Advisor satisfied port plans will protect estuary wildlife

2:13pm Wednesday 7th May 2008

A KEY advisor to the expansion of Teesport has announced himself satisfied with the steps taken to protect the wildlife of the estuary.

Dr Martin Bailey, of Newcastle consultants Royal Haskoning, said he believed the right balance had been struck in the proposals for the Northern Gateway plan formulated by PD Teesport.

He was addressing the inaugural Tees Conference, held by the Industry Nature Conservation Association, which is based at the Wilton International complex near Redcar, east Cleveland, and advises businesses on biodiversity.

Dr Bailey said extensive efforts had been made to preserve and, where possible, improve conditions for wildlife throughout the consultation on plans for a deep sea container terminal on the south bank of the River Tees.

Royal Hoskoning was commissioned to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment, which is required for all major developments, and Dr Bailey said discussions with organisations ranging from councils to Natural England and the Environment Agency identified a number of concerns.

These included: The impact of dredging work required to ensure the river could handle the deep sea containers. Worries included the potential release of pollution created by old industries and trapped in the sediment; Potential damage caused to the river by piling during construction; The effect of the work on migratory fish using the river; The effect of construction noise on wildlife; Loss of wildlife habitats.

The concerns were heightened because the terminal would be next to a Special Protection Area, which designates the estuary as of special wildlife significance because of the large numbers of migrating birds that use it.

Its habitats include sand shingle, shallow coastal waters and saltmarsh, while birds using it include little tern, sandwich tern, knot and redshank.

Dr Bailey said that when planning permission was granted for the terminal, 33 conditions were imposed, 18 of which related to environmental impact.

They included further studies of some speciesf needs and practical measures to protect existing habitats.

Dr Bailey said they meant that the development could go ahead, while also respecting the need for biodiversity.

Editor's Choice