the controversy

For those of you who don’t already know, the Cuckmere Estuary (also known as Cuckmere Haven) is:

“... an area of flood plains in Sussex, England where the river Cuckmere meets the English Channel between Eastbourne and Seaford. The river is an example of a meandering river, and contains several oxbow lakes. It is a popular tourist destination with an estimated 350,000 visitors per year, where they can engage in long walks, or water activities on the river. The beach at Cuckmere Haven is next to the famous chalk cliffs, the Seven Sisters.” [Source: Wikipedia]

Though generally considered to be an area of ‘unspoiled landscape’, the estuary has actually been subject to the changes of human intervention for hundreds of years and it is this intervention, or to be more precise the proposed revision of it, that lies at the root of the current controversy.

So what exactly is the problem? I shall attempt to explain. Please pardon the boxing metaphor.

“Sea levels on the south coast of Britain are predicted to rise by over a metre during the next century, and the frequency and intensity of storms caused by climate change is expected to increase.

As well as the problem of sea level rise and the threat of flooding, human intervention in the past has led to a number of problems at the estuary. The meanders are silting up, because there is no flow through them. The shingle is not naturally being replenished, leading to the erosion of the beach. And the man-made river walls and flood banks are coming to the end of their useful life.

In December 2008 the Environment Agency published its decision, under its Flood Risk Management Strategy, to withdraw maintenance of the river banks. Under government guidelines, public money cannot be spent on rebuilding and enlarging the sea defences, as there are no homes at risk of flooding in area.” [Source: Cuckmere Estuary Partnership]

This proposal has met with some severe criticism and opinion is currently split as follows:

In the red corner we have an affiliation of organisations, led by Natural England (formerly English Nature), the Environment Agency and the National Trust who have formed the Cuckmere Estuary Partnership. They have put forward a proposal to restore the Cuckmere Estuary to “...a naturally functioning estuary which will be self sustaining, reducing the need for engineered solutions and increasing the flood storage capacity of the flood plain.” They plan to adopt a process known as ‘managed realignment’ whereby “...working with, rather than against, natural coastal processes, the estuary and its wildlife would be able to adapt to sea level rise, creating a mosaic of saltmarsh and mudflats. [By doing this] We would be able to maintain footpaths and recreational use of the area, preserve features such as the meanders and the beach, and limit the impacts on local businesses.”

In the blue corner we have a group of local residents and businesses – who seem to be led by Nigel Newton, the founder and Chief Executive of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc and owner of one of the Coastguard Cottages overlooking the estuary – who do not wish to see this managed realignment for a number of reasons and are campaigning for the continuation of existing sea defences in order to preserve the Cuckmere estuary as it is. The website Rescue the Cuckmere Valley seems to represent their agenda. This is what they have to say about the Cuckmere Estuary:

“The Cuckmere Valley near Seaford, East Sussex is an area of unspoilt natural beauty that attracts 450,000 visitors a year. Here the River Cuckmere meanders across green fields grazed by cows and sheep before sweeping into the English Channel below the majestic Seven Sisters cliffs. Together with the Coastguard Cottages in the foreground this view is the very symbol of England. Cars are kept at a distance and visitors are free to wander along the banks of the river, communing with nature.”

Their objections to the proposal are that managed realignment will lead to the collapse of the sea wall which protects the Coastguard Cottages, endangering their future; create many years of mud until salt marsh develops and this only at the fringes leaving vast areas of mud flats; increase the flood risk for towns such as Alfriston and Littlington; subject the A259 to a greater risk of flooding and possible undermining by the meanders; remove the habitat of many creatures, including badgers, that inhabit the valley; lead to the loss of the beach on the east of the river once the river is reverted to its original course next to the Seven Sisters; lead to the loss of popular riverside footpaths and damage local business as mud is less attractive than the grass downland scenery.

The controversy has raged on now for the best part of a decade with no apparent resolution in sight. Though managed realignment is still the preferred option of the Cuckmere Estuary Partnership and its supporters, opposition from the blue corner has prevented any progress on the plan and in December 2008 Eastbourne MP Nigel Waterson renewed calls for a public enquiry into the affair.

What follows is my attempt to present the facts, debunk the lies and try to put forward a balanced view on the controversy. Please note that I have no agenda other than my own desire to understand what is really best for the Cuckmere Estuary. I will, for as long as it takes to reach a decision, canvass the views of those parties involved and present them without bias.