January 2012 |November 2011 |September 2011 |July 2011 |May 2011 |March 2011 |February 2011 |January 2011 |December 2010 |November 2010 |October 2010 |September 2010 | July 2010 | June 2010 | May 2010 | April 2010 | March 2010 | February 2010 | January 2010 | December 2009 | November Update 2009 | November 2009 | September 2009 | August 2009 | July 2009 | April 2009 (PDF) | Contact us |

Save Our Shoreline, October 2010

IRRESPONSIBLE?

Below: Photographs taken this summer, on the rock bund to the south of the incinerator.

This month Save Our Shoreline publish pictures sent in by a contributor. There has been build up of builders' waste on the rock bund below the incinerator. Worryingly this waste is mostly plastic or foam in nature and poses a threat the marine life and birds in the area. Particles break off, are mistaken for food and are ingested. This can cause a slow death. We are also worried that there may be asbestos in the mix. This is hopefully unlikely but needs to be checked as asbestos is stored above the bund. We are submitting these pictures to the Regulator and request that this is urgently investigated.

Below: The start of Jersey's South East Coast Ramsar Area, looking towards Havre des Pas. Does this image confirm the States commitment to Ramsar - is this something that Jersey should be presenting the international community with?

The Jersey Aquaculture Association were recently taken to task by the Countryside Officer for the occasional oyster bag that gets washed up onto our beaches and required the industry to provide mitigation against the impact of waste on our beaches or face fines or an annual fee towards conservation. The response from the Secretary of the Association was as follows and we don't think further comment is necessary:

Dear Mr Pinel,
We note in the Scoping of an EIA (for a modest moving of an oyster holding area) the above comments and attach a number of images provided by Save Our Shoreline. It would be useful to understand how the actions of the States of Jersey are seemingly acceptable but that three oyster bags and occasional strappings (presumably rubber bands) of indeterminate origin, requires fining and ongoing punishment?

Last month, SOS reported on the Water Discharge Permit applications that we had made submissions to. We heard only ten days after the event that the permits had been approved by the Regulator. So we apologise that our September edition was out of date before it went up. We are informed by the Regulator that he is under no obligation to inform us why these permits were approved.

Mr John Rogers, CEO, Transport and Technical Services, in a BBC Jersey interview earlier this week said that he had no knowledge of our submissions. The submissions were sent to the Regulator on 14th & 17th June 2010 to be forwarded to TTS for their consideration. Our concerns regarding the water discharge permits can be read in June's edition.

We suggest that in future, all necessary planning consents be obtained at the time of the original application, rather than the current expectation that permits will be issued regardless of carefully researched submissions presented. The total lack of transparency or even simple courtesy of an early reply or notification exacerbates the situation. We feel that the Planning law needs to be changed in this regard. Changes need to be also made to the water pollution law in the respect of the issuing of discharge permits.

Mr Rogers also accused SOS of behaving irresponsibly in producing a mock up of a possible emergency at La Collette. We would respond that the picture is clearly marked as a 'possible scenario'. The public are unlikely to think otherwise unless they are very dim. The pictures are designed to raise awareness. As for SOS being irresponsible, please examine the pictures on this page, and decide if it is irresponsible for SOS to highlight these issues. It is for the reader to decide where responsibility lies.

Then look at the pictures and text (provided by the then Project Manager at the incinerator) on our witness report page and draw your own conclusions.


Erratum
In the Jersey Evening Post's Report dated 9th October 2010 regarding our Risk Assessment as featured last month, an unintentional error occurred. We supplied a set of photographs to the reporter, but the JEP's caption does not match the photograph used. The photo used shows EfW northern elevation and the water tank in front of the plant. The photo that should have been used showed the nearest fuel farm tanks in the background. Some members of the public may have been unintentionally misled in thinking that the tank shown was a fuel tank. We regret any misunderstanding.

Save Our Shoreline, November 2010
Working to protect our marine environment.

Find us on Facebook and comment on any of our posts. Or simply show your support by sending us a friend request!
Just click on the logo below.

Save Our Shoreline Jersey


Email us

January 2012 |November 2011 |September 2011 |July 2011 |May 2011 |March 2011 | February 2011 |January 2011 | December 2010 |November 2010 |October 2010 |September 2010 | July 2010 | June 2010 | May 2010 | April 2010 | March 2010 | February 2010 | January 2010 (Eyewitness Report EfW) | December 2009 | November 2009 Update | November 2009 | September 2009 | August 2009 | July 2009 | April 2009 Press Release