Owners of a north Norfolk holiday park perched above the sea have spent £190,000 of their own money shoring up the crumbling cliff to save their business.

Richard and Anna Hollis have bought 1,750 tonnes of armoured rock, which has been heaped around steel sheet pilings at the base of the eroding cliff that supports their Castaways Holiday Park in Bacton.

Experts had told the couple they would lose their cliff-edge caravans this year and, when their attempts to get help with funding failed, Mr and Mrs Hollis decided to go it alone.

The couple now join two other ‘King Canute’ East Anglians who have taken a DIY approach to tackling North Sea coastal erosion.

Since 2002, retired engineer Peter Boggis has kept the waves at bay from his Easton Bavents home, near Southwold, with the help of 250,000 tonnes of clay, which he has paid to have piled in front of eroding cliffs.

And last month brought news of pensioner Michael Kennedy, who has been throwing stones and boulders against Hunstanton cliff for two hours each day, six days a week, for the past 14 years, in a one-man bid to create a tidal barrier and protect it from erosion.

Mrs Hollis, 36, said: “We didn’t have a choice. It was do or die for our holiday park.” The couple, who have a daughter Katie, five, and son Thomas, two, hope their action has stalled their erosion nightmare for another 15-25 years.

“It’s been giving us a lot of sleepless nights,” said Mr Hollis, 39. “I was hoping to leave something to my children if they want to follow in the same path. We have invested a lot of money in this place.”

Half the cost of the defence work came from the couple’s savings. Mr Hollis said they had not been able to find anyone prepared to put a value on Castaways before the work was done, because of the erosion threat, and his bank had, therefore, refused to give them a loan for the balance. In the end, they had secured one with another high street lender under the government’s loan guarantee scheme, which allows small businesses to borrow without assets as security.

The Midlands couple moved from their native Tamworth seven years ago to live Mr Hollis’ boyhood dream of owning a holiday park and bought Castaways, which includes a clubhouse, seven apartments, 35 caravans and three pine lodges.

They say steel sheet pilings were in good condition at the foot of the cliff and a desktop survey conducted before their purchase did not mention coastal erosion. The couple claim that there were no problems until 2006-2007 when work began on a new under-sea pipeline at the neighbouring Bacton Gas site.

Mr and Mrs Hollis say the beach level then began to drop and the steel pilings collapsed, undermining the cliff. They estimate that about four metres of clifftop has also since disappeared.

The couple have been involved in a long correspondence, and held many meetings, with representatives from several companies based at the site, and with North Norfolk District Council (NNDC) officials, but say their grievances have not yet been resolved.

Mr Hollis added: “These are hard times and we’ve now got a loan which we will have to pay off. I want to make sure that people realise we have paid for these sea defences ourselves. We have had to – to protect and keep our site.”

No one from North Norfolk District Council was available to comment last night.

Story by Alex Hurrell in the Eastern Daily Press

People living in a coastal village are “desperate” for help before their homes crumble into the sea and they lose any legal right to relocation.

Two homes in Easton Bavents, north of Southwold, are just 6m from the cliff edge and the owners fear they are in likely danger of succumbing to the sea.

Last year, £1.5m of state funding was allocated to Waveney District Council to explore the options available to communities at risk from erosion and potentially relocate them, as part of the Pathfinder scheme.

But a decision could be too late for the homes closest to the edge and those living in them want Waveney to support their quest to relocate now.

Paul England, whose son owns one of the homes on the edge of the cliff, said that if the properties were lost to the sea before a decision was made, the owners would lose their residential land use rights and no longer be eligible for relocation.

“There is no ‘risk’ to erosion here, it is a certainty,” said Mr England, from Southwold.

“We want to either have them [Waveney] agree that our land use is retained if the properties are eroded, or, if that isn’t possible, then we want their assistance in making immediate planning applications to relocate.

“We really are desperate for a quick response from Waveney on this issue.”

The two properties that are currently a few paces from the cliff edge are The Retreat, owned by Charlie and Beth England, and Thursley, owned by Sally Mitchell and her brother Andrew Thrale.

Speaking on behalf of these two homes, Mr England said they wanted Waveney to put the put the land use rights in some form of escrow.

Mr England said that Local Development Framework (LDF) policies also allowed for the “at risk” Easton Bavents homes to be relocated, but this would not be finalised until early 2011.

He said that, in any case, this required the whole community to be involved in the relocation, but some houses were still up to 20 years away from needing to move.

“We want to adapt and go somewhere else, but we can’t because the bureaucracy is slowing us up,” added Mr England.

A written response to councillors from Ken Sale, portfolio holder for the greenest county, said that the council was seeking legal advice over creating an escrow and the issue should be taken forward via the Pathfinder scheme.

A council spokesman said: “We are listening to a range of questions from affected communities and, understandably, the answers provided to them need to be detailed and comprehensive.

“We are seeking the advice of a barrister with considerable experience in this field to ensure that those concerned get the right advice as quickly as possible and we will continue to assist them in whichever way we can.”

In recent years, soft sea defences created by Peter Boggis, who also lives at Easton Bavents, halted the erosion of the cliffs.

But judges ruled that the site should erode naturally and the defences have now washed away. Since 1936, about a mile of land has been lost in front of the village.

The Pathfinder scheme was announced in December last year and 15 grants were given out nationally, with £3m going to North Norfolk Council.

The money allocated to Waveney was to be used working with people in Easton Bavents and Corton, to explore and deliver practical solutions to the impacts of Suffolk’s coastline.

Grants have to be used or allocated by March next year.

A statement from Suffolk Coast Against Retreat (SCAR), a group set up to preserve and protect the coastline, said: “While we are pleased to hear that Waveney is taking barrister’s advice concerning the ‘escrow’ possibility on the properties nearly in the sea at Easton Bavents, we cannot enforce the pontificating of the council when they have it in their own hands to make a decision now.”

Story by Amy Gray in the Advertiser 24

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 retired engineer has been dealt a blow in his battle to prevent his home from falling into the North Sea after an appeal was upheld.

Conservation watchdog Natural England has today won an appeal against a court judgment to allow the cliffs below Peter Boggis’ home at Easton Bavents, near Southwold, to erode naturally.

Since 2002, the 78-year-old has spent tens of thousands of pounds installing his own “soft” sea defences built of 250,000 tonnes of compacted clay soil in front of the cliffs near his home.

The work was carried out without planning permission and the Court of Appeal said today that the only lawful course open to Mr Boggis and other members of Easton Bavents Conservation was to apply for permission and go through the correct planning process.

Mr Boggis, whose house, The Warren, is 302ft from the cliff edge, says his sea defences have so far saved more than eight acres of land and four properties “at no cost to the nation”.

He wants to be allowed to maintain his defences to prevent further erosion of the cliffs.

In 2006, Natural England notified a coastal Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) between Southwold in the south and Kessingland in the north.

In the High Court, Mr Justice Blair said the evidence showed that part of the intention of the SSSI was to allow the destruction of Mr Boggis’ defences and the rapid erosion of the cliffs behind them.

He said: “I am not unsympathetic to the plight of Mr Boggis and the other residents who can see the cliff face remorselessly approaching the boundaries of their properties.

“But they were aiming at the wrong target in challenging the SSSI. The lawful course would be to apply for planning permission and coastal protection consent so that all material considerations, including their human rights and the SSSI, could be taken into account.”

Story in the Eastern Daily Press, and also featured in the Independent, the Guardian and the Telegraph

Watch a video clip on BBC News

Read the full judgment

The man dubbed East Anglia’s King Canute says he will seek formal planning permission before doing work to repair the DIY sea defences beneath his clifftop home.

Peter Boggis, who lives in Easton Bavents, near Southwold, has spent thousands of pounds building sea defences out of compacted clays at the base of the cliffs near his house.

He was banned from maintaining the defences in December 2005 after a four-year dispute with Waveney District Council over the legality of the structures, for which he never had planning permission.

As a result, he estimates that only about 50,000 tonnes of the 250,000 tonnes of earth remains, the rest having been washed away by the North Sea.

The soft cliffs at Easton Bavents have retreated more than 3.5km since 1640 and the process is continuing at a rate of one or two metres a year. A destructive storm in 2001 took away about 10m of earth from the cliff face near to his house.

It is estimated that Mr Boggis’ home, called The Warren, and the 13 other houses in the small community will all disappear within the next 50 years unless they are protected.

Now the retired engineer has said he will apply for planning permission before doing any work to rebuild the defences.

He said: “I have informed Waveney District Council that I will not be proceeding any further with the defences – other then in an emergency, such as a tidal surge – without settling this matter with them first. It would give them their chance to look at the evidence and have their say.”

In December last year, Natural England was taken to the High Court by Mr Boggis, who claimed that that the body’s officers should have carried out an appropriate assessment required under EU law to see if declaring the cliffs at Easton Bavents part of a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) might have an adverse effect on birds in nearby Easton Broad.

Natural England announced last week that it is appealing the judge’s decision and the appeal is expected to be heard at the end of February.

A spokesman for Natural England said: “We really think this is a constructive move and a good way forward. We have always said that this issue should be resolved through the local planning process and we will be pleased to see Mr Boggis taking things down that road.

“We will be happy to work with him in the future to help him pursue this course of action.”

Story by Haley Mace in the Eastern Daily Press

I note with interest the press release from Natural England (NE) covering their decision to appeal the recent High Court judgement re Peter Boggis and the Easton Bavents cliffs.

Sean Thomas (Regional Director NE) says the judgement “threatens to stifle the ways in which advice and expert opinion can be used to inform planning and development decisions”

That, I would respectfully contend, is absolute rubbish. What it may do is force NE to take a more open, honest democratic approach which must surely be in the public interest.

Read the full article by Malcolm Kerby on the Cosatal Concern Action Group website.

Natural England yesterday lodged an appeal against the judgment in the Easton Bavents High Court case brought last month by Mr Peter Boggis.

Shaun Thomas, Regional Director of Natural England, said: “The High Court’s judgment has unintended consequences that go far beyond the specifics of the case. It threatens to stifle the ways in which advice and expert opinion can be used to inform planning and development decisions and poses a real risk of unnecessary bureaucracy. Natural England wishes to work with Mr Boggis to find a solution to the predicament he faces, but we need to resolve the unworkable precedent that the judgment threatens to create.”

Contrary to recent publicity, the High Court was not asked to determine whether Mr Boggis should be allowed to build sea defences at Easton Bavents in an attempt to save his home from erosion. Instead, it considered whether Natural England acted lawfully in designating parts of the fossil-rich Easton Bavents cliffs as a site of national geological conservation importance. In the High Court hearing, the Hon. Mr Justice Blair confirmed that Natural England was entirely justified in notifying the Easton Bavents site on the conservation grounds that it did.

However in his judgment, Hon. Mr Justice Blair referred to comments made by Natural England officers at the time of notification of the site suggesting that they would be unlikely to consent to sea defences being built in front of the Easton Bavents site. Although no consent application has ever been made by Mr Boggis for Natural England to formally consider, Hon. Mr Justice Blair ruled that these comments amounted to a plan and, as such, an assessment of the effects of this plan on a nearby European Habitats Directive designated conservation site should have been carried out as part of the notification process.

Natural England disputes this part of the judgment and is concerned that Justice Blair’s definition of what constitutes a plan for the purposes of the Habitats Directive has been cast so wide that advice and consultation given in routine development and planning situations could easily become compromised by the need to carry out environmental assessments that are entirely unnecessary.

Shaun Thomas, concluded: “Natural England sympathises with the situation Mr Boggis faces but we believe that sea defences of the type and of the scale that he has put in place should be assessed by appropriate planning authorities. We would encourage Mr Boggis to make a suitable planning application to Waveney District Council to enable them to judge the matter and properly weigh the interests of the Easton Bavents conservation site, of adjacent homeowners and of the ways in which his sea defences impact coastal and erosion processes elsewhere along the coast.”

A retired engineer dubbed ‘King Canute” after winning the right to protect his cliff top home from the sea faces a challenge from the Government agency in charge of conservation.

Peter Boggis, 77, spent tens of thousands of pounds building earth barriers to protect his home at Easton Bavents, near Southwold, Suffolk, and those of his neighbours which are threatened by erosion to the cliffs on they stand.

He claimed victory in the High Court last month when a judge ruled that it was unlawful to allow the houses to be sacrificed to the sea for scientific reasons.

However, Natural England, who want the fossil rich cliffs to wear away exposing strata of soil and rock for study, have now announced they are to appeal the case.

Shaun Thomas, regional director of Natural England, said the original decision could impact on future efforts to protect the countryside.

He said: “The High Court’s judgment has unintended consequences that go far beyond the specifics of the case. It threatens to stifle the ways in which advice and expert opinion can be used to inform planning and development decision and poses a real risk of unnecessary bureaucracy.

“Natural England wishes to work with Mr Boggis to find a solution to the predicament he faces, but we need to resolve the unworkable precedent that the judgment threatens to create.”

Mr Boggis spent tens of thousands of pounds protecting his home and that of his neighbours with earth barriers.

However Mr Thomas said the plans were never properly assessed.

He concluded: “Natural England sympathises with the situation Mr Boggis faces but we believe that sea defences of the type and of the scale that he has put in place should be assessed by appropriate planning authorities.”

Story by Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent in the Telegraph

Sir, Natural England designated the Easton Bavents area in Suffolk as a site of national geological importance because it patently is one — as Justice Blair entirely agreed in Friday’s High Court judgment (“A home at stake in battle between birds and fossils”, Dec 6).

The new boundary does not stop Peter Boggis, whose efforts to protect his home have received court support, building sea defences. It means that planning authorities need to take the impacts on the site into account when considering any development. If Waveney District Council feels that the benefits of a sea defence outweigh the negative impacts on conservation it can authorise its construction. To date, Waveney has not been able to make this choice as Mr Boggis has not made a full application for planning permission — even though Waveney supported his case in court. He also needs to approach the Environment Agency for a licence.

Natural England wishes to continue working with Mr Boggis and other agencies to find a solution. We believe that the planning system is the right place to balance the public interests of the conservation site and the private interests of homeowners and we would encourage Mr Boggis to make use of it.

Helen Phillips

Chief Executive, Natural England

Letter published in the Times