6 TASK IV - PORT DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS
6.1 ADEQUACY OF EXISTING PORT FACILITIES
105. For pelagic fish the existing
fishing port facilities at W.B. will suffice but a northern base would afford definitive
advantages, principally lower fuel costs and improved fish quality at landing, especially
to purse-seiners fishing the northern pilchard and horse mackerel stocks. Although the
W.B. facilities for mid-water trawlers are sufficient, the viability of this class of very
large trawler is suspect. If they would be replaced by smaller vessels, additional fishing
port provision would be needed.
106. Landing facilities as well as handling, processing
and storage facilities for white fish are restricted at both W.B. and Lüderitz,
especially for fish landed on ice and for smaller fishing vessels such as wet-fish
trawlers and line-boats. The chief bottlenecks are:
i. private control of the only wharfage in the W.B.
fishing port;
ii. alternative access only through freighter berths in
the commercial port;
iii. cross-cutting jurisdictions and abdication of
responsibilities by the RSA public sector bodies having
authority over the fishing port.
107. Irrespective of capacities at W.B., a North
Coast fishing base would afford definitive advantages to small vessels targeting white
fish in the northern sector.
108. As far as general cargo is concerned W.B. port facilities will be adequate until
2015, if W.B. remains fully accessible for Namibian use. See tables 45 and 46 (Approximate
capacities of W.B. Commercial Port without and with expansion of dockside facilities).
TABLE 45: CAPACITY OF WALVIS BAY COMMERCIAL PORT
Cargo category |
Throughput (000 t) |
Berth lengths (m) |
Berths |
General Containers/ro-ro
Bulk |
2620
550
1710 |
750
280
370 |
4.3
1.5
2.2 |
Total Liquid |
4880
1840 |
1400
190 |
8.0
1.0 |
TABLE 46: CAPACITY OF WALVIS BAY PORT WITH EXPANSION
Cargo category |
Throughput (000 t) |
Berth lengths (m) |
Berths |
General Containers/ro-ro
Bulk |
1940
620
4190 |
550
330
520 |
3.2
1.8
3.0 |
Total Liquid |
6750
1840 |
1400
190 |
8.0
1.0 |
6.2 PORT OPTIONS AND LOCATIONS
109. The planning for future port facilities for Namibia is required to take account of
both economic and strategic developments. Par.2 of this Study actualised three different
strategic contexts which result in three port development options:
- Null Option: there are no additions to the existing ports, although new
shoreside
infrastructure
(e.g. for bulk loading) is built according to demand and as space
permits;
- Expansion Option: any new facilities are built at or near existing port
facilities;
- New Port Option: some or all of any new or replacement facilities are located
at one or more
new
harbour sites.
110. The geographical locations for new port facilities were tentatively established:
a. Commercial port, central: The nearest economically feasible and suitable site north
of W.B. is Cape Cross. For any site further north, facilities for anything more than the
port community and its immediate hinterland cannot be justified on either economic or
strategic grounds.
b. Fishing port, central: New or expanded fishing port facilities are required in the
central zone in any case and cannot be adequately substituted by a northern fishing port.
Again, Cape Cross is the most suitable location for the central sector and could also
cover the northern fishing grounds (more adequately than W.B.).
c. Fishing port, northern: A medium-sized northern fishing port can be justified for
the long term on grounds of improved access to the northern fish stocks irrespective of
developments in the central zone. Cape Fria or Angra Fria are disadvantaged by its
remoteness and by difficulties of land access through or around the sand-dune belt. Möwe
Bay appears on balance the most suitable location. Again, Cape Cross could be a compromise
between the requirements of the central and northern zones.
6.3 PORT OPTIONS UNDER STRATEGIC CONTEXTS
111. Table 47 gives a summary of port developments under the different port option
scenarios:
TABLE 47: PORT OPTIONS UNDER STRATEGIC CONTEXTS
Location |
Type |
Null option |
Expansion option |
New port option |
Strategic context 1: Namibian sovereignty established |
Lüderitz |
F |
Limited private sector development for white fish |
L1: Expanded fishing harbour; zonal landings: most southern |
L1: Expanded fishing harbour; zonal landings: most southern |
Walvis Bay |
C |
Limited bulk handling facilities like salt |
WB 1: Additional handling and storage facilities by operators; under the
rapid growth scenario, planning after 2005 for future seaward extension |
WB 1: Additional handling and storage facilities by operators; under the
rapid growth scenario, planning after 2005 for future seaward extension |
Walvis Bay |
F |
Limited private sector development, mainly for white fish |
WB1-B: existing fishing harbour developed, or WB1-D: northern fishing
harbour extension; zonal landings: all central and northern, mainly of white fish |
WB1-A: existing fishing harbour developed, or WB1-C: northern fishing
harbour extension; zonal landings: all central, minor part of northern, mainly of white
fish |
Cape Cross |
C |
- |
- |
- |
Cape Cross |
F |
- |
- |
- |
Möwe Bay |
F |
- |
- |
MB1: new fishing harbour; zonal landings: most of northern |
Summary |
|
- |
L1, WB1-B or -D |
L1, WB1-A or -C, MB1 |
Strategic Context 2: Namibian sovereignty not established, joint
administration |
Lüderitz |
F |
Limited private sector development for white fish |
L1: Expanded fishing harbour; zonal landings: most southern |
L1: Expanded fishing harbour; zonal landings: most southern |
Walvis Bay |
C |
- |
- |
- |
Walvis Bay |
F |
Limited private sector development, mainly for white fish |
Limited private sector development, mainly for white fish |
Limited private sector development, mainly for white fish |
Cape Cross |
C |
- |
- |
Under rapid growth scenario, planning after 2005 for future new harbour or
commercial extension to fishing harbour |
Cape Cross |
F |
- |
CC1-D: new fishing harbour; zonal landings: all central and northern,
mainly of white fish |
CC1-C: new fishing harbour; zonal landings: all central, minor part of
northern, mainly of white fish |
Möwe Bay |
F |
- |
- |
MB1: new fishing harbour; zonal landings: most of northern |
Summary |
|
- |
L1, CC1-D |
L1, CC1-C, MB1 |
Strategic Context 3: Namibian sovereignty not established, Walvis Bay
replaced |
Lüderitz |
F |
Limited private sector development for white fish |
L1: Expanded fishing harbour; zonal landings: most southern |
L1: Expanded fishing harbour; zonal landings: most southern |
Walvis Bay |
C |
Run down |
Run down |
Run down |
Walvis Bay |
F |
Run down |
Run down |
Run down |
Cape Cross |
C |
- |
CC1-B New commercial harbour replicating facilities at Walvis Bay; under
rapid growth scenario, planning after 2005 for future extension |
CC1-A: New commercial harbour replicating facilities at Walvis Bay; under
rapid growth scenario, planning after 2005 for future extension |
Cape Cross |
F |
- |
CC1-B: new fishing harbour; zonal landings: all central and northern, of
both pelagic & white fish |
CC1-A: new fishing harbour; zonal landings: all central, minor part of
northern, of both pelagic & white fish |
Möwe Bay |
F |
- |
- |
MB1: new fishing harbour; zonal landings: most of northern |
Summary |
|
- |
L1, CC1-B |
L1, CC1-A, MB1 |
NOTA: Type: F = fishing harbour; C =
commercial harbour.
Alternatives like L1, WB1, CC1, MB1 etc. should
be regarded as building components for the specific port options. |