|
SEO
Harbor and channel deepening is required by most ports to remain competitive, but it is an undertaking facing increasing pressure from environmentalists and government agencies. This past summer, the Washington Department of Ecology and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality refused to issue water quality permits to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for deepening of the Columbia River, stating they both had "serious concerns" about the impact of the project on fish habitat. Prior to this, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service revoked its approval of the dredging project, citing similar concerns.
Six ports along the lower Columbia: Portland, Vancouver, Longview, St. Helens, Woodland and Kalama, have been behind the deepening project, while the Columbia Deepening Opposition Group and the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission have been opposed. The main concerns are that the dredging might smother or trap juvenile species of smelt and salmon and that toxics might be released. The Washington Department of Ecology also said it was worried that removal of sand near the mouth of the river might cut off the natural supply of sand to the state's southern beaches.
Proponents of the project feel dredging will not cause environmental damage but concede that digging now faces a steep uphill fight. Ironically, funding for the 103-mile deepening and widening project was authorized by Congress last year, although the Willamette River section was placed on hold because of the discovery of toxic sediments. Since then, that area of the channel has been proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for SuperFund listing.
Although the Columbia deepening is stalled, Congress has passed legislation in recent weeks to fund a range of other dredging projects, most through the Department of Transportation and its related agencies.
For the full story subscribe to Marine Digest. |