Boats have made their way up the Thames since humans discovered floating – in more recent times the Thames has been an artery of trade and commerce, of travel and exploration in times of war and peace.
Through all this the Thames estuary has retained an abundance of nature and wild places – now recognised as internationally important for the hundreds of thousands of wildfowl and wading birds that depend on the estuary as a stop over on their great migrations or as a vital winter refuge.
Bringing ships safely to shore close to where people live inevitably means ports share or compete for space in some of our most important places for wildlife – which surely must be a recipe for conflict.
An inevitable conflict between economic growth and further loss of our natural environment? Photo credit Rolf Williams RSPB Images.
Today’s announcement of the opening of Dubai Ports World massive London Gateway port development on the Essex coast tells a different story – and it is an important one in the context of the relentless pursuit of economic recovery.
London Gateway and logistics centre has been developed on the old Shellhaven oil refinery site but included proposals for land claim in the Thames estuary. A defining phase of the development was the constructive dialogue with the developers to understand their proposals and agree on the scale and nature of the likely adverse impacts and what was appropriate to mitigate and compensate any predicted damage and monitor the outcomes.
The planning inspector concluded that there was no alternative to this proposal that it was in the overriding public interest and, crucially, accepted the legal agreement on mitigation, compensation and monitoring. Here’s a Guardian article we helped with which illustrates the result.
Pantomime politics have portrayed our fragile and damaged natural environment as the villain of the piece, blocking heroic efforts to boost our economy (boo!) – and yes, when a development proposal is badly conceived, where there are less damaging alternatives, where there is questionable public benefit then it is right that they should not proceed (hooray) – but London Gateway shows clearly that working through the regulatory process can achieve outcomes that are good for business as well as the natural environment. A case that is repeatedly made and accepted – effective use of the Habitats Regulations is not interfering with economic activity.
The ports sector has been a shining example of good practice through both port developers and conservationists increasing understanding of both sides of the argument – and let’s hope it stays that way.
The story of an industry getting to grips with the regulatory framework that exists to protect our natural environment should be an example for other sectors, not least because ports, generally, operate in some of our most important sites of wildlife.
Follow me on twitter.