|
Preventing 'an abysmal use of land' (cont.)
|
|
|
TINA MARKOE/Courier-Post
Anthony DePasquale, site specialist with the Philadelphia district of the Army Corps of Engineers, highlights spoils sites on a map.
|
"Gloucester County has been plagued with environmental problems, such as Superfund sites, in the past," says Gloucester County Freeholder Robert J. Smith. "We won't allow our county to become a dumping ground for environmental problems. The Army Corps and the port authority will face stern opposition to their plans to desecrate our land with contaminated dredge spoils from the Delaware River project."
Gina Carola, chair of the West Jersey Sierra Club, which focuses on the tri-county area, says dredge sites are like the unexamined landfills of the past and could be the Superfund sites of the future.
"Quite possibly, 10, 15, 20 years down the road, South Jersey residents could be living with a tragedy similar to that in Toms River (a cluster of childhood cancers) because our Department of Environmental Protection wasn't paying attention while someone was poisoning the well," the West Deptford resident says.
Patrick Mulligan, president of Oldmans Creek Watershed Association, says the corps--in conjunction with the port authority--could not have chosen worse sites on which to stockpile spoils.
"These are tidal marshes that support an amazing variety of wildlife and plant life," Mulligan says.
"They are part of the East Coast flyway for migrating birds in spring and fall. They are wetlands of the most unique type because of the combination of salt and fresh water that form them."
While every site is different, the corps stands by its limited test results, which show no significant impact on water or aquatic life near a Pedricktown disposal site. The corps also has agreed to install monitoring wells--a major concession--and to stop work immediately if results are outside agreed-upon limits.
Beverly Fedorko of the state Department of Environmental Protection is satisfied with the corps' approach.
"We do not give licenses to pollute, but to protect," she says. "This is a very good project."
From the river, the disposal sites look like a scenic forest. From land, they appear much the same, because they are surrounded by a wall, or berm, covered with wild grasses and trees. From the top of the berm, ranging from 20 to 50 feet at the different sites, the actual disposal area is carved out like a bathtub. A recently used site near Raccoon Creek resembles a mud hole. A dormant site in Pedricktown is covered with natural vegetation. Neither emits any unpleasant odors.
The crime of it, say dredging opponents, is the barrier that will grow to its 70-foot maximum capacity, blocking vistas and recreational use of the river. The same charge has been made repeatedly against the maritime industry in Camden, Pennsauken and Gloucester City, for example, for obscuring waterfronts with containers, heavy equipment and security fences.
Given the need for disposal sites and the fact no two sites or scoops of fill are alike, th ere is little conclusive data on environmental impact. That's why the Delaware River Basin Commission has lobbied for continual monitoring and oversight.
"There's no question that some of the sediment is contaminated, but if put in large sites with long retention times, the toxins are not washing back into the river, says Thomas Fikslin, head of the commission's monitoring branch.
"They are accumulating on land, which presents other problems. But with planning, the most contaminated could be put on the bottom, then covered with cleaner stuff.
"There are a host of conscientious ways to mitigate the damage that can be done, but without oversight, they could be ignored," he added.
| 
