Discussions at our recent habitat creation conference drew out several key points about the role of using dredged sediment and other “wastes” to benefit coastal habitats.

In November, ABPmer hosted a conference in London that considered the role of using dredged sediment and other “wastes” to benefit coastal habitats. This was the third habitat creation conference produced by ABPmer.

Close to a hundred people attended the event where the programme outlined the institutional framework, showcased project examples and discussed ways forward.
During each of the sessions of this conference there was a lively, valuable and interesting discussion period which often reflected a strong consensus of opinion. Based on the issues raised during these sessions and on the feedback forms submitted afterwards the key points were as follows:

We would like to do more (and larger) projects. Even after 25 years of (limited) project implementation we are still finding it difficult to implement anything other than relatively small-scale projects, often in the form of small ‘trials’. However, we have proven these work and we have the knowledge and technical capability to be doing more and better. We are not doing as much as we could, and are missing opportunities, due to the obstacles that exist

The lack of statutory leadership is a key issue on this topic. This means that a central driving force is absent which would push this subject forward and address issues and challenges.

The regulatory burden is too great, risk-averse and inconsistently implemented. There was a broad consensus that the regulatory process is overly complex and that there is a general lack of clarity and consistency with it. This ‘red tape’ is a key constraint to implementation. There is also a tendency to place emphasis (possibly even increasingly so) on not doing things unless all evidence to the contrary is in place and, all risk removed rather than having a proactive, ‘can do’ or ‘yes if’ approach in which there is a presumption in favour of habitat restoration.

Definitions and terminologies create obstacles. While the need for appropriate regulation is recognised some issues emerge that seem unnecessary or perhaps readily resolvable. This may be a function of interpretation only. For example, the EA has very recently ‘clarified’ the waste recovery test so that projects similar to the Wallasea project where spoil is used could not really be undertaken again. This is particularly pertinent given that Wallasea has proven to be such a visionary and high-profile example of joined up Government thinking to achieve large-scale sustainable coastal management. Treating dredge arisings as ‘waste’ is a key challenge.

Costs and Benefits need to be clarified. We need to be much clearer about the full costs and the benefits of restoration projects and also about our national priorities and the reasons for undertaking restoration work when reviewing costs and considering funding issues. The issues value for money (to society) and who pays is especially pertinent because for beneficial use the cost often falls on the harbour authority or marina owner who are not necessarily the beneficiary.

More local perspectives are needed by all parties involved. The particular reasons for undertaking beneficial use can vary between different locations. There needs to be more understanding of local issues, as part of the consenting processes. It is also notable that the case for beneficial use is generally much easier to make to local communities than managed realignment.

Co-ordinating sources and sediments is a key (but resolvable?) issue. One of the most well-known challenges involves linking the sources of sediment and the sites that need it. It can be difficult to marry the two together when the timing of dredging activities can vary along with the type of sediment that is available. Also, getting consents in place for the receiver and donor projects at the same time is complex. However, this is an issue that could be resolved by using existing data and developing new communication mechanisms. Those mechanisms might need to be bespoke or could be derived from the established MMO Marine Information System or the CL:AIRE network which connects generators of “waste” with users.

For more information, download the conference report and presentations.