Impact of Harbour Moles and Access Channels on the South-East Baltic Shore Zone
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GEOGRAFIJA. 2007. T. 43. No. 1. P. 12–20 © Lietuvos mokslų akademija, 2007 © Lietuvos mokslų akademijos leidykla, 2007 Impact of harbour moles and access channels on the South-East Baltic shore zone Rimas Žaromskis Žaromskis R. Impact of harbour moles and access channels on the South-East Baltic shore zone. Geografija. 2007. T. 43(1). ISSN 1392-1096. Vilnius University, The paper deals with the impact of harbour engineering in the open South-East Baltic e-mail: [email protected] Sea shores on sandy seashores and bottom relief. Based on cartographic, literature and field investigation material, shore segments situated in harbours of Latvia, Lithuania, Russia, Po- land and Germany are analysed. Shore zone evolution is discussed from the time when there were no harbour moles in the study area. Key words: mole, access channel, bar, morphodynamics, harbour deepening, dumping INTRODUCTION image effects and state of harbour reconstructions, and the forth ones (the latest) portray the situation of the 1990s or the start of The general features of the impact produced by outer hydro-en- the 21st century. Literature sources and personal experience in sea- gineering on the shore zone are rather well investigated. There is shore investigations have been used as well in wiring the paper. rich experience gained in construction of certain harbours and their operation, since people who worked in the ports did their Impact on the shores in some SE Baltic states. Latvia has a best in order that the harbour environment and the processes long shoreline and several ports (Fig. 1). We shall deal, however, occurring there were explored properly. Regularities of environ- with only those harbours that are located on a more or less open mental impact are similar in harbours situated at sandy shores sea shores, not in the bays, lagoons or rivers. From this point of but not the same, since each harbour has its own specific engi- view, a c. 235 km-long shore between the Lithuanian / Latvian neering and plan structures as well as a unique position in the border and the Kolkas Rags cape seems to be the most interest- shore zone. Some of them are situated in the straits connecting ing. There are three ports operated in this section: Ventspils, the sea with internal fresh-water basins; others are in the river Liepaja and Pavilosta. The first one is close to the zone where lower reaches or mouths, while some lie at an open seashore. sediments drifting along the shore are accumulating, whereas Harbours differ greatly in their water area and the depth of the Liepaja and Pavilosta are in the active transit zone of sediment access channel, the length of outer hydro-engineering struc- tures, i. e. moles and channels, etc. Some shores with harbours are notable for a well-developed nearshore drift, while others have no longshore transport of sediments. There are differences in natural conditions as well. The purpose of the present paper is to analyse the impact on shore zone topography taking place in harbours situated under sim- ilar hydrometeorological conditions and sediments but differing in plan structure, development history and geographical situation. METHODS The paper deals with the impact on the shore zone relief by the SE and E Baltic (Latvian, Lithuanian, Russian Kaliningrad, Polish and German) harbours situated at the sandy shores, where hydro-en- gineering structures are directly affected by the open sea waves. The impact on shore zone relief changes is analysed taking into account the harbour construction plans and maps grouped according to their type. The oldest ones reflect the state of the shores before harbour construction, others show construction Fig. 1. Situation of ports at the SE Baltic shores stages or the period shortly after the construction, the third ones 1 pav. Uostų išsidėstymas Pietryčių Baltijos krante Impact of harbour moles and access channels on the South-East Baltic shore zone 13 flow (Кнапс, 1966; Ulsts, 1998; Eberhards, 2003). According to are not long: the western one extends only as far as about 200 m, Latvian experts, the port of Ventspils affects the shore length of while the eastern pier is nearly 300 m long – both reaching the 19 km (+5 km and –14 km, where accumulation is marked by 5-m isobath. Their role for the shore formation is determined “+” and erosion by “–”), Liepaja – 24 km (+10 and –14 km) and by nearshore drift speciality. Beside Kolobrzeg, there are several Pavilosta – 4.5 km (+1.5 and –3 km) (Eberhards, 2003). Hence, small ports on the open seashore (Dziwnow, Mrzerzino, Ustka, overall, these Latvian ports make an impact on 20.2% of its Darlowo and Wladyslawowo, etc.), as well as hydro-engineer- shores or a 47.5 km shore length. ing constructions stabilising the Vistula River arms. The moles Only 90.6 km of the shore belongs to Lithuania, with its of small harbour of Wladyslawowo reach only 5 m in depth, but main part (51 km) being on the Kuršių Nerija (Curonian) sand being situated in the zone with a well-expressed nearshore drift spit which is declared the National Park and entered into the they affect at least a 3–4 km long shore segment (Foltanski,1938; UNESCO list of protected areas. Its sea coast has no hydro-en- Szmytkiewicz, 2003). Small and large harbours, taken together, gineering constructions. North of the Kuršių Nerija there is the affect approx. 42.1 km or 10.5% of the open shoreline. In fact, port of Klaipėda and, farther, an olden system of the Šventoji it is even higher, because the smallest engineering sites ignored harbour, now unserviceable. The sea coast at Palanga was also here and used by fishers also affect shore-formation processes. changing under the impact of the olden quay that later turned Although Germany has a rather long shoreline of the Baltic into a promenade pier – a sand drift-tight system. Later the pier Sea, its major part lies in the belts, bays or areas sheltered by is- was reconstructed into a more openwork system which, never- lands from the open sea waves. Therefore we shall discuss here theless, continues affecting the shore (Žaromskis,2005).The port only a small segment (approx. 60 km) of the shoreline east of of Klaipėda affects approximately 25 km (+9 and –16 km) of the Greifswald Boden. Moreover, these shores are considerably less seashore. The broken-down southern pier of the Šventoji har- affected by marine dynamical processes than those in Latvia or bour affects an approx. 6.5 km shore-length (+4 and –2.5 km). Lithuania. The Palanga pier and a nearby groyne affect directly a 1.5 km There are no big ports on this coast,and small landing-places shore-length (+0.5 and –1 km). Thus, the engineering construc- exert only a local impact on the shores, their total length being tions affect,directly or indirectly,a 33 km shore-length,or 36.4% less than 4 km. Thus, only 2.4% of eastern German shores are of the total. affected by harbour engineering. It should be noted that nearly About 150 km of SE Baltic shore belong to Russia and con- 80% of the Usedom Island shores, due to active erosion, are re- tain two harbours: Baltiysk and Pionersky. Located near the inforced by breakwaters, groynes and erosion-proof slopes, and convergence zone of the nearshore drift, the Baltiysk (former other hydro-engineering constructions (Generalplan…, 1994). Pillau) harbour affects a rather short length of the shore (+3 and This fact is a serious setback for determining the impact of small –2 km). Pionerskiy (Naujieji Kuršiai, Neu Kuhren) is in the zone harbours on the shores. feeding the nearshore drift.Its western pier goes even 560 m sea- ward, but due to its direction parallel to the shoreline it makes no Harbour dredging impact on shore processes. The majority of great impact on the shore processes (+1 and –2 km) (Žaromskis, East Baltic ports built or renovated their outer hydro-engineer- 2001). Hence, the harbours of Russian Kaliningrad region affect ing systems during the period from 1834 to the end of the 19th c. approx. 12% of the shoreline. Swinoujscie, Klaipėda and Gdansk should be noted here. The Open shore of the Baltic Sea in Poland is extended for about pole or crib type moles reached the depth of 7.5–8 m (Hagen, 400 km with four large ports on it: Szczecin, Swinoujscie, Gdynia 1863) and met the harbour standards of that time nearly as long and Gdansk. All of them are situated in favourable geographical as by WWII. Such moles exerted a slight impact on shore for- conditions and undergo a rather weak impact of the marine pro- mation in limited local segments. On the contrary, the harbour cesses. Gdynia and Gdansk are partly sheltered from the open moles built on the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries (Gdynia, sea by the Hel sand spit; Szczecin is situated in the Odra River Ventspils and Liepaja) already ensured the access channel depth delta, and only Swinoujscie harbour piers are reached by the N of 9–10 m. It should be reminded that by the mid-20th c. dredg- and NE wind-caused waves. As the shoreline here is exposed to ers were not very powerful. The harbour depth was,as a rule,en- the prevailing winds, the Swinoujscie region is in the zone where sured not by dredging but by extending moles to reach the surf rather weak nearshore drift streams converge. On the contrary, zone or even beyond it. Under the conditions of a well-expressed Gdynia and Gdansk are located in the divergence zone of weak nearshore drift, such constructions caused a significant direct drift streams within the Gdansk–Puck bay (Subotowicz, 1995).