Two people responsible for a company are suspected of dumping construction and bulky waste near Dragišići. Police also mention asbestos sheets. Their statement does not provide evidence of measured pollutant spread, the quantity of waste or a remediation plan.
The specific allegation
Šibenik-Knin police reported on 7 October that they were investigating two company representatives from Šibenik, aged 43 and 42. They are suspected of having excavated soil and deposited construction and bulky waste near Dragišići over an extended period up to July 2026. The statement mentions asbestos sheets and plastic containers among the materials.
The suspects were handed over to the officer responsible for police custody, and a criminal complaint was submitted to the competent state attorney's office in Šibenik. This is a police report of suspected offences, not a conviction or a judicial detention order independently confirmed by us.
Large dimensions are not yet a quantity of waste
Police describe the affected area as measuring 82 by 25 by 10 metres. We do not treat that figure as a measured volume of waste. Multiplying the dimensions would produce a seemingly exact number of cubic metres without establishing the fill depth, shape or actual proportion of waste.
According to the statement, the owner of the land had not yet been identified either. We therefore do not name a presumed landowner or further participants based merely on local knowledge or speculation.
The environmental question requires separate findings
A list of deposited materials does not yet answer whether pollutants spread or where they went. The police statement publishes neither measurements of any spread nor a quantified amount of waste, remediation costs or a completed clearance plan.
The next important editorial questions therefore concern environmental testing and removal: who will examine the site, which results will be published, and who will arrange secure disposal? Until such evidence exists, a claimed all-clear would be as premature as an invented assertion of widespread contamination.
One case, not a blanket statement about the coast
Dragišići is one specific investigation site. This case proves neither contamination at particular beaches nor a general conclusion about every company in the region. Precise spatial and factual limits are part of the story, especially in environmental reporting.
Anyone who discovers suspicious dumping should not enter it, open it or move material to obtain a better photograph. A report stating the location and observation is more useful than an improvised investigation. Acute hazards belong with the responsible emergency services; rumours do not replace sampling.
Evidence
Sources & date
Sources support the facts. Planning notes and recommendations are Golden Beach editorial assessments.
Time-sensitive information may change. Please check the linked primary source before travelling.
