Unloading depth of 2.7 m claimed

Consequently, in the so-called inland shipping memorandum of 1992 it was laid down that in view of traffic policy the channel east of Vienna shall be deepened to an unloading depth of 2.7 m (the channel width being 120 metres). This depth has been identified by shipping companies to be necessary for fully loaded cargo ships to pass even when water levels are low. In contrast to the inland shippers, Nemetz is not convinced that this width is necessary along the whole stretch and that along some stretches, 100 metres would be sufficient due to the new navigation equipment. Presently Austria guarantees the Danube Commission (of which Austria is a member) a channel depth of 2.5 m on the entire Austrian section. An unloading depth of 2.7 would de facto necessitate a total channel water depth of 3.2 m.

The starting situation of his establishment in view of the discussion to come is described by Nemetz as follows: "Under the condition that no further hydro-power stations will be built in the east of Vienna, extensive development work is necessary which will both satisfy inland shipping and ecological requirements along the Danube." Nemetz is content that the Danube development plans were included in the final draft of the Federal Traffic Plan. Thus, this waterway will receive the priority that it deserves.

Nature conservationists ring the alarm

However, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) is a decided opponent of the project. In the eyes of Günther Lutschinger, managing director of WWF, developing the Danube into a "water-highway" is a complete nonsense, "... it is nothing but the submersion of billions of tax money into the Danube." And he continues: "Nothing in the world obliges Austria to have a channel depth of 3.2 metres! The realisation of the project would create a useless ’bathtub’ between Vienna and Bratislava, which would endanger several fish species."

And Bernd Lötsch, ecologist and managing director of the Museum of Natural Sciences in Vienna, adds: "The exaggerated development objective to guarantee a channel depth of 3.2 metres throughout the year would necessitate the movement of millions of cubic metres of river material and its river biotopes. This would mean: decades of moving large construction areas in the life vein of the National Park – where we have a landing prohibition for paddle boats right now because the structures are so precious and delicate. Neither the Wachau nor the Danube east of the Austrian border has a constant channel depth of more than 2.5 m." Dredging plans for the German section of the Danube have already been rejected by the veto of the Bavarian Rechnungshof and a hearing on the national level. Lötsch calls the promoters of the project simply "castle-builders".

The decisive factor: money

A "dream" remained the deepening of the channel certainly for the Austrian chamber of commerce, which has claimed it for years. For Alexander Piekniczek, managing director of the Fachverband Schifffahrt, the project has failed due to a lack of funds. No wonder, the costs for it are said to amount to ATS 2.5 billion. This sum cannot be called negligible, admits Nemetz, too, but it shall be distributed over a project period of 10 years. The head of the Wasserstraßendirektion regrets that the WWF in particular is opposing the Danube development – because his organisation spent ATS 30 million from its budget in 1996 to invest in the networking of waters along a 10-km stretch between Regelsbrunn and Haslau. In spite of apparently incompatible viewpoints of the economy and nature conservation the planning work for the project should be completed by January 2001 to a large extent and an additional construction cost assessment will have been made. Subsequently, the project will land on the desk of Infrastructure Minister Monika Forstinger and a political decision is pending. (Source: aqua press Int. 1/2001)
Josef Müller