY	○○	Ended at transition: approved and broken ground under one state administration in 2022 and 2023 [3][6], suspended by the incoming administration's coastal office on April 5, 2025 and terminated on July 17, 2025 [9][4].

TOTAL 0/12 · T5

POLITICAL TEST

The project failed the political test outright, and it is the clearest case in the registry of a fully permitted, fully funded intervention dying at a change of administration. It cleared federal environmental review and received its Record of Decision and permits on December 19, 2022, and its USD 2.26 billion funding approval on February 1, 2023 [6][2]. Groundbreaking was August 10, 2023 [3]. Within four months the host local government, Plaquemines Parish, had issued the first of two stop-work orders, the second on February 28, 2024, on flood elevation and fisheries grounds, and had won a pair of state appeals court rulings moving its challenge to its own parish court [10]. In 2024 the state legislature was formally asking CPRA what the state general fund would owe if the project were not completed on time [14]. On April 5, 2025 the head of the Governor's Office of Coastal Activities ordered all work suspended for 90 days, saying the diversion could no longer be afforded and that plant was standing idle [9]. Later that month, on April 25, 2025, the federal regulator suspended the permit it had issued, citing the state's own conduct [11]. On July 17, 2025 the operator and the funding trustees agreed to terminate [4][5]. The mechanism was not a funding withdrawal by the funder: the funder had paid, and the state stopped. Money already committed to Louisiana coastal restoration returned to the trustee pool for reallocation within the same restoration area [4].

The file

14 SOURCES

SOURCES

[1] restoration_plan_fact_sheet · Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion, Final Phase II Restoration Plan #3.2, Louisiana Restoration Area (fact sheet) · Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group, Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration, published by NOAA · 2022-09 · en · PRIMARY · INDEPENDENT · www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov Full 3-page PDF fetched and text-extracted, all three pages read. Carries the 75,000 cubic feet per second peak capacity, the more than 13,000 acres and 20 square miles projection, the USD 2.26 billion cost statement and its scope, the USD 378 million mitigation and stewardship figure and its origin in public comment, the recorded adverse impacts on dolphins, brown shrimp and oysters, and the public comment tally. This is the fact sheet, not the full restoration plan, which runs to 1,123 pages and was not retrieved.
[2] government_announcement · Louisiana Trustees Approve Funding for Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion Project · NOAA Gulf Spill Restoration (Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group) · 2023-02-01 · en · PRIMARY · INDEPENDENT · www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov Page fetched and read. Confirms the USD 2.26 billion approval on February 1, 2023, the 75,000 cubic feet per second capacity, the more than 13,000 acre projection over 50 years, the USD 378 million mitigation allocation, and the trustee agency list.
[3] government_announcement · Louisiana Breaks Ground on Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion · NOAA Gulf Spill Restoration · 2023-08 · en · PRIMARY · INDEPENDENT · gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov Page fetched and read. Carries the August 10, 2023 groundbreaking date, the River Mile 60.7 location, the total project cost of USD 2.92 billion, the roughly five year construction duration, and the construction-phase economic projections of nearly USD 1.5 billion in sales and about 12,400 jobs.
[4] government_announcement · Louisiana Moves to Terminate Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion Project · NOAA Gulf Spill Restoration (Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group) · 2025-07 · en · PRIMARY · INDEPENDENT · www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov Page fetched and read. The funder side of the termination: agreement dated July 17, 2025; grounds given as suspension of the federal permit by the Army Corps and ongoing litigation, with CPRA determining the project no longer viable; authorized budget reduced from USD 2.26 billion to USD 618.52 million reflecting funds already disbursed; CPRA authorised to use funds for closure with monthly reporting; final budget reconciliation to follow; unused funds return to the Louisiana Restoration Area.
[5] operator_press_release · State, Louisiana Trustee Implementation Group Announce Termination of Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion · Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority · 2025-07-17 · en · PRIMARY · coastal.la.gov Full release fetched and read. The operator side of the same termination: grounds given as costs, permitting concerns and ongoing litigation on the totality of the circumstances; same budget reduction to USD 618.52 million; states that the Louisiana Coastal Area Medium Diversion at Myrtle Grove with Dedicated Dredging is reinstated as the alternative.
[6] operator_press_release · CPRA Receives Authorizations for Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion · Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority · 2022-12-19 · en · PRIMARY · coastal.la.gov Full release fetched and read. Dates the Army Corps permits and permissions to December 19, 2022, and the environmental review to a Draft Environmental Impact Statement in March 2021 and a Final Environmental Impact Statement in September 2022. Carries the operator's figure of up to 26,000 acres of wetlands, which is higher than the trustees' more than 13,000 acres.
[7] operator_press_release · CPRA Receives Over $2 Billion in Funding for Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion Construction · Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority · 2023-02-01 · en · PRIMARY · coastal.la.gov Full release fetched and read. Confirms the February 1, 2023 approval of USD 2.26 billion, repeats the up to 26,000 acre figure, and states construction would begin later that year and take at least five years. No cost breakdown and no mitigation figure appear in the release.
[8] operator_opinion_piece · CPRA Chairman: Canceling the Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion Was the Right Move, Here's Why · Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority · 2025-08-15 · en · PRIMARY · coastal.la.gov Full piece fetched and read. The operator's retrospective justification, dated August 15, 2025: uncertainties and questioned environmental outcomes raised by the Army Corps, the trustee group and scientific modelling. Contains no cost figures, no permit detail and no litigation detail, which is itself a finding about the published rationale.
[9] news_report · Landry administration suspends all work on Louisiana's largest coastal project · Fox 8 WVUE, New Orleans · 2025-04-05 · en · INDEPENDENT · www.fox8live.com Full report fetched and read. Dates the 90-day suspension of all work to April 5, 2025 and attributes it to the head of the Governor's Office of Coastal Activities. Source of the USD 750 million original estimate against USD 3.1 billion current cost comparison, the idle plant point, and the affordability and fisheries statements quoted or paraphrased in this record. No spend-to-date figure and no contractor detail.
[10] news_report · Plaquemines Parish orders work halted on Louisiana's largest coastal project · Fox 8 WVUE, New Orleans · 2024-02-28 · en · INDEPENDENT · www.fox8live.com Full report fetched and read. Dates the second parish stop-work order to February 28, 2024 and describes it as the second in three months; it does not date the first order. Source of the parish president's base flood elevation figures of one and a half to three feet, the fisheries objection, the state appellate venue rulings, and the USD 3 billion cost figure used in press coverage at that date. The article does not name the parish ordinance relied on.
[11] investigative_report · Mid-Barataria's muddy end · Verite News, read on The Margin · 2025-11-27 · en · INDEPENDENT · themargin.us Full feature fetched and read on The Margin, which republishes it; the veritenews.org original returned 403 and was not retrieved. Source of the April 25, 2025 permit suspension date, the district commander's stated basis in the state's actions including failures to act, the USD 660 million National Fish and Wildlife Foundation figure, the more than USD 500 million spent and about USD 1.6 billion returned figures, the 27 square miles by 2050 land figure. The suspension letter itself was not retrieved and is cited here only through this report.
[12] ngo_report · Louisiana Pulls the Plug on the Nation's Largest Ecosystem Restoration Project · National Audubon Society · 2025-07 · en · INDEPENDENT · www.audubon.org Full article fetched and read. Used only for its spend estimate of roughly USD 560 million on permitting and design, which conflicts with other published estimates and is recorded as a range rather than a figure. Written by an organisation that campaigned for the project, so its characterisations are not relied on.
[13] trade_press · Officials Break Ground on $2.92B Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion Effort · Construction Equipment Guide · 2023 · en · INDEPENDENT · www.constructionequipmentguide.com Full article fetched and read. The only source retrieved that carries engineering and contracting detail: the two mile conveyance channel in a 1,600 foot corridor, the gated river intake and basin outfall, the highway and railway bridge replacements, the December to June operating window with a 450,000 cubic feet per second activation threshold and a 5,000 cubic feet per second maintenance flow, the USD 660 million National Fish and Wildlife Foundation share, and the contractor roster of AECOM, Alberici and Archer Western with 16, 15 and 19 supporting firms. Its mitigation figure of USD 360 million disagrees with the trustee fact sheet's USD 378 million, and its 21 square mile and 26,000 acre land figures disagree with the trustee projection. No exact date is shown on the article, so published_on is recorded at year precision.
[14] legislative_document · Fiscal Note on HR256 (HLS24RS), Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority, Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion project report · Richie Anderson, analyst; Patrice Thomas, Deputy Fiscal Officer · Louisiana Legislative Fiscal Office · 2024-05-28 · en · PRIMARY · INDEPENDENT · www.legis.la.gov Single-page PDF fetched and text-extracted in full. Establishes that in May 2024 the legislature was directing CPRA to report to House Appropriations by June 12, 2024 on potential state general fund liabilities if the project were not timely completed, and on steps to limit that exposure. Contains no project cost or spend figures; the fiscal note records no material fiscal effect from the resolution itself.

RECORD

PUBLISHED: 2026-08-16
LAST VERIFIED: 2026-08-16
REVIEW DUE: 2027-02-16
RUBRIC: v1.0
STATUS HISTORY: 2026-08-16 · discontinued political · Record published.
RIGHT OF REPLY: Not yet exchanged. The failure analysis in this record rests on the operator's own press releases and its chairman's own published account, on the federal trustee record that funded and then defunded the project, on the state legislature's own fiscal document, and on independent reporting of the federal permit action. Right of reply will be offered to the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority before this record is promoted or distributed, and any response received will be published here in full.
LANGUAGE: All sources are English-language publications of United States federal agencies, the State of Louisiana, its legislature, and United States news, trade and non-governmental organisations. No non-English source was consulted and none appears necessary for this record.
CONFIDENCE: Solid, read directly from the documents cited and not from abstracts or search summaries: the 75,000 cubic feet per second peak capacity, the more than 13,000 acre and 20 square mile projection, the USD 2.26 billion natural resource damage allocation and its scope, the USD 378 million mitigation and stewardship figure and its origin in public comment, and the recorded adverse impacts on dolphins, brown shrimp and oysters [1]; the February 1, 2023 approval [2][7]; the August 10, 2023 groundbreaking, River Mile 60.7 and the USD 2.92 billion total [3]; the December 19, 2022 Record of Decision and permits and the March 2021 and September 2022 environmental review dates [6]; the July 17, 2025 termination and the reduction of the authorized budget to USD 618.52 million [4][5]; the April 5, 2025 state suspension [9]; the February 28, 2024 parish stop-work order, reported as the second in three months [10]; and the May 2024 legislative demand for a state general fund liability report [14]. Thin, contested or unverified. (a) Total spend before termination is not established. The USD 618.52 million revised authorization is exact and primary but is a budget ceiling covering disbursed funds plus closure, not an audited spend figure, and a final reconciliation was still outstanding [4]. Independent accounts give more than USD 500 million [11] and roughly USD 560 million [12]; both are approximations and neither is coded as an exact figure. Spend against the separate USD 660 million National Fish and Wildlife Foundation award is not disclosed anywhere in the sources fetched. No Louisiana Legislative Auditor report on the project was located. (b) The cost escalation claim of USD 750 million to USD 3.1 billion comes from the state at the moment it stopped the project [9]; no document fetched shows what either figure covered, and it is reported here as the state's stated position, not as a verified cost history. (c) Land building projections disagree across sources: more than 13,000 acres, or 20 square miles, from the trustee fact sheet [1], stated as over 50 years by the trustee funding and groundbreaking announcements [2][3], up to 26,000 acres from the operator [6][7], 21 square miles and up to 26,000 acres in trade press [13], and 27 square miles by 2050 in an independent account [11]. None was reconciled and none is coded as an outcome, because none was ever measured. (d) The mitigation allocation is USD 378 million in the trustee fact sheet [1] and USD 360 million in trade press [13]; the trustee figure is used. (e) The Army Corps permit suspension letter of April 25, 2025 was not retrieved. Its date, its author and its stated basis in the state's actions and failures to act are taken from an independent report [11], and the New Orleans District permit pages returned 403 on access. The permit number is not stated anywhere in the sources fetched and is not given here. (f) The parish ordinance relied on for the two stop-work orders is not named in any source fetched, and the outcome of the litigation at termination is not established beyond the appellate ruling on venue [10]. (g) The outcome_status label is a judgment. The rubric defines discontinued_political as an intervention that worked and was ended by funding withdrawal or political change; this project never operated, so the worked clause does not apply, and it was the operator state that stopped, not the funder that withdrew. failed_social was considered, because organised opposition from the host parish and from fisheries interests is documented throughout [1][10], and unmeasured was considered, because no outcome was ever assessed. discontinued_political is used because the proximate and decisive act was a state political decision taken after a change of administration, with the federal permit suspension following it [9][11][4]. (h) proposed_on is null. The only date resembling an origin date in the sources fetched is 2007, and that account [11] attaches it to the smaller Myrtle Grove diversion, not to Mid-Barataria; no fetched source dates this project's proposal or authorization. (i) Coordinates are approximate and were not verified against a named gazetteer. (j) The full Final Phase II Restoration Plan #3.2, 1,123 pages, and the Environmental Impact Statement were not retrieved; only the trustee fact sheet summarising them was. No peer-reviewed study of the project or of Barataria Basin sediment diversion modelling was fetched, so the record makes no claim about the scientific merit of the land building projections in either direction. No figures were estimated, interpolated or converted by the registry; all nulls reflect absence in the sources.

CITE THIS RECORD

change4planet.org. C4P-CST-0004: Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion, Louisiana: a USD 2.92 billion estuarine wetland restoration terminated during construction by state decision. Grades T5/E4 (rubric v1.0). Last verified 2026-08-16. https://change4planet.org/records/c4p-cst-0004-mid-barataria-diversion-usa