Green Party councillor objects to Port of Waterford dredging campaign in River Barrow estuary (2024)

The Port of Waterford (PoW) has notified the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that the planned maintenance dredging campaign for April 2024 would commence on Wednesday, May 1, but added that the exact start date would depend on weather and plant availability.

The campaign is expected to last about 20 days and would include dredging by “Trailing Suction Hopper Dredger” (TSHD) followed by bed levelling. The dredging is carried out to ensure the waterway remains navigable for the larger vessels using Waterford Port.

The TSHD vessel is the Shoalway, while bed-levelling will be completed by the Fastnet Sound. An updated notice to mariners has been posted on the company’s website, portofwaterford.com.

Waterford Green Party County Cllr Jody Power said that he has made submissions in relation to the Port of Waterford’s application in relation to dredging the estuary.

The PoW spokesperson said the port welcomed these submissions “and would like to make some observations on the submissions received to provide clarity on some matters for the public and for consideration by the EPA.”

Cllr Power maintained in a submission to the EPA licensing authority that “NASA satellite photography taken some years ago clearly shows the large accumulation of dumped dredge spoils, in mound form, at the current dumping site.

"This accumulation amply demonstrates that dispersal of the spoils is far from optimum with negative consequences for the ecosystem where fertile crustacean and fish spawning grounds are negatively impacted.”

The Port responded: “This statement is anecdotal and is not reflected or supported by any of the environmental studies commissioned by the PoW and contained within the application.”

Cllr Power said: “Dumped spoils in all and any tidal condition, so close to the harbour entrance, is self-defeating as a flooding tide will undoubtable carry a portion right back into the Estuary.”

Port of Waterford: “PoW has provided dispersion modelling to inform all environmental assessments undertaken.”

Cllr Power: “An empirical analysis - visual examination of the largest sand coral reef in Europe, stretching from Duncannon to the Hook, clearly shows the devastating impact of the fine silt of the dumped dredge spoils smothering the live coral, with dead patches clearly evident at low tides.”

PoW: “No empirical results have been provided by the submission to comment on the proposed impacts. PoW is not aware of any such impacts despite undertaking significant studies to support this application.”

Cllr Power: “The prevailing tidal currents are impacted by the extending geomorphology of the underwater Hook Rock formation thus creating eddies to frustrate better dispersal.”

Port of Waterford: “PoW has provided dispersion modelling to inform all environmental assessments undertaken.”

Cllr Power: “The current dump site is an anachronistic left-over from the first world war when the new dredger at that time, SS Portlairge, was barred from voyaging further afield due to the activities of German U-Boats in the area. The location has never changed since.”

PoW: “This is incorrect. As can be viewed on the EPA mapping website, PoW and the Office of Public Works have had various disposal sites closer to shore previously. The current site has been active since 1993.”

Cllr Power: “With the upcoming demarcation of a DMAPS (Designated Maritime Area Plans) at this location, a dumping site of this nature would negatively impact the spirit and the practical aspirations of such a Marine Protected Area.”

PoW: “DMAPs will determine the broad area where offshore renewable energy projects can be developed and have no relevance to the PoW’s application.”

Cllr Power: “Other Irish Port Companies must dump their dredge spoils much further out from the baseline. Cork Port Company is mandated to dump its spoils at least 4km from shore, which makes much more sense.”

PoW: “The optimum disposal site for each port is site specific, based on a range of natural characteristics of each location. For example, Dublin Port places their dredged material at the edge of Dublin Bay, Fenit, distance is 1.5km from the shore and Shannon Foynes has various disposal sites within the Shannon Estuary.”

Cllr Power: “The prevailing currents, east-west and west-east, coupled with a flat bathymetric structure, extending out to our full Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) lines, makes a 5km from baselines dump zone a far more effective dredge dumping location.”

Port of Waterford: “PoW has considered such a proposal historically but found it to have significant cost, programme and carbon impacts with no notable benefits.”

Cllr Power: “The recent licensing permit allowing dredging to escalate to a full yearly endeavour, particularly at Cheekpoint, appears to have made, inter alia, devastating impacts on the ecology of the Waterford Estuary with fish and crustacean extinctions accelerated, anecdotally reported. This extension exacerbates the many problems, as outlined above, associated with the current dumping location.”

PoW: “This statement is anecdotal and is not reflected or supported by any of the environmental studies commissioned by PoW and contained within the application.”

Cllr Power also maintained that with rail services now connecting Limerick to Waterford Port, the most dredged estuary in Ireland is Waterford’s, while dredging is “solely undertaken to accommodate Panama Max and Suez Max ships,” and it is “unnecessary for the importation of minimal amounts of animal feed and molasses, mostly unloaded beforehand at Foynes and Cork Ports.”

The Port responded: “PoW believes that such a national port policy/strategy observation is not relevant to this application.”