rss
mobile
Feeds
The biggest selling point for a port on the Jasper County side of the river is that it provides a deep-water port much closer to the ocean than the existing Savannah port, making it easier and cheaper to maintain passage for the massive ships expected to come calling after the Panama Canal is widened by 2014.
But if you deepen the Savannah River channel from 42 feet to 48 feet for the 26 miles to the existing port, you decrease the need for another deep-water port.
The Jasper port is a two-state project that would be going nowhere without Georgia's cooperation -- or at least nowhere without an expensive legal battle. The land designated for the port had been owned by the Georgia Department of Transportation to use as a site by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to dump dredge spoil from the river.
But Georgia officials are getting antsy about possible objections to the dredging project from South Carolina officials. The Savannah River Maritime Commission, a state of South Carolina creation, wants to hire a consultant to examine and explain the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the project expected to be released in March.
It's a good idea and one that should be supported financially. It's expected to cost more than $100,000, but it would be money well spent. We must have a full understanding of the impacts of the dredging on this side of the river before the digging begins. That includes possible saltwater intrusion into the Upper Floridan Aquifer, a major drinking water source for the region, and the damage it might cause the Savannah Wildlife Refuge.
A report by the Coastal Environmental Organization of Georgia states that previous dredging projects have reduced the refuge's original 6,000 acres of tidal freshwater marsh to 2,800 acres in 1997. Dredging also has lowered dissolved oxygen levels in the river, causing problems for wildlife and the industries that use the river. And it robs beaches of nourishing sand.
But it should be remembered that the agreement between Gov. Sonny Perdue of Georgia and Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina that started the two-state effort to build a port in Jasper County included a provision that South Carolina would help get the Savannah River dredged. That provision was included for a reason: Georgia officials want the harbor deepened, and they don't want South Carolina officials slowing or stopping it.
News this week that the dredging project might need to extend miles into the ocean, greatly increasing its cost, was met with concern from state Sen. Larry Grooms, chairman of the state's Port Oversight Commission and a candidate for governor. Grooms, whose district includes part of Charleston County, has said he worries that South Carolina's help in deepening the river channel to the Garden City Terminal would make the Jasper project unnecessary.
That's always been the case. And the flip side of that -- the Jasper port making it unnecessary to dredge all 26 miles to the Garden City Terminal -- is one of the reasons groups such as the Coastal Conservation League support the Jasper port. That and it takes pressure off expanding the Charleston port.
Concerns about the long-term impacts of the dredging project and of the construction of the Jasper port and accompanying infrastructure should not be dismissed lightly, no matter whether they are self-serving or sincere.
As best we can, let's set aside the politics of the ports and examine the environmental impacts. Residents of both states would have to live with the consequences of either project for a long time to come.
