Coastal erosion and flooding policy

1. Coastal erosion and flooding policy Ethical and democratic issues that impact on rural communities http://tinyurl.com/nokj4se Or http://www.ifever.org.uk/camera/

2. Issues • Coastal erosion – sometimes ‘required’ by Environment Agency • Coastal flooding – sometimes deliberately created by the Environment Agency • Lack of democratic accountability – decisions taken by civil servants rather than elected representatives

3. Landowners required to allow their land to erode by the Environment Agency Shoreline management plans (SMPs) require some areas of private land to be allowed to erode in order to provide sediment for other areas further down the coast Landowners prevented from funding their own sea defences

4. Example: Benacre and Covehithe, North Suffolk Losing 25 acres of farmland to erosion/year Landowner prepared to spend £200,000 funding own sea defences BUT Environment Agency have to give permission and have indicated they will refuse as the erosion is ‘needed’ to provide sediment for Southwold beach to the south. • “Future defence of Covehithe…would risk potential significant loss of sediment to Southwold “ (Lowestoft to Landgaurd Point Shoreline Management Plan p27)

5. Scientific research - less than 5% of eroded material ends up on nearby beaches • In fact coastal erosion is responsible for an almost insignificant proportion of the total input of marine sediments. Inman (1960), for instance, suggested that even in the temperate zone where wave energy is highest, less than 5% of beach sediments directly result from cliff erosion. This is a conclusion supported by Valentin (1954) who shows that, despite rapid erosion of the Holderness coast in Eastern England, amounting to over 1.5m/year, less than 3% of the resultant material was contributed to adjacent beaches. (John Pethick: An Introduction to Coastal Geomorphology) • The Environment Agency privately accept that probably less than 5% of sediment eroded from Benacre and Covehithe end up on local beaches such as Southwold – but still insist that the erosion MUST be allowed to continue as even this small amount of sediment is important for such beaches…

6. The ethical issue • The landowner is required to allow his land to erode and in practice not allowed to spend his own money protecting it. • All land below the low water mark belongs to the Crown Estate – so every year the ownership of 26 acres of land is in effect transferred from the landowner to the Crown Estate (valued over £200,000/year) • In effect a compulsory purchase order with no compensation • Private land is being treated as a ‘public good’

7. Coastal flooding – sometimes deliberately created by the Environment Agency 4 categories of ‘management in shoreline management plans: - Advance the line (never used in UK – although is Netherlands) - Hold the line i.e. maintain existing defences - No active intervention - Managed retreat – move the defences back few hundred metres or kilometres

8. The EU habitats directive • Managed retreat is being used to implement the EU Habitats directive

9. Ethical issues • 1. Farmland that may have been in the same family for many generations is sacrificed to create ‘compensatory habitats’ • 2. Plant and animal habitats given a higher value than human habitats • From a Conservative perspective: • 1. Land is a trust – we inherit from previous generations and should ensure we can pass on to future generations • 2. The right to own private property is one of the most fundamental rights

10. 2010 Flood and Water Management Act • Rushed through parliament without proper scrutiny just before election • Gives wide ranging powers to Environment Agency to actually create coastal erosion and/or flooding

11. Section 38 Flood and Water Management Act 2010 • Incidental flooding or coastal erosion: Environment Agency • (1) If Conditions 1, 2 and 3 are satisfied the Environment Agency may carry out work of a kind listed in section 3(3)(a) to (e) in a way that will or may cause— • (a) flooding, • (b) an increase in the amount of water below the ground, or • (c) coastal erosion. • The conditions are that this would enhance either : - Nature Conservation - Preservation of cultural heritage - People’s enjoyment of the environment - Any other situation where the Environment Agency “considers the benefits of the work will outweigh the harmful consequences” District councils, landowners and farmers only have to be ‘consulted’

12. The ‘democratic deficit’ • Decisions to deprive people of their land often without any compensation are being taken by unelected officials of a QANGO • Although SMPs have to be approved by district councils – in practice, it is very hard to challenge the assumptions of the technical experts that private land must be surrendered • It is not the people who are the problem – it is the structure that needs to change.

13. Suggestions for ministers 1. Presumption in favour of landowners having the right to defend their land from coastal flooding and erosion – provided those defences do not interfere with the movement of existing sediment along the coast. 2. Urgent review of 2010 Flood and Water Management Act. 3. Address the democratic deficit: Review structure of who gives consent for sea defences – should it be local council planning committee with Environment Agency having a statutory right to object? 4. Include the Habitats Directive in list of competencies we are seeking to take back from EU

15. EU Habitats directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora) • The main aim of the Habitats Directive is to promote the maintenance of biodiversity by requiring Member States to take measures to maintain or restore natural habitats (http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-1374) • Where development destroys a habitat – it should be replaced • Where a habitat e.g. saltmarsh is lost to erosion – it should be ‘replaced’ • - in practice this often means ‘managed retreat’ – moving back sea defences, flooding farmland to create new saltmarsh

16. Sea level rise UK Source: Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, Liverpool (now National Oceanography Centre)