Questions bubble up to challenge Wilmington port project

(Part 1 in a Series)

While the North Carolina State Ports Authority insists that deepening the harbor channel at the Port of Wilmington will provide a significant boost to the state’s economy, a coalition of environmental groups is questioning whether the $1.35 billion taxpayer-funded project should go forward.

Feeling the heat, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wilmington District voluntarily requested in December 2025 that the massive project be paused temporarily and put on hold. Its request was granted in late January 2026 by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Coastal Management.

The Corps said it needed additional time to consider objections that surfaced in more than 1,500 public comments.

Essentially, the proposal calls for deepening the Cape Fear River shipping channel from its current 42 feet to 47 feet to accommodate larger, deep-draft container ships. 

Work to deepen the channel and widen it in several places would include substantial amounts of dredging and even blasting.

The scope of the project spans roughly 26 miles, from the harbor entrance near Bald Head Island up to the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge in Wilmington. 

Construction could begin in 2030 and take about six years to complete, sources said.

Groups such as the North Carolina Coastal Federation (headquartered in Carteret County) have suggested the project “could devastate the natural resources that make coastal North Carolina unique.”

 

“For the mere purpose of saving shipping companies an unidentified amount of money, the Corps proposes to destroy more than 1,000 acres of wetlands, risk harm to threatened and endangered species, threaten groundwater quality and increase coastal and riverine erosion,” the Coastal Federation contends.

“The Wilmington port expansion poses many threats to the environment of the Lower Cape Fear region, which is rife with wildlife and natural resources, boasting spectacular barrier islands, tidal creeks and salt marshes.”

The bottom line, according to Coastal Federation officials, is that as proposed, the Ports Authority harbor project “would cause irreversible harm to the Cape Fear River, its wildlife and surrounding communities.”

Among the Coastal Federation’s specific objections to deepening the channel is the fear that allowing more saltwater to intrude farther upriver can change the salinity levels in sensitive tidal forests and potentially kill the trees there.

Also, the Coastal Federation believes that deepening the harbor will amplify storm surge and flooding, increasing risks to homes, businesses and critical infrastructure during hurricanes and other extreme weather events.

Further, the Coastal Federation fears that increased vessel tonnage will lead to more wakes that erode shorelines and increase the risk of vessel strikes on turtles, fish and marine mammals.

Additionally, the Coastal Federation says the project will disturb primary nursery areas where young fish and crustaceans develop, as well as critical habitat for the federally endangered Atlantic sturgeon, which spawn in the river.

 

(The Coastal Federation is a member-supported nonprofit organization that was formed in 1982 to “protect and restore the North Carolina coast.”)

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission listed additional concerns that the channel deepening project could have on “wildlife resources in the project area.” 

It noted that “more than 330 bird species rely on this region throughout the year, including bald eagles and brown pelicans.”

Citing the fact that the lower Cape Fear River supports 30% of the state’s coastal shorebird population, the commission suggests the Corps reassess potential impacts to the habitats of nesting waterbirds that might occur with “larger and increased vessel use.”

(The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission is an independent state regulatory agency that was created in 1947 to manage fish and wildlife resources within the state. The agency reports directly to the legislative and executive branches, rather than a cabinet secretary.)

In response to the pause, a Ports Authority spokesperson told Emma Dill (shown below) of the Greater Wilmington Business Journal: “A project of this magnitude deserves close scrutiny. We appreciate the due diligence of both the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.”

  

On top of the estimated outlay of $1.35 billion for construction, the channel would require an annual investment of about $14 million for maintenance.

Ports officials say that “deepening the channel will boost the Port of Wilmington’s competitiveness and allow it to accommodate fully loaded ships.” As it is, ships currently have to be “light-loaded to get in and out of the port.”

The Ports Authority maintains: “Demand for access to the Wilmington harbor is growing as North Carolina strengthens its position as a freight gateway. In order to keep pace with demand and open new opportunities, the Port of Wilmington seeks to enhance its navigational channel to allow deep-draft vessels to efficiently navigate to the port.”

“A more efficient channel would modernize the port, attract more import and export business, help mitigate East Coast congestion and help North Carolina Ports become an even stronger player in this competitive landscape, thereby supporting the economies of Wilmington, New Hanover County, eastern North Carolina and the entire state.”

The goal is to accommodate larger, deep-draft container vessels, including ultra-large container ships.

Natalie English, president of the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce, expressed her organization’s support in a statement:

 

“A modern port is fundamental to future-proofing our economy. Without the deepening project, North Carolina risks losing market share to ports that are already preparing for the next generation of vessels. The global shipping industry continues to trend toward larger, more efficient ships that require deeper channels….Failure to act would shift cargo, investment and job creation to competitor states.”

Several municipalities – including Bald Head Island, Caswell Beach, Kure Beach, Leland, Oak Island, Southport, Sunset Beach and Wilmington – are wary. 

Through formal resolutions, they are imploring the Corps to revisit the harbor deepening project and re-examine various potential impacts, including the loss of fish habitats and harm to certain wetlands.