O P I N I O N

No Need to Sacrifice the
Lobster Industry to Improve
Searsport Shipping Channel

by Rock Alley and Bill Coppersmith

Although the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Maine Department of Transportation have withdrawn their dredging applications, DOT says the proposal to deepen and expand the Searsport Federal Navigation Project will be resubmitted. While we await a revised application, it is important to clarify the basis for opposition by lobstermen to this project as proposed and urge the federal and state officials to modify this proposal to one that better protects the environment of Penobscot Bay and the economic interests of all Mainers.

Lobstermen do not oppose improving the port of Searsport or encouraging more deep-draft vessels use the docks at Mack Point. Lobstermen strongly support maintenance dredging (with responsible disposal of all spoils on land). But lobstermen, small-business owners, environmentalists and just plain folks who call Penobscot Bay home, oppose the Searsport dredge, as proposed by the Corps and DOT, because there is a smarter, safer, cheaper alternative to dredging and dumping a million cubic yards of sediment — clean or contaminated — in the fertile and fragile lobstering grounds in Penobscot Bay.

The Dawson Alternative would allow 2-foot deeper draft vessels to safely offload cargo at the Mack Point docks through all low tide cycles than the Corps’ proposal would while costing Maine taxpayers nothing and federal taxpayers millions less than the Corps’ proposal. Dawson would also do no harm to the fisheries, environment and economy in Penobscot Bay.

The Dawson Alternative would require removing only: 37,100 cubic yards of sediment to restore the 35-foot congressionally authorized channel depth (the same depth as Portland and Portsmouth); and about 30,000 cubic yards to deepen the Mack Point dock area by 5 feet (to 45 feet). With upland disposal of the dredge spoils generated from this alternative the adverse impacts of improving access to Searsport for deep-draft vessels could be achieved without disturbing long-buried HoltraChem mercury or doing any harm to the irreplaceable fisheries in Penobscot Bay, including the valuable lobster fishery, which in 2014 brought in a catch worth more than $650 million in the Maine economy from just Knox and Waldo County landings.

In contrast, the Corps proposes dredging almost a million cubic yards of sediment — up to 20 percent of which the Corps acknowledges is so contaminated it is “unsuitable for uncontained open ocean disposal” — and dumping those dredge spoils 5,000 feet from a thriving mussel farm and in the middle of some of the most productive lobstering grounds in the United States.

The DOT suggests the Corps’ alternative is the only way to create jobs in central and northern Maine; however, Mainers do not have to choose between creating jobs in central and northern Maine and preserving tourism and fishing jobs in Penobscot Bay. Improving the Searsport Federal Navigation Project for use by additional deep-draft vessels does not require us to sacrifice the lobster fishery in Penobscot Bay (where up to 49 percent of the U.S. lobster catch is landed).

The Dawson Alternative was developed by the foremost water resources experts in the nation, Dawson & Associates, who are all former members of the Corps’ leadership. Dawson was retained with private citizen funds from the Islesboro Islands Trust because of the refusal of the Corps to do the thorough analysis of alternatives mandated by federal law. Dawson concluded that 97 percent of the port improvement goals identified by the Corps (i.e. increasing the ability for deep-draft vessels with drafts of between 35.2 feet and 40 feet to service Searsport) can be effectively achieved without causing the massive damage the Corps’ proposal will inflict on Penobscot Bay’s environment, lobstermen and economy.

The cost of the long-overdue maintenance dredging in the Searsport channel is 100 percent a federal responsibility, and much of the cost for deepening the Mack Point docks (estimated to be $900,000: 30,000 cubic yards at $30 per cubic yard, according to the Corps’ 2013 feasibility study and draft environmental assessment) would be Sprague Energy’s responsibility. Consequently, the Dawson Alternative can be implemented at no cost to Maine taxpayers and much less cost to federal taxpayers than the $13 million price tag for the Corps’ proposal.

The entire general membership of the Maine Lobstering Union and the Zone D Lobster Council all unanimously oppose the Corps’ proposed dredge and dump proposal. We ask that the governor and Maine congressional delegation join and support lobstermen in Penobscot Bay and across Maine by directing the Corps and DOT to pursue immediate implementation of the Dawson Alternative — and not refile the Corps’ ill-conceived and destructive proposal.

Rock Alley of Jonesport is president of the Maine Lobstering Union. Bill Coppersmith of Windham is the union’s vice president. They wrote this OpEd on behalf of the Maine Lobstering Union’s executive board.