Coastal defences that currently protect huge swathes of farm land, natural habitat and housing are to be moved inland, allowing the sea to flood into low-lying areas.

In some parts of the country, householders and land owners have been told they face spending millions of pounds of their own money to build and repair flood defences to try to protect their property.

Among the areas affected are Medmerry, a popular tourist destination, near Selsey, West Sussex, where 612 acres are to be surrendered to the encroaching sea, and East Head, another nearby beauty spot where residents have been told their homes will no longer be protected.

Along the Humber estuary, around 800 homes scattered along the shoreline are to be left at the mercy of the sea within the next 20 years. At the end of that period, a further 1,000 properties in the area will be allowed to flood, including parts of the villages of Kilnsea and Sunk Island. In East Sussex, 260 acres of the picturesque valley of Cuckmere Estuary will also be lost over the next 15 years.

The new strategies have been drawn up by the Environment Agency, the government body with national responsibility for flooding, as it cannot afford to maintain all of the country’s 2,500 miles of coastal defences in the face of rising sea levels.

Instead, officials are drawing up detailed plans for the entire coast of England and Wales to decide where protection can be withdrawn.

The controversial move, however, has threatened to leave thousands of houses and acres of farmland vulnerable to flooding or even permanently underwater within the next 20 years without any form of compensation.

In some areas, the Environment Agency has said that it will repair and maintain defences only if landowners and residents cover the costs themselves. Home owners could also build their own defences, provided they meet planning and environmental rules.

John Bunn, managing director of Bunn Leisure, a holiday cottage and caravan park owner in the Medmerry area, said they had been forced to spend £1.5 million on flood defences that were completed this year and are planning another £10 million of work over the next two years.

“Our mile of seafront is as much a part of our infrastructure as the facilities we offer and I’m passionate about preserving both.

“Chronic underinvestment in sea defences for more than a decade has put us in the position of having to take matters on ourselves.

“We cannot leave the country to shrink – if the Dutch had taken the same approach Holland would now be half the size.”

In Kilnsea, residents have already taken matters into their own hands and are maintaining the defences themselves after the Environment Agency refused to defend their village.

They raised £200,000 through Environment Agency grants and charities to build a new embankment to keep the water from the Humber estuary from spilling into their village.

Nearly two thirds of the country’s coastline is currently defended with shingle banks, sea walls and barriers that are maintained by the Environment Agency using taxpayers’ money. Some land, such as that owned by the Crown Estate, has privately-maintained defences.

The risk of flooding is due to increase over the next century as sea levels rise by up to three feet. But the Environment Agency cannot afford to build new defences and increase the height of existing infrastructure in all of the areas it covers.

Ministers have instead decided to allow the agency to pick and chose the areas it will defend, with priority being given to towns and areas with special historical or natural interest.

The National Trust is also to abandon some of the 180 miles of coastline under its control after taking the decision that it could no longer afford to hold back rising seas and prevent erosion.

Visitors to Studland beach, in Dorset, which is among the worst affected areas, last week demanded urgent action to save the nature spot after beach huts have had to be moved back three times in the past 25 years due to erosion.

The Government currently spends around £600 million a year on protecting against flooding and coastal erosion and this will increase to more than £800 million over the next three years.

But Alison Baptise, national coastal policy manager at the Environment Agency, said that despite the funding increase, the Environment Agency still needed to prioritise where it spent the money by taking a strategic look at the nation’s coastline as a whole.

“There are clearly some areas that are more difficult than others,” she said. “As the coast is dynamic – it has been changing for years and continues to change – we can’t do the same thing at the same place all the time. We need to adapt how we manage it.

“In some areas there are defences built there that we could keep building up but it is not sustainable economically or good for the environment. These are long term changes and are not going to happen suddenly.”

The policy of abandoning defences and not raising defences in other areas has enraged campaigners, who claim house prices in effected areas have plummeted as residents struggle to sell their properties.

Malcolm Kerby, from campaign group National Voice of Coastal Communities, said: “People buy houses behind flood defences in good faith and then the Environment Agency can choose to move or abandon those defences at no cost to themselves.

“People living in areas that are being abandoned are seeing the value of their homes plummeting and they can’t sell them. Why would anyone want to buy a house in an area that will be regularly flooded in 20 years?”

Story by Richard Gray, Science Correspondent in the Telegraph

CAMPAIGNERS say they will fight on following the decision by the Environment Agency to allow Cuckmere Haven to revert to a tidal floodplain.

Wednesday’s announcement that it will be withdrawing flood protection for the river banks has sparked angry calls for a public inquiry.

The iconic landscape of the meanders will be lost to future generations but the agency says the decision will allow the estuary to adapt to the impacts of climate change and will bring major benefits to visitors and wildlife.

The Envjronment Agency spends £50,000 a year to remove shingle from the mouth of the river and says climate change, the rise in sea levels and human intervention have put the estuary under increasing pressure.

Existing flood defences are not high enough to cope with sea level rises.

But the move has been slammed by MPs Norman Baker and Nigel Waterson.

Mr Waterson said: ‘Unfortunately the Environment Agency seem determined to abandon this very special area to the sea. They have not provided the detailed results of the consultation and I demand that they are published; but we do know that this unique natural feature is hugely popular with local people and visitors alike.

‘They claim that nothing will happen immediately. But in the same breath they say they will not repair damage caused by severe storms.

One such storm could weaken the existing defences to such an extent that the sea could pour in. And there is a real risk of the A259 being cut by flooding.’

Mr Waterson said he was writing to government ministers demanding an public inquiry.

Slamming the decision as ‘hugely controversial and undemocratic’, Mr Baker said: ‘The Environment Agency is an unelected body and therefore has no popular mandate for the controversial course of action it wishes to pursue. They may well feel they have a good case, but then experts on the other side of the argument feel likewise.

‘That is why I have long argued that the proposal to allow the estuary to flood must be subject to some sort of external validation by an independent element, perhaps through a public inquiry. It is highly regrettable that the Agency has not accepted the need to do this.’

Responding to the news, the Cuckmere Estuary Partnership said local councils, heritage and conservation agencies had joined forces to protect the Cuckmere Estuary, and would be seeking the views of residents and local businesses about its long-term future.

The partnership want to see a more managed approach to ensure people can continue to enjoy access and recreation in the Cuckmere Haven while allowing the gradual return to a naturally functioning estuary system.

Spokeswoman Kate Cole said: ‘We can’t ignore this problem. The current defences are reaching the end of their natural life, and water levels already reach the top of the banks at high tide.

‘We don’t want to rule out any options, and we are actively encouraging everyone who cares about the Estuary to share their views. Our current thinking is that a managed realignment process would be best for wildlife, residents and visitors, and the local economy.’

Story in the Mid Sussex Times

Current flood defences are not high enough to cope with sea level rises at the Cuckmere Estuary in East Sussex and each year the agency spends tens of thousands of pounds removing shingle from the mouth of the river.

Now it has decided to allow the sea to reclaim the popular landmark in a move that will see the valley return to the tidal floodplain it was back in the 1840s.

Campaigners said they are pressing for a more managed approach and that allowing the area to flood would harm wildlife, footpaths and parts of the local beach.

But the Environment Agency said that climate change, sea level rises and past interference by man have put the Cuckmere Estuary under increasing pressure.

Read the full story on the Telegraph website

A MP has renewed his call for a public inquiry into plans to turn Cuckmere Valley into a tidal floodplain.

The Environment Agency announced on Wednesday that it would allow the East Sussex valley to flood, turning it into a salt marsh nature reserve.

It said climate change meant its flood risk management had to change.

Eastbourne MP Nigel Waterson said he was writing to the government to demand a “proper public inquiry” and he wanted the consultation details published.

Read the full story on the BBC News website

The Cuckmere Valley in East Sussex is to be turned into a tidal floodplain, the Environment Agency has decided.

Residents had fought the plans to flood the valley, created by the Victorians in 1846, and turn it into a salt marsh nature reserve.

The Environment Agency’s Andrew Pearce said it knew there would be concern but flood risk management had to change.

He said the valley was under pressure from climate change, rising sea levels, and past interference by man.

Residents who opposed the plan had called for more sea defences to keep the valley in its current state, and had said the plan would destroy wildlife, footpaths and parts of the local beach.

They also expressed concerns about the impact of the floodplain plan on nearby homes and businesses.

Read the full story on the BBC website

Watch a video clip on the BBC iPlayer

The prospect of invasion has occupied the minds of those living on the southern fringes of England for centuries, although the threat from Napoleon has long since receded and a scattering of pillboxes on the hillside is the only hint of the cross-Channel menace once posed by Hitler.

The prospect of invasion has occupied the minds of those living on the southern fringes of England for centuries, although the threat from Napoleon has long since receded and a scattering of pillboxes on the hillside is the only hint of the cross-Channel menace once posed by Hitler.

But in the beautiful Cuckmere valley, Sussex, they are preparing to take on their most implacable foe. The scene is set for the biggest challenge: The People versus The Sea.

Full story by Paul Peachy in the Independent

Also, articles in this edition on Happisburgh, and learning lessons from Dunwich