# Dredge it or loose it



## SeaShipDev (May 17, 2008)

Lets hope TasPorts takes action soon!

------------------

A FORMER master warden of Devonport says if the Mersey River is not being dredged well enough to cater for its main freight ships, it may as well be turned into a car park.
Captain Dick Burgess, who is also an ex-port director, weighed in on the dredging issue after being asked if it could be a reason the cruise ship Athena had to be diverted to Burnie on Monday.

TasPorts said it was because of a tidal restriction in Devonport. Capt Burgess agreed it was the case and that it had happened once before.

Liberal deputy leader Jeremy Rockliff has also given a stern warning that Devonport could be in danger of losing major port users such as Cement Australia and Shell because of dredging issues.

"If that is the case, they may as well put a pipe up the Mersey River and turn it into a car park," Capt Burgess said.

He said the needs of the port's regular freight ships - which were definitely getting bigger - had to be catered to or else they would go elsewhere.

During his time Capt Burgess said as the ships got bigger "we dredged deeper into the river to cater for them".

"We worked very closely with port users to cater to their needs.

"Maintaining the port and its depth was our business and we used revenue from trade to pay for that."

Capt Burgess said the Mersey was dredged about every four years and monthly soundings were undertaken to determine when the next dredging was scheduled.

It is understood Cement Australia and Shell do have concerns.

TasPorts has confirmed there were operational limitations on some ships using the Port of Devonport and yesterday a TasPorts spokeswoman said the dredging needs of it and other ports were being reviewed.

She said TasPorts was consulting with key stakeholders and letters were sent to Cement Australia and Shell seeking information on their requirements.

The Advocate: http://www.theadvocate.com.au/news/local/news/general/dredge-it-or-lose-it-burgess/1735156.aspx


----------



## Klaatu83 (Jan 22, 2009)

The ships are definitely being built larger, and the operators are putting pressure on the ports to accommodate them. For example, a few years ago Maersk built the largest container ship in the world (Regina Maersk). They promptly sailed her, bedecked with flags like a battleship, into the Port of New York, which was currently dredged to 45 feet. The company then told the Port Authority, in effect, that they had better dredge their channels to 50 feet, and install larger container cranes, or else Maersk would euphemistically pick up it's bat and ball and take their game elsewhere!


----------



## Alistair Macnab (May 13, 2008)

For how long are port authorities and politicians going to be blackmailed by container companies? If the market is there, the ships will come. It should be no concern of the authorities and their careful administration of public money that a particular shipping company may not berth its larger ships at the port. Rather, if the shipping company wants to service the port, it should be prepared to berth a suitably sized ship for the purpose. Ports should not be in the business of catering for 'folies de grandeur'. Public money has no business being used to subsidise private enterprise.


----------



## bobw (Apr 18, 2006)

I would say that the river at Devonport (Tasmania) has just about reached it's limit as far as cargo shipping is concerned. There is not much room in there let alone the problem of depth. They will soon have to either build a container terminal outside along the coast or expand the existing facilities at Burnie.


----------



## Klaatu83 (Jan 22, 2009)

Alistair Macnab said:


> For how long are port authorities and politicians going to be blackmailed by container companies? If the market is there, the ships will come. It should be no concern of the authorities and their careful administration of public money that a particular shipping company may not berth its larger ships at the port. Rather, if the shipping company wants to service the port, it should be prepared to berth a suitably sized ship for the purpose. Ports should not be in the business of catering for 'folies de grandeur'. Public money has no business being used to subsidise private enterprise.


I couldn't agree with you more! I well recall the heated competition between Charleston and Savannah in the 1980s in their efforts to dominate the container trade to the Southeaster U.S. Each port built newer and larger terminals, in an effort to try to attract the container ship companies away from their rival. Each city persuaded their taxpayers that it was a necessary expense for the benefit of the city's future prosperity. The container ship companies profited, while the local taxpayers paid most of the expense.


----------

