Achill bridge in stormy waters
Fish-farmers claim concrete and mucky landfill poured straight into water at Achill Sound
Áine Ryan
ACHILL fish-farmers may sue Mayo County Council and the construction company contracted to develop the new bridge at the Sound, because, they claim, the terms of the granted Foreshore Licence for the temporary bridge have been flouted.
The Mayo News also learned last night (Monday) that, in light of complaints received, Minister for Fisheries, Mary Coughlan, has advised Deputy Michael Ring that she ‘would regard with the utmost seriousness any breaches’ of the licence conditions.
Oyster fish-farmers, Tom Henry and Neil Kilbane, have claimed that concrete has been poured straight into the water and mucky landfill used during the construction of the temporary bridge, thus breaking the terms of the licence. Furthermore, they say their oyster stocks have now been damaged, along with the area’s ecosystem. Their farms are about one mile to the south of the bridge.
These allegations have been substantiated in official documentation seen by The Mayo News. Expressing concerns to other officials, Sea Fisheries Protection Officer, Mr Paul Murray wrote on March 24 last that, contrary to the licence terms, the rock-fill supplied by local quarries was ‘heavily covered in soil’. He said he was even more concerned about ‘the fact that in certain parts of the channel there appears to be relatively little evidence of hardened concrete in areas where … it was indeed poured’.
Mr Murray observed that this gave rise to further concern that ‘not only may cement run-off have gone into the water but apparently in some areas there appears to be no evidence of cement ever having been poured’.
In the correspondence, Mr Murray refers to the specific terms of the licence which stipulate that Mayo County Council provide a ‘method statement’ and, moreover, that the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources ordered that ‘no spillages or leakages of fuel or cement or other leakages should occur into the marine environment’.
Tom Henry, a fish-farmer for 17 years, says the whole development has been ‘a complete disaster’.
“For the first time ever, I couldn’t sell my oysters after Christmas because the meat content was bad. In April last year I spent €8,000 on reseeding the beds but I can’t take that expensive risk this year,” said Mr Henry.
He told The Mayo News that he first became worried when he saw lorry-loads of dirty fill being poured into the channel so that the company, SIAC, could lay duct pipes for electricity, water and the upcoming sewerage services.
“The fill from a local quarry wasn’t even screened and it’s bound to have an effect on the plankton. Next thing they were pouring concrete straight into the channel; with those currents you can imagine what happened. What’s it going to do? Flow away. It just didn’t make sense,” he continued.
He conceded that the temporary foundation for the new bridge – which now acts like a dam and has increased and changed the direction of the current – may be resolved once the permanent bridge is constructed.
Meanwhile, Mayo County Council yesterday defended the standard of the works, which were due to be completed in June but now will not be finished until next October. However, the project engineer confirmed there had been small amounts of seepage during the in-fill process.
“We have heard about these complaints on a number of occasions. But we have an engineer on-site who has all along been monitoring the project and these expressed concerns,” said Senior Engineer, Mr Michael Mongan.
“The works being undertaken by SIAC are preliminary works and have been carried out in very difficult conditions over the winter months,” he said.
Mr Mongan also explained that there was no alternative method for encasing the ducts other than surrounding them by concrete. Pre-cast concrete could not have been used, he said.
“These works have been carried out very sensitively. The causeway material was sourced from local quarries and naturally there will be some sandy type material in gravel. The fines [small sand particles] from this did cause some water discolouration in the vicinity of the works,” Mr Mongan continued.
He also told The Mayo News that ‘a foreshore lease’ still being processed by the Department of Fisheries was for a compound for the project, but was no longer being actively pursued by Mayo County Council.
