A COMMITMENT has been made to raise the £21million needed to protect Lyme’s eastern side from coastal erosion.

Phase 4 of West Dorset District Council’s coastal protection works in the town will protect roads, public utilities, businesses and homes from the more serious effects of erosion and associated ground movement.

If the work were not carried out 144 properties would be destroyed within 50 years and a further 342 properties would lose their access.

Around 900 metres of Charmouth Road and Church Street the main road into the town, and its facilities would also be lost.

District councillors last week approved proposed funding arrangements to raise the £21,348,000 needed to pay for the design and construction.

The report that went before the district council’s full council meeting last Thursday recommended applying for Government approval and Defra funding.

It also recommended completing discussions with Dorset County Council about its contribution, and asked the district council to set aside £600,000 towards the work, as the scheme would also protect council assets such as the car park and road.

The district council will seek to re-coup the cost by securing section 106 contributions – funding for public open spaces and amenities, or benefits in kind – from developers in Lyme Regis.

But the council has also accepted that the work may impact on council tax levels, either if actual costs exceed the grant contributions, or if section 106 contributions are lower than expected.

Planning permission for the work was secured in April and work could begin in spring 2012, with completion expected in two years.

Engineers are recommending building 390 metres of new seawall, designed to have minimum impact on the foreshore geology, together with piling, drainage and other work to strengthen the coastal slopes.

West Dorset District Council leader Robert Gould said: “We are committed to providing long-term security for Lyme Regis and the people who live and work there.”

Story by Adrianne Maslen in the Lyme Regis News

Coastal residents have called for more help in tackling erosion before they back a new shoreline management strategy.

A straw poll among 100 people who attended a meeting at Happisburgh voted to reject the latest SMP between Kelling and Lowestoft, because revisions did not go far enough to compensate the communities affected by cutting back on sea defences.

The key aim of the meeting held on Friday was to see what people felt about the newly revised draft SMP for the section of coast between Lowestoft and Kelling, drawn up in consultation by North Norfolk District Council, Great Yarmouth Borough Council, Waveney District Council and the Environment Agency.

The SMP which dates back to 2004, provides a large-scale assessment of coastal evolution and presents a policy framework which determines how the shoreline will be managed, for instance which sections of the coast are to be protected.

The revised draft includes three conditions, the first being that a proper technical analysis of the coastline should be carried out looking at what the consequences are of defending one place but not another.

The second condition is for an economic analysis looking at what will be lost and the final condition, that if an area is not to be defended then the social justice and compensation issue be addressed.

Malcolm Kerby from the Coastal Concern Action Group, who organised the meeting, acknowledged the work the councillors had done with the revised plan, but said the feeling was that it did not go far enough.

He said: “We had more than 100 people at the meeting and with a straw poll I took everyone wanted to reject the revised SMP, unless there is a social justice element not just as a condition, but actually built into or made to run concurrent with it.”

District councillor Clive Stockton, portfolio holder for planning policy, coastal strategy and economic development, said however that he believed both the council and the villagers were “singing from the same hymn sheet” with the revised plan.

He also pointed to the pathfinder programme whereby the council has been given £3m as part of the government’s national programme designed to find new ways to help communities adapt to a changing coastline, as starting to go some way to addressing the social justice issue.

The revised SMP plan is due to come back before members of North Norfolk District Council later in the year for acceptance now it has been altered.

Story by Tracey Gray in the Eastern Daily Press

Thousands of holidaymakers heading to British beaches this summer will be cheered by a major government report into the state of the UK’s seas. Coastal waters are getting cleaner, fish stocks are improving and species diversity in estuaries is increasing, according to the most authoritative examination ever carried out of UK seas.

But while the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs study boasts of “significant improvements” since the last such report in 2005, it also paints a picture of an environment being rapidly affected by a warming world. Seas around the British Isles are higher, warmer and more acid, it says, and coastal litter levels are at a record high.

The sea surface temperature of UK waters has risen on average by between 0.5 and 1C since the 1870s, which could affect the fish that appear on our plates in future. Of the 330 species found around the UK, cold-water species such as cod are in retreat, while warm-water fish including red-mullet, seabass and John Dory are spreading rapidly.

Fish stocks are improving overall, partly due to fishing reductions brought about by European Union quotas, despite criticism from marine conservation groups that the quotas are set too high to maintain fish stocks. The proportion of fin-fish stocks in UK waters being harvested sustainably has risen from 10% in the early 1990s to 25% in 2007.

However, the report notes that a large majority of stocks are still being fished at unsustainable levels. Fish are simultaneously being hit by warming waters, which are causing the cold and warm water zooplankton that fish feed on to move north. The warm water zooplankton tend to be smaller and less nutritious, affecting fish larvae and stocks.

Climate change is also causing sea levels to rise, with the mean sea level rising by 1.4mm per year in the 20th century. While slower than global growth of 1.7mm per year in the same period, the rise has not always been steady – in the 1990s, it was going up by 3-4mm each year. More coastal erosion and more flooding are likely to occur as a result, says the report, with the Humber estuary and Norfolk coast particularly at risk.

UK waters are also not exempt from the global trend of ocean acidifiation due to higher levels of dissolved CO2. This leads to harmful effects for marine life that rely on calcification, such as crustacea and molluscs. But the authors of the report admit the lack of a baseline for pH levels makes it hard to measure the rate of our acidifying seas.

Levels of pollution continue to drop since Defra’s research in 2005, including heavy metals such as lead and mercury. However, there are still some localised problems such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) which, while stabilising nationally, are still found in places at levels that affect wildlife, including harbour porpoises. Litter levels doubled, though, between 1994 and 2007, with 2,000 items per kilometre of coastline. Litter was even found at a depth of 1,000 metres.

The picture for waterbirds and seabirds is mixed. Waterbird numbers are largely healthy, with the 2006/2007 population numbers 85% above levels in the 1970s. But seabirds have seen a 9% decrease in numbers since 2005, with herring gull numbers down over 50% since 1969. Seabirds are suffering particularly badly in north and north-west Scotland, due to the arrival of invasive species such as rat and mink, which affect nesting sites.

The evidence in the report was gathered from peer-reviewed science provided by universities, government agencies, NGOs and industry.

Marine environment minister Richard Benyon said: “The report’s findings show that we are moving in the right direction, but there is more work that needs to be done, especially to protect the UK’s seabirds. I am committed to improving our marine environment by delivering the conservation measures in the Marine and Coastal Access Act and hope to see further improvements in the next report as we gain the benefits from Marine Conservation Zones.” In January, Lundy Island off the north Devon coast became England’s first Marine Conservation Zone.

Story by Adam Vaughan in the Guardian

Visit the Charting Progress 2 website

Running along the southern edge of the Isle of Wight’s downs, Military Road overlooks the stunning emerald sweep of Brighstone Bay.

Thousands of visitors each year glimpse the breathtaking view of the white chalk cliffs, towering out of the sea along the coast to Freshwater.

But the elements are now taking their toll as coastal erosion threatens long stretches of the road.

Campaigners now want the picturesque route saved.

Rapid erosion

While coastal erosion has been affecting Military Road for the last three decades, the process has speeded up considerably in the last few years, including this past winter.

Fresh water coming off the downs has eaten away at the cliffs, creating new chines (valleys) and bringing the cliff edge perilously close to the road.

A tarmac car park has huge ‘bites’ out of it with a jagged line where the land has just fallen away down to the beach below – barriers have gone up to stop cars going over the edge.

The edge of the road itself is so close to the coast now that on one stretch it has been reduced to to one lane.

Not only is Military Road the main route along the south west coast of the island, it is also a major draw for tourists.

Four thousand people are supporting a campaign to lobby the council to stop the road from falling into the sea.

Potential solutions

The Isle of Wight Council has said a permanent solution could cost up to £10m which, in the current times of tight finances, the council insists it cannot afford.

Bypassing the worst spot would cost £500,000 but would only buy a short amount of time as the erosion continues to gnaw into the coastline.

The likely solution is that the middle section will be closed, creating two cul-de-sacs and sending traffic inland through nearby villages like Brook.

These tiny villages could face a fivefold increase in traffic, as traffic from the island’s main south coast road is diverted through the narrow village streets, many of which do not have footpaths.

Brighstone parish councillor David Tolfree said: “It’s totally unsuited to the volume and nature of the traffic – coaches and heavy vehicles. This increase in traffic will basically destroy the village.”

Mr Tolfree insisted the parish council had been “lobbying for years” about the erosion issue and something should have been done before the road reached critical stage.

He said: “This isn’t something new – this has been predicted and it seems there hasn’t been any contingency for this occurrence.”

Council finances

With council finances tight, and no funding from central government, the island’s road authorities say they cannot afford the £10m estimated to keep Military Road open.

Edward Giles, Isle of Wight Council cabinet member for environment and transport, explained gaining planning permission would be a long and costly process, given the land needed for a diversion is owned by the National Trust.

He said: “There are a great deal of difficulties in diverting the road because of the various conservation designations which affect the land.”

Campaigners point to the council recently agreeing a £300 million Private Finance Initiative scheme initiative for the island’s highways. But Mr Giles insisted the scheme is solely for road maintenance and “not available” for diverting roads suffering from erosion.

A public consultation will offer local people the chance to air their opinions before the council’s cabinet decide the fate of Military Road, probably in September.

Mr Giles said: “If we have a dialogue, it would better inform everyone as to what the problems really are.”

Story by Dominic Blake on the BBC website

Work on a £20m project to safeguard about 140 properties in a Dorset town from falling into the sea is scheduled to start in spring 2012.

The Lyme Regis coastal erosion scheme aims to stop roads, public utilities, firms and homes in the east of the town from being destroyed in 50 years’ time.

West Dorset District Council said part of the A3052, the main road into the town, is also at risk.

It said engineers have recommended building a 390m seawall.

A council spokesman said: “[The wall would be] designed to have minimum impact on the foreshore geology, together with piling, drainage and other work to strengthen the coastal slopes.”

‘Worst landslip’

The scheme includes “extensive landscaping to restore the natural habitat and reinstate the private gardens affected by the work”.

Planning permission for the work was secured in April and councillors recently approved proposed funding arrangements to raise the £21,000,000 needed to pay for the design and construction.

A report put before a full council meeting recommended applying for government approval and Defra funding.

The study also said discussions with Dorset County Council about its contribution needed to be completed.

The district council is expected to set aside £600,000 towards the work.

West Dorset council leader Robert Gould said: “We are committed to providing long-term security for Lyme Regis and the people who live and work there.”

In May 2008, about 400m (1,312ft) of cliff slipped between Lyme Regis and Charmouth, exposing an old landfill site.

Described as the “worst landslip for 100 years” in Dorset, it closed a beach.

The earth movement, the length of four football pitches, affected part of the 95-mile (153-km) Dorset and east Devon Jurassic Coast.

Story on the BBC website

SEASIDE communities dotted along the borough’s coast need to stand together to have any chance of getting government to pay for sea defences or compensation for those who lose their homes if they don’t.

The call came from Malcolm Kerby of Happisburgh who is fighting for social justice on a national stage, on Thursday in Ormesby St Margaret.

The campaigner, widely regarded as the most knowledgeable person outside Government on coastal erosion, was in the village urging people to sensibly object to the emerging second draft of the Shoreline Management Plan.

Widely criticised, the document sets out the Government’s policy on coastal erosion which campaigners say takes no account of the human and social costs, and – since those living near rivers get a better deal – discriminates against people who live by the sea.

Around 70 people who packed the village centre were told that accepting the SMP would mean tumbling property values for those on the front line – and for others up to two miles inland – affecting everyone with the NR29 postcode.

But they were told to be reasonable in their total opposition and to foster “togetherness” rather than lobbing grenades at each other and taking up positions.

Chris Hogg, chairman of Scratby Coastal Erosion Group (SCEG) said the SMP was a flawed document that was technical and nothing to do with management. He said the shift in policy from hold the line to no active intervention at Scratby would scupper the rock berm project, spelling disaster for tourism, the dunes and amenities.

He said: “They say they did listen and there were certain changes made. However I have read it three or four times and there are statements there that are meant to make us feel better. But they are littered with ‘ifs’, ‘buts’ and ‘maybes’. It is aspirational rather than definitive.”

Mr Kerby, chairman of the National Voice of Coastal Communities, said: “There is no going alone. We have to stand together. I do not believe there is any way our elected representatives can accept this on our behalf. But it’s not a question of having a blazing row and pointing the finger – just make it very clear that not in my name will you accept the Shoreline Management Plan. There is a huge cost to doing nothing and we need to encourage them along that route.”

Also present was Peter Boggis from Eastern Bavents near Southwold in Suffolk who has had an ongoing battle with the authorities to be allowed to protect his own section of coastline at his own expense.

A show of hands were unanimous in requesting SCEG to write to the relevant authorities urging them not to accept the Shoreline Management Plan without provision for social justice and a change from ‘no active intervention’ to ‘hold the line’.

The group has received 20 comment forms protesting about the SMP which will be forwarded to Coastal Management in North Norfolk. No representatives from Great Yarmouth Borough Council were present although a message of support was received from councillor Charles Reynolds. Lewis Roberts, case worker for MP Brandon Lewis was present as was Tony Wright who pledged his continuing support. The document will be re-presented to Great Yarmouth Borough Council in October.

Story in the Great Yarmouth Mercury

A £1.5million project to help protect the Suffolk coast against the threat of erosion was last night branded a “talking shop” that will not provide the immediate action desperately needed.

The Suffolk Coastal Change Pathfinder Project has been set up with government funding to help villagers in Corton, near Lowestoft, and Easton Bavents, near Southwold, look at ways to adapt to the changing shoreline.

But last night campaigners said it did not go far enough to provide the practical solutions that were needed.

However, those behind the initiative launched a vigorous defence saying they could only come up with appropriate solutions following consultation with local communities.

Over the next 10 months, people living and working in the two villages will have the chance to take part in workshops and events aimed at creating ideas and planning for the future.

It will try to establish what options there are for managing the effects of coastal erosion and its impacts on community life and businesses.

Their suggestions – which could include relocation and re-use of land – will then be handed to the Department for food, environment and rural affairs (Defra) in April next year for consideration in the future development of coastal change policy.

But Graham Henderson, chairman of Suffolk Coast Against Retreat (SCAR), said: “It is not offering any actual solutions.

“The people of Easton Bavents thought they were going to get some practical help, but all they are getting is an opportunity for consultation.

“That will take up money that would be better used for practical applications such as relocating properties that are close to the cliff edge.

“The knowledge of what needs to be done is already in the hands of local organisations.

“There are three properties at Easton Bavents close to the edge at the moment and they will probably go into the sea before this project is concluded.”

Retired engineer Peter Boggis has spent years creating his own costal defences from some 250,000 tonnes of compacted clay soils near his home in Easton Bavents.

Last night he said: “It is a great shame. This is purely a talking shop. It does not provide any physical help. I believe its purely a holding operation to placate the general public.”

The Pathfinder Project was launched in Lowestoft on Tuesday and is being led by Waveney District Council along with Suffolk County Council and Suffolk Coastal Futures.

It is one of 15 Pathfinder projects across the country which was set up with money from Defra last year.

Last night Waveney District Council’s David McGinnis, project officer for the initiative, said it was a great opportunity for communities to have their say on what should be done.

“We need to find sustainable and practical solutions,” he said. “The whole idea is that we want to listen to local opinion and engage with the community to enable us to identify what they consider to be issues and concerns and work with them to form solutions.

“We need to listen to what people have to say and understand the pressures and concerns to see where we can help in the short and long term.

“For the most favourable options to be identified, it is essential that they are worked through in consultation. It is vital that the local communities have a say in their future.”

For more details about the Pathfinder project, visit www.waveney-pathfinder.com.

Story by Craig Robinson in the East Anglian Daily Times

A £1.5m project to help two threatened communities find ways to adapt to coastal erosion was officially launched this week.

The Suffolk Coastal Change Pathfinder Project has been set up with government funding to help villagers in Corton, near Lowestoft, and Easton Bavents, near Southwold, look at possible ways that they can change their lifestyles, homes and businesses to adapt to the changing coastline.

With about 95 homes in Corton at risk within the next 100 years and tourism businesses relying on the local beaches, it is hoped that Pathfinder will help people come up with constructive ways to limit the effects and costs of erosion.

The project was officially launched in Lowestoft on Tuesday and over the next 10 months, people living and working in the two villages will have the chance to take part in workshops and events aimed at creating ideas and planning for the future.

The scheme, which is being led by Waveney District Council with Suffolk County council and Suffolk Coastal Futures, is one of 15 Pathfinder projects across the country which was set up with money from the department for food, environment and rural affairs last year.

Ken Sale, Waveney council’s portfolio holder for the greenest county, said: “The issue of coastal erosion is pressing and emotive. The government is committed to effective management of our coastline and will defend against erosion where it is sustainable and affordable.

“However there will be some locations where it is not sustainable to build new defence structures, or to maintain existing ones. Where this is the case, communities will need to start preparing for, and managing, change.

“In this current climate of tight budgets and spending cuts it is reassuring to be granted this fund, which will be used to support community engagement and planning.”

A new Pathfinder website, which features information about erosion, details of the Pathfinder events and an interactive forum so that local people can put forward their ideas, has also been launched at www.waveney-pathfinder.com.

Story by Haley Mace in the Advertiser

ANOTHER coastal community is rallying people to loudly oppose a high-level policy which they say threatens seaside homes and businesses.

Campaigners in Scratby this week joined those in Hopton in saying they had no intention of facing the future without a battle and have organised a public meeting in a bid to get more people voicing their concerns over the Shoreline Management Plan which is emerging from its final review.

According to some predictions more than 150 homes and businesses could be lost to erosion in the popular holiday village over the next 100 years, although a crucial funding decision on a £5m rock berm is in Government hands and officials -having spent around £200,000 working up the scheme – are hoping for a positive response.

Hopton was due to debate the issue last night after hundreds of homes were leafleted.

Chris Hogg, chairman of Scratby Coastal Erosion group, said consultation on the 2008 revision of the SMP was drawing to a close and without action could be accepted by the borough council by the end of the year.

“The meeting is very important. It is our last chance. Basically the SMP has come back and it’s virtually unchanged since the previous one. Where do you stop? Could we end up losing Ormesby?” He is also concerned about compensation.

Borough council regeneration officer Tim Howard, said: “The Shoreline Management Plan is the culmination of several years determining the best way to deal with coastal change.

“The plan provides for a series of actions ranging from full defence to no active intervention. For some parts of the coast a policy of managed retreat has been adopted. This will keep existing defences maintained for a designated period in order to allow for communities to adjust to the realignment of the coastline.

“The SMP is a draft document and comments are welcome from members of the public via the North Norfolk District Council website and any other mediums. Following this process the SMP for this region will be considered as part of a national coastal management strategy.”

Recent consultation has mostly focussed on the Strategic Environmental Assessment – a document within the SMP. Mr Howard said the SMP drew on scientific analysis and financial reality. The partnership group lead by North Norfolk District Council aimed to adopt the policy by October.

Mr Howard said the council did not have anything like enough resources to deal with erosion but that it was committed to the rock berm as part of the intention to manage the retreat, although it would not last forever.

The meeting is on Thursday June 24 at 7.30pm at the Village Centre, Station Road, Ormesby St Margaret.

The main speaker will be Malcolm Kerby, Chairman of the National Voice of Coastal Communities and the Coastal Concern Action Group.

Story on the Advertiser 24 website

The challenges of defending the Norfolk and Suffolk coast from the North Sea look set for another good airing in the coming months. ED FOSS examines the state of play of two key projects – the shoreline management plan for Kelling to Lowestoft and the Pathfinder schemes, which attracted millions of pounds of funding into East Anglia last winter.

Back in 2004, all hell was let loose when the Kelling to Lowestoft Ness shoreline management plan (SMP) was published in its first public draft form, suggesting some dramatic losses of land and homes along the coastline across the next century.

Following its traumatic arrival into the world, thousands of hours of work have been put into consultations, reports and meetings to try to bring the SMP to a standard acceptable to the mainly rural coastal communities which, at the time, justifiably feared they were about to be swept aside both literally by a pounding North Sea and metaphorically by a central government with a perceived urban focus.

The demand has, famously, been for communities facing losing homes and businesses to be guaranteed “social justice”, which in most cases constitutes financial compensation in all but name.

As another set of meetings looms to see if the tinkered SMP can finally get the nod from the relevant maritime local authorities so it can become a ‘set in stone’ document nearly six years on, views about whether enough has been done have begun to emerge. And there are clearly differences of opinion.

In parallel to this debate is the progress of the Pathfinder project, which in December saw three local authorities – North Norfolk (£3m), Waveney (£1.5m) and Great Yarmouth (£296,500) – win bids totalling nearly £5m out of a national pot of £11m to address coastal challenges.

The headline part of Pathfinder was the prospect of buying and demolishing some of the most at-risk homes on Beach Road in Happisburgh, allowing homeowners to escape with more than nothing following the slow but certain loss of what for many is the main lifetime purchase.

There are emerging differences of opinion about how successful the Pathfinder will end up being, but they do not seem as potentially divisive as those over the SMP.

The main point at this stage is to redraw the battle lines over the SMP and gear up for a further fight,according to Malcolm Kerby, the Happisburgh-based co-ordinator of the Coastal Concern Action Group (CCAG) and chairman of the National Voice of Coastal Communities (NVCC).

Along the frontage involved – from north Suffolk to somewhere near the middle of the north Norfolk coast – people have been beginning to rebuild their opposition to the plan, and need to carry on doing so, according to Mr Kerby.

A consultation into one aspect of the SMP, the strategic environmental assessment, will finish on July 2. Although it is technically only about that aspect, it has been taken to be a chance to ask about and ponder the wider plan ahead of local authorities being asked to vote on it.

“When the SMP comes up for acceptance again in this area, if there is still no social justice built into it, which at the moment I believe there is not, I shall do all I can to fight to stop it being accepted, and I would encourage others to do so,” said Mr Kerby.

“More than five years ago we went through massive pain and turmoil here over the SMP and we have to give huge credit to the elected members at North Norfolk District Council for standing their ground and refusing to accept it.

“The stand we took all those years ago has moved the whole situation on by a significant amount, but in some ways we are just back to square one.

“Social justice is at least actively under consideration by the authorities and there is recognition that something will have to be done to address the consequences of the SMPs on coastal communities, but there is nothing yet locked in place within the SMP itself.”

To accept the SMP under those circumstances would be a “giant leap of faith in the dark,” said Mr Kerby, as he encouraged district councillors to take another stand and for people to lobby their councillors with the same intention.

For Peter Frew, head of coastal strategy at North Norfolk District Council, the response from around 100 people at a recent set of SMP consultation meetings in Sea Palling, Great Yarmouth, Corton and Mundesley was of a different nature to Mr Kerby’s stance.

“The people who came to see me wanted to know if their concerns about changing policies had been put into the SMP and they went away satisfied.

“By and large we have been able to allay people’s fears.”

It was the subsequent and separate work, such as Pathfinder, which would address the issues around social justice, said Mr Frew. The SMP would potentially come before the district council’s cabinet in November, added Mr Frew.

Pathfinder project

Although widely accepted as being born out of the original SMP crisis, the Pathfinder project is a separate strand of activity, a short-term attempt to solve some localised problems while, arguably more importantly, trying to identify longerterm solutions to generic problems.

Pathfinder has a wide mandate, including working out how to help businesses relocate in the face of erosion, assessing the viability of buying and demolishing privatelyowned property and trying to formulate policy for moving community buildings so they survive for longer.

Concerns have been raised that the project (it’s not a pilot, apparently – Defra doesn’t like it being called that) has not moved forward quickly enough since the cash handouts were confirmed in December, with people living in the relevant Happisburgh houses only receiving small levels of contact to date ahead of a technical deadline of the end of this current financial year – next April.

But others feel it is progressing as quickly as it can, considering it involves a new approach to a longrunning set of challenges, and argue that the real deadline is not the end of the financial year.

A company called Bruton Knowles has been appointed as an independent property adviser to hold meetings with residents, assess values and work out suitable financial offers.

What is almost certain is that there is not enough money in the pot – the property acquisition for demolition project has been allocated £550,000 – to do what most people wanted and buy a small number of homes for somewhere near standard market value if they were in a no-risk location.

On the other hand, others suggest that some money is better than nothing, which looked likely not so many months ago.

Story by Ed Foss in the Eastern Daily Press