Latest News Archive 2009

Radioactivity MA Marine Aggregates ML Marine Legislation BW Bathing Water MR Marine Reserves RE Renewable Energy OA Ocean Acidification PO Pollution FI Fisheries GW Global Warming CE Coastal Erosion

Correspondence with Anne McIntosh

MARINET wrote to Anne McIntosh, who has been Shadow Minister for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs since 8th September 2009, to express our concern of the ongoing impasse regarding continuing Offshore Aggregate Dredging. She in turn wrote to Huw Irranca Davies who is the existing Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in DEFRA.

The Ministers reply to her consisted of the usual output as regards dredging as seen earlier on our website, so a follow-up was sent to Anne McIntosh to cover our response to the content, some quotes and points of which our members might find useful when dealing with the matter.

The correspondence can be seen at www.marinet.org.uk/mad/annemcintosh09dec.html

Threatened Coast Dweller refuses 'handout'

A brave 65 year old lady who's three bedroom bungalow is now only a few metres from the eroding cliff face at Happisburgh has stated emphatically that she will refuse to vacate her home and will not take the thousands of pounds compensation offered to have it compulsory demolished.

She feels that it would be totally immoral of her to take any money at all, and says "I am worried that while the compensation issue is being fought, the idea of preserving the coastline, which I think is very important, is being lost."

The whole story by Ed Foss can be seen in the Eastern Daily Press of the 8th December '09 with the title 'I won't take erosion payout for my home'.

Starfish Deaths

Mass grave: More than 10,000 starfish died after a storm washed them onto Norfolk's Holkham beach

In the first few days of December '09 many tens of thousands of starfish, some alive, many damaged, but mostly dead, along with much shellfish debris, were washed up along a wide stretch of the north and north-west Norfolk coastline. The strong southerly gales had brought about a shorebound undertow bringing the corpses in to litter the beaches.

The knowledgeable mussel fishermen of the area were quick to blame Offshore Aggregate Dredging, whilst others blame the mussel fishermen themselves for scraping the seabed for mussels.

An Anglia TV video showing the carnage strewn along on just one Norfolk beach can be seen by going to: www.itv.com/anglia/starfishgraveyard15831 … whilst The Daily Mail reports the issue here.

Fuel from the seabed

Possible undersea coal burning scheme off Norfolk to provide synthetic gas fuel.

map showing relevant ares off East Anglian coast

Rohan Courtney, who is Chairman of 'Clean Coal', a British-American company with a degree of expertise in Clean Coal Technology (CCT) and Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) speaks of plans to reintroduce that methodology by gently burning coal deposits under the seabed of North and North-East Norfolk and other UK coastal areas to produce a synthetic fuel gas that could be scrubbed and piped to customers. They are later seeking to develop other projects in Europe, Asia and North America.
The UCG system involves pumping a mixture of water and either air or oxygen into a coal seam, which is then ignited and gently burned to produce diesel fuel that can be used for transport, heating, aircraft fuels, fuel for power stations and even the basis for plastics and fertilizers. The technique was first invented by a canny Scotsman in Durham over one-hundred years ago. It was employed in the USSR in the 1970's, but has never been developed or used since until now, apart from in Australia. But now advances in drilling technology, depletion of coal and oil resources and rising gas and oil prices have brought about a revival here in the UK

The Government estimates that there are 50 billion tonnes of un-mineable coal reserves off and onshore, and that the five mentioned sites could provide one billion tonnes, enough to provide 5% of the nation's energy needs. The result is that undersea coal seams in offshore areas between Overstrand and Happisburgh (near Cromer), off Grimsby, Sunderland, Swansea and Dumfriesshire in Scotland will be initially explored using seismic survey techniques by the Clean Coal company to see if they are commercially viable, with the results known in about one years time from now. The site off Cromer is one of the five that have just been given licences for test drilling commencing in 2010, along with a prior public meeting to explain the project.

More information is to be found by going to www.cleancoalucg.com

In order to prepare a dossier for consultation at the coming public meeting, which Pat Gowen will attend o.b.o. MARINET and the NSAG, your comments, ideas, backing or criticisms of the plan are invited. Please send by e-mail to pat@marinet.co.uk or to pat.gowen@ntlworld.com.

Sea Drop?

BBC News Online's correspondent Damian Carrington reports a US geologist as stating that Global warming can lead to a dramatic fall in sea level:

This suggestion is the very opposite of the generally expected effect of rising temperature. And while he says that this is unlikely to happen in the near future, Dr John Bratton of the US Geological Survey says the process behind it could offset the sea level rises which are predicted to flood so many low-lying areas of the world. It could also explain mysterious plunges in sea level in warmer periods in the Earth's geological past.

The sea level drops could be caused by the melting of clathrates. These are sea-floor crystals of water ice and gases such as methane. When the crystals melt, the gas bubbles away to the surface and other gases trapped in the ocean sediments below could also be released. In the worst circumstances, the 'hole' left behind could result in a sea level drop of 25 metres but Dr Bratton told BBC News Online that his more conservative estimates suggest a drop of up to 1.5m.

"Any temperature rise will start to melt clathrate," he says. "The apparent massive hydrate melting about 60 million years ago was triggered by an increase in bottom water temperatures of about four degrees centigrade. Therefore, it appears that the process could get going with an increase of even one or two degrees, especially in the polar regions where gas hydrate is abundant". He reports that such is quite possible. but any actual drop in sea level would be countered by the simultaneous melting of the Earth's polar ice caps. The rising temperatures would also cause ocean waters to expand. Dr Bratton goes on to say that the predicted drop resulting from clathrate melting "is of the same order of magnitude as those associated with thermal expansion of the oceans, melting of non-polar ice and melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet."

If correct, this could be good news for threatened coastal areas, but, Dr Bratton warns that the release of methane, a greenhouse gas, to the atmosphere could itself have a significant effect in driving further climate warming. When asked if this is a worry, Dr Bratton says: "Yes, definitely, although not everyone agrees the effect would be that significant relative to anthropogenic forcing by carbon dioxide emissions. Almost everyone agrees that hydrates melt when climate warms. The debate is now about whether hydrates may actually drive natural climate warming or whether they just go along for the ride."

Dr Bratton's research is published in the journal Geology, so should not automatically be taken as being part of the conspiracy to dismiss global warming and attempting to debunk the results of reputable climatologists world-wide.

The full BBC report may be seen here.

Concern grows over oil storage tankers in UK coastal waters

Concern is growing over the number of oil tankers moored offshore. These tankers, which are essentially acting as offshore storage tanks, are being used in a monetary game of speculation involving the future selling price of oil in the UK. Concern arises out of the fear that these storage tankers could either come to grief in bad weather or, in the case of those tankers moored off the Suffolk coast where ship to ship transfer of oil is permitted, the possibility of an accident that leads to oil pollution of the coast.

We record below the news item printed in the Daily Mail in November and covered also by the online news service Sea Rates www.searates.com/news/4885.

"More than 50 oil tankers are anchored off Britain — pieces in a game in which the only winners are market speculators. The losers are the millions of British motorists paying over the odds for their petrol and diesel. After yesterday's report in the Daily Mail on how several so-called 'oil shark' tankers were moored near the Devon coast, dozens more vessels were revealed to be loitering off-shore.

"Some are carrying aircraft fuel or fuel for homes. Others are empty, waiting to be restocked before setting off around the globe. But according to industry experts, a significant number are 'oil sharks' — tankers that have been cynically told to wait for crude prices to be driven up before they unload their cargo. With values soaring on the international markets, fuel made from their oil is unlikely to appear on a petrol station forecourt any day soon.

"Paul Watters of the AA said: 'Tankers are off the UK coast and also off the U.S. They are acting as storage tanks. As always, motorists are the victims in this. They are at the end of the food chain.'

"The Daily Mail has learnt that 54 tankers are anchored around the British Isles. Six are off the Essex and Kent coasts, five are moored in Lyme Bay, while four are lurking next to the Isle of Wight. But the biggest fleet — around 30 ships — lies around ten miles from Southwold, Suffolk in the only waters around the UK where ship-to-ship transfers of oil are allowed. They come from as far afield as Malaysia, Liberia and Singapore — and include 1,000ft vessels capable of carrying more than 300,000 tons of oil.

"Southwold Tory councillor Simon Tobin said: 'There have been ship-to-ship transfers of oil going on off the coast here for around 15 years. But there began to be a huge increase in the number of these tankers around seven months ago. We are massively concerned. These tankers are treating the coast like a car park while they wait for the right time to take their oil to shore. There is nothing to stop them staying here as long as they like. There might be a catastrophic oil spillage which could ruin our beautiful coastline.'

"Small tankers bringing oil from Russia often use the spot to transfer their cargo to larger vessels. Others drop anchor there while waiting for business because it is cheaper than tying up in a port. The price of a barrel of oil has risen from $40 to $80 over the last year. It is expected to soar even further over the next few months as the world eases its way out of recession and demand rises.

"The supply of oil is strictly controlled by producers and owners — to ensure that prices remain as high as possible. In the course of its journey from wells to the refineries, a barrel of oil may be bought and sold by different traders many times on the international markets.

Source: Daily Mail 20 November 2009, and Sea Rates www.searates.com/news/4885.

Comment on the Westminster Offshore Dredging Debate

The much heralded Parliamentary debate on Offshore Dredging (see 'Graham Stuart MP has HoC debate on off-shore dredging' in our Latest News at www.marinet.org.uk/latestnews.html#gsmh) duly took place from 1.29 - 2.00 pm on Tuesday 1st December '09 at Westminster Hall. It was responded to by the DEFRA Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies and was attended by Great Yarmouth MP Tony Wright, but surprisingly not by Lowestoft's Bob Blizzard, North Norfolk's Norman Lamb, Suffolk Coastal's John Gummer, nor a number of other coastal constituency MPs who could and should have involved themselves in this major threat to the inhabitants they are supposed to represent.

MARINET was mentioned and quoted eight times in the space of 29 minutes (without the prefix of an explicative at that) which must be an all time record. It was further claimed by the Minister that he had "met MARINET representatives regularly about a range of issues" — yet the two requests by Pat Gowen to meet that Minister were both declined.

The entire half-hour transcription is to be found under 'Offshore Dredging' in the House of Commons Official Report Vol.501 No.8 on page 103, this some half way down the pages that may be read by going to www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/chan8.pdf.

Some comments produced in the debate leap out, such as:

"We do not contest the fact that poorly managed aggregate extraction from the marine environment could cause a range of physical impacts, which may ultimately contribute to coastal erosion. That is why all marine mineral dredging applications are required to assess by way of a coastal impact study the physical effects of the proposed operation and its implications for erosion"

… which coupled to a following statement…

"Modelling and field studies on the impact of individual offshore dredging licences, and their cumulative impacts, have concluded that UK offshore dredging has not contributed to coastal erosion."

… can be seen as an admittance that, despite the vital need of this measure already expressed by a number of astute scientific bodies, no empirical research has ever been put in place to back up the assumed simulative computer modelling by those performing the studies on behalf of and rewarded by the dredging companies.

To conclude that UK offshore dredging has not contributed to coastal erosion is purely an over-optimistic assumptive hope. To prove or disprove this hypothetical claim we would need see the institution of post dredging studies, because several years can result before beach draw down results, as to seen in the 'Correlations of Offshore Dredging levels with Coastal Losses' graph at the end of our briefing on this topic at www.marinet.org.uk/mad/madbrief.html.

Furthermore we would need the backing evidence of practical findings such as tracking the transport of labelled sand and gravel from the shoreline, beaches, dunes and sand cliffs to the dredged areas, which have never been attempted by those determining the post-dredging erosive impact, apart from the study instituted by Blackpool Council, who discovered that the sand being lost to their beach was going into the holds of the dredgers. (See AODA Report at www.marinet.org.uk/mad/objection/reapat1aoda.pdf)

These questions are currently not being considered by the MAREA study, despite our repeated requests that they be so.

And one other point — it was openly admitted that they take no heed of distance from the shoreline nor of the water of depth when granting licences. But we know from previous research that even at the current depth and beyond there is still considerable sediment movement, especially off the East Anglian coast where the tides are so strong, and even greater in surges. Many items lost on the beach have much later been trawled up by fishermen around the dredging areas.

Unless they have repealed Isaac Newton's Laws of gravity, the government Minister should recognise that we are fully aware (as given in the 'Sandpit Report' see www.marinet.org.uk/mad/sandpit.html) that any mobile material migrates from a high point to a lower, the lower points in this case being the evacuated pits left following dredging. These evacuated sea bed areas exist over vast areas off our coastlines. They are between three and five metres deep, but slowly filling.

The basic report on the replies and comments given by Huw Irranca-Davies would be 'Could do better' — much better in fact.

Norfolk and Suffolk Local Authorities Secure nearly 50% of National Fund Allocated to Manage Coastal Erosion

East Anglian local authorities North Norfolk, Waveney & Great Yarmouth have been awarded a total of £5m of a national fund of £11m allocated to address the penalties imposed upon those living by the coastline from accelerated erosion.
North Norfolk has been given £3m, Waveney £1.5m and Great Yarmouth £296.500, these authorities now have 18 months to spend these grants in this pilot study project.
The money will be used for compensation for people in selected areas who lose their homes to coastal erosion, or for government purchase and lease back options for threatened homes, relocating communities and coastal defence measures.
The selected Authorities will act as pathfinders for the UK government to test a range of measures and feed back lessons learnt to the government.

This is the first positive move by the Environment Agency/Government towards recognition of the problem created by accelerated coastal erosion along the Norfolk and Suffolk coastline since the introduction of the do nothing Shoreline Management Plan (SMP 3b) in 2005.
Although I (as many others) have campaigned that the EA/Government should provide adequate sea defences for all at risk areas instead of compensation, by introducing this part compensation and other measures pathfinder study grant they (the government) are finally admitting that we have a problem and it is great news that our three local authorities (North Norfolk, Waveney & Great Yarmouth) have been selected to receive a significant portion of these pathfinder grants.

It is morally correct that the government should compensate people who lose their homes if they do not provide or do not allow them to provide sea defences, and this is an encouraging first move by the government (their admission finally that we have a problem and that there must be a cause) — but we need to point out:
Although we are thankful for these pathfinder study grants and the governments final recognition of this problem we still need SMP3b amended from its policy of no active intervention or managed retreat for the majority of areas to a policy of full sea defence protection for all at risk areas.

We also recommend that these grants are spent on actual sea defence projects — not frittered away (as previous grants) on further reports by "so called experts" who are only lining their own pockets.

We also suggest that part of each Authority's grant should provide for an independent study (which is not part funded by the offshore dredging companies) on the affects of Offshore Aggregate dredging along the adjacent coastlines — as historic events, studies and evidence point to the removal of seabed material over large areas being the major contributory cause of our accelerated coastal erosion.

Mike King — Marinet Great Yarmouth and coastal home owner

Ocean acidification rates pose disaster for marine life, major study shows

Report launched from leading marine scientists at Copenhagen summit shows seas absorbing dangerous levels of CO₂

The world's oceans are becoming acidic at a faster rate than at any time in the last 55m years, threatening disaster for marine life and food supplies across the globe, delegates at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen have been warned.

A report by more than 100 of Europe's leading marine scientists, released at the climate talks this morning, states that the seas are absorbing dangerous levels of carbon dioxide as a direct result of human activity. This is already affecting marine species, for example by interfering with whale navigation and depleting planktonic species at the base of the food chain.

Ocean acidification — the facts says that acidity in the seas has increased 30% since the start of the industrial revolution. Many of the effects of this acidification are already irreversible and are expected to accelerate, according to the scientists.

The study, which is a massive review of existing scientific studies, warns that if CO₂ emissions continue unchecked many key parts of the marine environment — particularly coral reefs and the algae and plankton which are essential for fish such as herring and salmon — will be "severely affected" by 2050, leading to the extinction of some species.

The full article can be read at The Guardian 10th December 2009

IUCN urges politicians to recognise the importance of oceans in climate change

Failure to recognize the ocean in climate change discussions will have profound consequences for humanity, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in a report published 10th November 2009 and titled The Ocean and Climate Change — Tools and Guidelines for Action

The report has been published to help decision-makers understand the importance of the ocean in the global climate debate, and provides a comprehensive view of the mitigation and adaptation strategies available, as well as a clear set of action recommendations.

"Maintaining biodiversity and restoring degraded ecosystems are cost-effective strategies for disaster risk reduction and will help poor communities adapt to climate change while ensuring the continued provision of vital services," says Dorothée Herr, lead author of the report and IUCN's Global Marine Program Officer.

The ocean is the earth's most significant global heat buffer, and absorbs up to one third of the CO₂ released by human activities. The ocean covers over seventy percent of our planet's surface yet much less than one percent of the ocean is effectively protected. Marine ecosystems such as salt marshes, coral reefs and mangroves are among the most vulnerable to climate change, with millions of people relying on them for food, protection, tourism and development.

The report urges global leaders to significantly reduce CO₂ emissions and to set reduction targets based on the latest science on ocean acidification and marine ecosystems. The report welcomes the development of sustainable marine renewable energy sources and promotes the use of coastal ecosystems as natural carbon sinks. The report however also carries an important warning to world leaders:

"We should explore all possible ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions," says Carl Gustaf Lundin, Head of IUCN Global Marine Programme. "But proposed actions such as ocean fertilization to increase carbon capture and storage need to be approached with caution as the possible impacts on the atmosphere and marine biodiversity may be severe and have not been fully evaluated."

The full report is available here.

Coastal carbon sinks disappearing faster than the Amazon rainforest

Coastal areas in the form of salt marshes, mangrove swamps, kelp forests and eelgrass beds are vital providers of "carbon sinks", and yet it is reported that worldwide these habitats are currently shrinking faster than the Amazon rainforest.

In a report published on 17th November 2009 by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), scientists have sounded the alarm over the threats faced by coastal marine ecosystems — such as tidal salt marshes, seagrass meadows, kelp forests and mangroves — which are key tools in combating climate change. Part-funded by Natural England, the Lighthouse Foundation and the UNEP, the IUCN report 'The Management of Natural Coastal Carbon Sinks' looks at a range of global options for carbon management around the world's coastlines.

Dr Helen Phillips, Chief Executive of Natural England, said: "The role of forests and peatlands in helping to prevent carbon entering the atmosphere is widely recognised, but it is crucial not to overlook our coastal habitats, which can have just as much impact in helping limit climate change. Many of these coastal habitats, like tidal salt marshes, are under significant threat from development and rising sea levels, and urgent action is needed to prevent further damage to their essential carbon storage role. Natural England welcomes this compelling and timely research from the IUCN, which provides vital information on how these coastal carbon sinks work and why it is so important to preserve them."

The report highlights the wide-ranging benefits that coastal habitats provide and also the increasing threats that they face. For example, the loss of two-thirds of seagrass meadows and 50 per cent of mangrove forests due to human activities has severely threatened their carbon storage capacity and is comparable to the annual decline in the Amazon forests.

Natural England's Professor Dan Laffoley, lead author of the report and also Marine Vice-Chair of IUCN's World Commission on Protected Areas, said: "Over the past two years we have worked with a range of leading scientists to document the carbon management potential of particular marine ecosystems and understand how they can be successfully managed. Until now, surprisingly little attention has been paid to the ocean and its habitats, despite the fact that they form a critical part of the carbon cycle and one of the largest sinks of carbon on the planet. We cannot afford to ignore their potential."

The report is titled "The Management of Natural Coastal Carbon Sinks", is edited by Dan Laffoley and Gabriel Grimsditch, and is viewable here.

Appointments made to the independent Science Advisory Panel for the selection of MCZs

In order to assist in the selection of the the Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) which will be created as a result of the new Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, the selection procedure will be superintended and guided by a panel of experts — the Science Advisory Panel. The appointments to this Panel were announced by Natural England on 1st December.

The News Release from Natural England states:

"One of the first steps the Government has taken under the Marine and Coastal Access Act is the creation of an independent Science Advisory Panel to assist the work to select Marine Conservation Zones.

"Dr Peter Ryder has been appointed as Chairman, and he is joined by a panel of world-leading marine experts. A physicist who has worked primarily in the fields of operational meteorology, and oceanography, Dr Ryder is a former Deputy Chief Executive and Director of Operations of the Met Office, where he spent most of his career. He has extensive experience in chairing executive and advisory committees.

"Dr Ryder said "I am delighted to have been appointed as chairman of this Panel by the Secretary of State, Hilary Benn, and I am strongly motivated to make a success of our collective efforts. We are privileged to be able to help construct and promote strong scientific foundations for an effective network of Marine Protected Areas."

"James Marsden, Director Marine for Natural England, said: "Today's appointment is excellent news and means that work can now begin in earnest to develop proposals for Marine Conservation Zones, which will contribute to an ecologically coherent network of Marine Protected Areas in English waters. The Science Advisory Panel's shared knowledge and expertise is formidable and will ensure that this ambitious, stakeholder-led process is informed by the best available evidence and meets key scientific criteria."

"Four regional projects led by local people with an interest in the use of our seas have been set up to select potential MCZ sites. Finding Sanctuary in the South West was the first of the regional projects to be established.

"The Marine Conservation Zone Science Advisory Panel is an independent body which has been established to support the four regional projects in the MCZ selection process by offering objective scientific assessment of site proposals, and independent advice to Ministers. Panel members have been drawn from a diverse range of marine scientific disciplines in order to ensure a balanced and comprehensive skill set.

The Panel members are:

Professor Juliet Brodie (Natural History Museum, London)
Professor Brodie is a marine algae specialist, and she has extensive knowledge of the taxonomy, distribution and importance of algae and the activities which impact upon it. She has over 25 years experience as a marine scientist, and her work has included the identification of sites of importance for seaweed and other algae.

Professor Michael Elliott (University of Hull)
Specialising in estuary and coastal science and management, Professor Elliott has worked for 35 years as a marine scientist. He has been involved in many initiatives in the marine field both in the UK and elsewhere during this time, providing advice to many organisations, agencies and government departments, particularly regarding the environmental effects of coastal and estuarine activities and the management of those impacts.

Dr. Jason Hall-Spencer (University of Plymouth)
Dr Hall-Spencer is a lecturer in marine biology at the University of Plymouth, with a strong track record in providing input to the selection of MPAs, particularly in areas beyond 12 nautical miles from the coast. He also has personal experience of working on fishing vessels throughout Europe and a history of working within coastal communities.

Dr. Keith Hiscock (Marine Biological Association, Plymouth)
Four decades of marine biological survey and of using science to support conservation have given Dr Hiscock a wealth of knowledge relevant to the work of the SAP. After leading programmes within the nature conservation agencies, he established the Marine Life Information Network at the Marine Biological Association in 1998 and is now an Associate Fellow there.

Professor Michel Kaiser (University of Bangor)
Professor Kaiser has undertaken world-leading research to understand human impacts on the marine environment and the consequences of different management strategies. He has focussed on sustainable fisheries and aquaculture issues, and has held a number of influential positions, including chair of Defra's Marine Fisheries Stakeholder Forum.

Professor Callum Roberts (University of York)
Professor Roberts is well-recognised as one of the key scientific contributors to the film The End of the Line. He has extensive experience in the science and establishment of MPAs and networks around the world. He is author of The Unnatural History of the Sea, an account of the effects of 1000 years of fishing and hunting on marine life. He currently lectures at the University of York.

Dr. Beth Scott (University of Aberdeen)
Dr. Scott's academic career as a marine ecologist includes several years working onboard fishing vessels in Alaskan waters. Her research focuses on functional linkages between bio-physical oceanographic processes, flexible life history traits and population dynamics of fish and seabird species. Her work is helping to identify critical marine habitats where predators and prey species interact.

Professor Graham Underwood (University of Essex)
Professor Underwood has research experience across a range of disciplines within the marine area, and he specialises in estuarine and coastal systems, especially the ecology and functioning of mudflats, sandflats and salt marshes. He is also a regular contributor to BBC Radio 4's environment programme Home Planet.

Source: Natural England News release, 1st December 2009.

Graham Stuart MP has HoC debate on off-shore dredging

MP for Beverley and Holderness, Graham Stuart, was granted an adjournment debate in the House of Commons on 1st December calling for the Government to consider commissioning a study of the potential impacts of off-shore dredging on the Holderness coast.

He said that he has constituents convinced that the rate of erosion along the Holderness coast is made worse by the dredging of gravel from areas out to sea. He said "The experts I have spoken to suggest that there is no evidence for this. They also emphasise that each dredging application needs to be looked at on its merits. I hope the Government will agree with me that it is important to ensure that any impacts from dredging are understood and that any public fears are allayed."

Fears that new nuclear power station will destroy oyster fishery

There is concern, expressed in the Colchester Daily Gazette that a new nuclear power station at Bradwell, in the Blackwater Estuary, Essex, could destroy parts of Colchester's native oyster fishery which has been renowned since Roman times.

This concern is based on the practice of nuclear power stations releasing large quantities of warmed "cooling water" into the estuary which alters the aquatic ecology, making it inhospitable to oysters; and, the fact that this scenario did actually occur with the old nuclear power station at Bradwell (now closed), with the oyster fishery only recovering once the discharges of water from the nuclear power station had ceased. In the case of the new nuclear power station it is said that 72,000 cubic litres of water will be pumped in and out of the Blackwater Estuary every second, more than twice the volume of the old Bradwell nuclear power station.

We reproduce the full report from the Daily Gazette below:

"Fears have been raised that Colchester's world-famous oyster beds could be decimated if a new nuclear power station is built at Bradwell. Last month, the Government earmarked Bradwell as one of 11 potential sites for a new nuclear power station.
"To cool the new generation of stations, 72,000 cubic litres of water would be pumped in and out of the Blackwater Estuary every second — more than twice the volume needed at the old Bradwell power station. And campaigners believe the warm water pumped back could wipe out some sections of Colchester's native oysters, beloved since Roman times.
"Alan Bird, a Mersea oyster fisherman for 45 years, said the shore and seabeds along the Bradwell coast became barren in the late Sixties, more than a decade after the original nuclear station opened. But within a few months of the nuclear facility being decommissioned in 2002, the coastline began to regenerate.

"I have major concerns about a new power station that will pump much more volume than the old one," Mr Bird said. "I would say a year after it closed, we could see the beginnings of new life, and now we have a nice population along that shore. The suction pipe is going to suck in so much oyster larvae, I have grave doubts for the fishery."
"Prof Graham Underwood, professor of ecology at Essex University, said native oysters, such as the famous Colchester variety, would be particularly affected by changes in the estuary's environment. He said research was inconclusive, but the onus was on those bidding to open another nuclear plant to prove their case. "It's up to the developers to show there will be no impact, not for the people who live around there to prove against them. The people of both sides of Mersea have invested many, many years of building these fisheries up and establishing them. In the absence of good studies it's just not known what the impact would be."
"The Government's Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science is set to commission research on the effects new water intake pipes would have on oyster stock.
"Concerns about the future of oysters was one issue raised at a meeting of Colchester Council's strategic overview and scrutiny panel. A group tasked with looking into the potential effects of a new station at Bradwell on the borough found the economic benefits of more jobs would be minimal.
"Other worries raised included the potential effects of climate change, how residents on an island would be evacuated if there was a disaster, and research suggesting young children living near power stations may be more susceptible to leukaemia."

Source: Colchester Daily Gazette, 7th May 2009

Highly Protected marine reserves are absent from the UK Marine Bill

MARINET has campaigned and lobbied throughout the parliamentary passage of the Marine and Coastal Access Act for the inclusion of highly protected marine reserves (HPMRs) within the text of the legislation, but the UK Government has failed to deliver this important marine management tool which is widely recognised by marine experts and scientists worldwide as one of the most important features of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management.

MARINET has written a report on the parliamentary campaign, and this may now be accessed on MARINET's marine reserves webpage at www.marinet.org.uk/mreserves/hpmr.html.

Scottish Green Party contests the shooting of seals

It is reported by BBC News, 2nd December 2009, that the Scottish Parliament has been debating the shooting of pregnant seals in Scottish waters, with particular reference to the welfare of the young of those female seals have pupped and in the context of the Scottish version of the Marine Bill which is passing through the Scottish Parliament at the present time.

"There is no evidence pregnant seals are being shot in large numbers, according to the Scottish Government.

"Green MSP Robin Harper had tabled an amendment to the new Marine (Scotland) Bill seeking a ban on shooting the mammals during breeding seasons. The animals can be killed on licence if deemed to be a threat to a fish farm by eating the stock, or damaging nets. Environment Secretary Richard Lochhead said he a duty to protect businesses and seals. Mr Harper withdrew the amendment at the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee stage of the Bill's passage through the Scottish Parliament. Mr Lochhead said if breeding seals were being targeted then he would bring in restrictions.

"Current rules allow the mammals to be shot by licensed individuals to stop damage to fish farm cages. The Greens' call for killings only to happen outside the breeding season had been backed by naturalist Terry Nutkins and Queen guitarist Brian May.

"Earlier, Mr Harper said the new bill could potentially be one of the parliament's "finest hours", but would need to include rigorous protection for wildlife. He said: "It can no longer be acceptable to shoot seals that are nurturing their young. It is wrong to kill nursing mammals, leaving the pups to try to survive alone when they are vulnerable and defenceless."

"John Hermse, of Mallaig and North-West Fishermen's Association, said seals could "devastate" some fish catches but added that his organisation was not seeking a cull. He said: "We don't need them culled, although we would like to see seal management. What we would like is management through contraceptive darts which are freely available nowadays and a modern way of managing seal numbers."

"Last year, Mr Harper claimed an emergency ban on the shooting of common seals was needed to halt an "alarming" drop in their population. At the time he said studies had revealed between 3,000 and 5,000 of the seals were shot each year. He called for the Scottish Government to ban the practice and bolster seal protection in its new Bill. The Government said it believed fewer than 1,000 seals were shot annually.

"Meanwhile, the Greens also asked for a marine litter strategy to be drawn up in an effort to tackle the amount of rubbish ending up in the sea, on the seabed and along coastlines. The Scottish Green Party said the waste was a risk to the environment and navigational safety."

Source: BBC Online News, 2nd December 2009.

DEFRA's Compensation to erosion impacted communities

DEFRA have just awarded £4.8m to help offset the financial losses imposed upon those threatened with loss of their properties due to erosion in Norfolk and Suffolk from a total sum of £11m. North Norfolk has been given £3m, Waveney £1.5m and Great Yarmouth £296,500. After those sums granted to North Norfolk and Waveney, the next largest handout was East Riding in Yorkshire for whom £1.2m was made available.

The money is intended to go towards a number of central themes, which include purchasing a small number of cliff top homes immediately threatened, then demolishing them, offering a 'purchase and lease back' option to owners of another set of homes not so immediately vulnerable, to tidying up those areas that have become derelict because of erosion, to business investment retention on the coast and to the relocation of threatened businesses and retention or replacement of vulnerable infrastructure.

Whilst this new measure may help placate many of those previously facing loss of their homes, no mention is made of any alteration of the government's defeatist 'Managed Retreat' policy nor of any attempt to terminate the impact of offshore dredging which is the main cause of the problem.

The fully detailed story can be seen by reading the Eastern Daily Press articles 'Millions awarded to coastal communities' and 'Multi-million pound drive to fight coastal erosion' by Ed Foss.

Update on coastal protection

Steve Hayman, East Anglian EA Coastal Engineer, reports that the sea defence works at Felixstowe were completed in October with the pipeline now moved to Jaywick, where work had been started with beach recharge and breakwater construction, due to be completed by the end of December.

Eccles to Winterton rock delivery and beach recharge works were also due to be completed by the end December, whilst the contract for sea defence works at Bawdsey, Suffolk, involving the installation of rock had been finalised.

For 2009 the annual campaign for the Lincolnshire coast with a requirement for 200,000 cubic metres of rock was planned to commence in April.

Gravel Seeding Sea Bed Restoration?

The DEFRA website should soon show the full details of a now completed project that could point the way to restoring sites devastated of bed life due to aggregate dredging. Simply, The purpose of the project was to set up a field trial to investigate the potential for gravel seeding as a means of restoring sediment composition in areas where dredging has resulted in an overburden of fine sediments.

Specific objectives were to determine whether:

it is practically feasible to perform gravel seeding at a relinquished aggregate extraction site,
whether the technique results in sediments more physically similar to that of non-impacted gravelly habitats in the wider environment, … and
whether the technique results in the return of more gravelly fauna.

Zone 2, within aggregate extraction Area 408 (offshore Humber), was chosen as the experimental site as there was some evidence for persistence of sand which may have resulted from screening operations at this site. Two 4000 tonne cargoes were dredged, using a commercial suction hopper trailer dredger, from within an active zone of Area 408 and deposited within the 'treatment' box.

Prior to deposition, a baseline survey using a combination of acoustic tools and grab sampling was undertaken. This survey was followed up, post deposition by a further three surveys.

Results showed that a commercial dredger, typical of those operating at extraction Area 408, could be used to undertake gravel seeding. Results also indicated that the technique was successful in increasing the proportion of gravel exposed at the seabed surface. The increase in gravel led to the establishment of a faunal community more similar to that of local gravel dominated reference sites. Although results suggest gravel seeding could be used for restoration, further work is required to assess the long-term success of the technique.

Dredging Areas Update

The minutes of the most recent East Coast Dredging / Fishing Liasion Committee Meeting show that Laura Tolhurst produced information on the status of the current main dredging areas, advising that :-

(1) Dredging Sites:-

Area 202 - Pre-application advice sought, MFA awaiting payment of fee and scoping pack
Area 447 - dredging commenced on 30th April
Area 401/2 off the Norfolk Coast (Hanson) — Sab Spin report submitted and exclusion zones agreed in line with GV
Area 254 Cross sands (UMD) — 5 yr review submitted in line with GV
Area 480 East of Humber (Hanson) — Dredging permission granted 12 May. No update
Area 481 Inner Dowsing — Permission due to be granted shortly
Area 466 and 485 Dogger Bank (Cemex) — Applications about to move to final stage, possible issues with SAC designation. No change
Area 484 and 483 Humber DEME (submitted as Dredging International) — Application on hold. No change
Area 452 Shipwash Gabbard (Cemex) — Application planned 2011. No update
Area 448 and 449 New Sand Hole and Humber Estuary (Cemex) — Anticipate moving into final stage winter 2008
Area 400 North Dowsing (Hanson) — On hold. No change
Area 439 Inner Dowsing mk2 (Hanson) — Application planned but not begunArea 430 East of Southwold (UMD- CEMEX) — Pre-application advice sought, fee received. Draft ES received, meeting to be held to discuss

(2) Prospecting sites:-

Prospecting licences have been issued for Area 498 North Inner Gabbard (BrittaniaWolker), Area 504 North Falls (Hanson) and Area 501 North Falls East (WGL), which for the latter CE WGL has begun a six week consultation exercise from 15th April.

EU backs CO₂ storage change to OSPAR treaty

Member states of the European Union will shortly endorse amendments to the OSPAR Convention on the Protection of the North East Atlantic Ocean which are designed to legalise the undersea geological storage of carbon dioxide.

These changes reflect an agreement reached in 2007 by the 15 European countries who are party to the OSPAR Convention plus the EU. The text, based on a European Commission proposal, is expected to be be rubber-stamped by Justice Ministers. It will be ratified by OSPAR signatories in September 2010.

The text of the decision by the Council of the European Union may be seen here.

Scientists say Arctic sea-ice melt and sea levels rises are accelerating beyond forecasts

A collection of international scientists have written a report in advance of the Copenhagen Conference on climate change which asserts that global warming trends and effects are accelerating beyond recent forecasts and expectations. In the Press Release on the report, it is stated:

"Global ice-sheets are melting at an increased rate; Arctic sea-ice is disappearing much faster than recently projected, and future sea-level rise is now expected to be much higher than previously forecast, according to a new global scientific synthesis prepared by some of the world's top climate scientists.

"In a special report called 'The Copenhagen Diagnosis', the 26 researchers, most of whom are authors of published IPCC reports, conclude that several important aspects of climate change are occurring at the high end or even beyond the expectations of only a few years ago.

"The report also notes that global warming continues to track early IPCC projections based on greenhouse gas increases. Without significant mitigation, the report says global mean warming could reach as high as 7 degrees Celsius by 2100.

"The Copenhagen Diagnosis, which was a year in the making, documents the key findings in climate change science since the publication of the landmark Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report in 2007.

"The new evidence to have emerged includes:

Satellite and direct measurements now demonstrate that both the Greenland and Antarctic ice-sheets are losing mass and contributing to sea level rise at an increasing rate.
Arctic sea-ice has melted far beyond the expectations of climate models. For example, the area of summer sea-ice melt during 2007-2009 was about 40% greater than the average projection from the 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.
Sea level has risen more than 5 centimetres over the past 15 years, about 80% higher than IPCC projections from 2001. Accounting for ice-sheets and glaciers, global sea-level rise may exceed 1 metre by 2100, with a rise of up to 2 metres considered an upper limit by this time. This is much higher than previously projected by the IPCC. Furthermore, beyond 2100, sea level rise of several metres must be expected over the next few centuries.
In 2008 carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels were ∼40% higher than those in 1990. Even if emissions do not grow beyond today's levels, within just 20 years the world will have used up the allowable emissions to have a reasonable chance of limiting warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius.

"The report concludes that global emissions must peak then decline rapidly within the next five to ten years for the world to have a reasonable chance of avoiding the very worst impacts of climate change.

"To stabilise climate, global emissions of carbon dioxide and other long-lived greenhouse gases need to reach near-zero well within this century, the report states."

The full report is available at www.copenhagendiagnosis.org/download/default.html.

'Cliffhanger' — the ethical and social impact of erosion

'Cliffhanger — A Story of Coastal Erosion', a very moving film of the appalling impact of offshore dredging and managed retreat imposed upon a rural coastal community can be seen here.

Lowestoft's disappearing beaches

Lowestoft, like it's neighbouring resorts, is now rapidly losing its famous holiday beaches. They may well disappear completely this coming Winter, and may well not restore afterwards. However, they will not be replenished by Waveney District Council despite many concerned complaints. The Council spokesman is quoted as saying "The council does not plan to undertake works, or replenish the beach, however monitoring will continue and management measures will be reviewed.

Perhaps this result could be seen as poetic justice, as Waveney District Council is the only local Council who has not once objected to the granting of offshore aggregate dredging licences. That lack of awareness allowing the loss of their holiday beaches could cost them dearly in tourist income, upon which the local economy is highly dependent.

Instead of preventative or curative action they have issued a warning to the public advising them not to attempt to enter large parts of the beach that have now been closed on grounds of public safety.

Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for Norfolk?

Although somewhat speculative, some thought is now being given to establishing three marine conservation areas offshore to Norfolk and Suffolk, these forming part of the twelve currently being considered for the whole of the UK. Such areas must be identified to meet the requirements of two major European directives seeking to provide a network of protected areas for threatened wildlife and habitats.

The East Anglian offshore areas being considered comprise the Inner Dowsing, Race Bank and North Ridge area of the Outer Wash, selected as possible Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) in order to protect biodiversity, as this area is renowned for its sandbanks and Ross Worm reefs. Off north-east Norfolk, the Happisburgh, Hammod and Winterton sandbanks could gain the same protection whilst areas off Great Yarmouth's down to the south could become part of an Outer Thames Estuary Special Protection Area (SPA).

Whilst the Wildlife Trusts welcomed the proposals, Natural England and the JNCC pointed out that they 'are mindful that the sites could impact on marine industries like fishing, wind farms, sand and gravel extraction and the oil and gas industries'.

Feedback over the next three months ahead of the proposals will be submitted to government, after which Ministers will consider the plans and decide which recommendations to submit to the European Commission in August 2010 for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network.

Details of the proposals can be viewed on Natural England's website at www.naturalengland.org.uk whilst formal comment can be made by sending an e-mail to natura2000.consultation@naturalengland.org.uk.

NGOs claim marine conservation zones will protect and save Britain's marine wildlife

In an article in The Observer 8th November 2009 several marine NGO state their belief that the forthcoming passage of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill into law will result in protection and a rebuilding of populations of many of Britain's marine species currently under threat from a variety of activities, including fishing.

In the article Joan Edwards, Head of Marine Policy at The Wildlife Trusts, is quoted: "The Marine and Coastal Access Bill, if effectively implemented, will provide the chance to conserve the thousands of species which inhabit UK waters."

MARINET is less certain. This is because the key instrument for protecting species and habitats, and for rebuilding commercial fish stocks and damaged marine ecosystems, is missing from the Act. This instrument is highly protected marine areas where the primary purpose is to protect the marine ecosystem as a whole within a reserve's boundaries. This marine management instrument is widely used by other maritime countries around the world in order to protect and rebuild marine biodiversity, and its use has been recommended to the UK Government by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution in their 25th report. The UK Government says it believes in the use of highly protected areas, but has failed to include this marine management instrument in the text of the new law.

MARINET, working with Katy Clark, MP for North Ayrshire and Arran, tabled an amendment to the Report Stage of the Marine Bill and Coastal Access Bill in the House of Commons on 26th October 2009. This amendment sought to make the protection of the marine ecosystem as a whole a ground for designating a marine conservation zone (MCZ), in addition to the reasons of protecting marine flora and fauna, marine habitats or types of marine habitat, and features of geological or geomorphological interest which are already cited by the Government as grounds for designating a MCZ.

Despite a filibuster, the amendment was debated and voted upon. The Conservative and Liberal Democrat front benches decided to support the amendment, as did a number of Labour backbench MPs. This compelled the Government to use its Whip in order to refuse the amendment by 158 to 246 votes. A tactical victory for the Government (who say that, in fact, they do believe in highly protected MCZs, whilst excluding them from the Act), but a resounding moral victory for all the MPs and campaigners throughout the country who believe that highly protected marine reserves are essential.

Therefore, MARINET observes, the campaign for highly protected marine reserves continues and the task now will be to hold the Government to "its belief in highly protected MCZs" as the network of MCZs in UK seas is identified over the next two years.

The full text of the Hansard report of the House of Commons Report Stage on 26th October 2009 can be viewed here.

Hull University Report opposing Offshore Aggregate Dredging

Fearing similar results to those wreaked upon our East Anglian seabed and coastline by offshore aggregate dredging, 'Filey Against Dredging' commissioned a report, at a cost said to be £20,000, by the Institute of Estuarine and Coastal Studies at the University of Hull on the consequences and likely outcome of a licence being granted to dredge offshore to Filey.

The December 1991 report was financed by Filey Town Council, added to by voluntary donations from local businesses, organisations and individuals and was supported by the World Wide Fund for Nature UK. It was compiled by the IECS members Dr. M. Elliott, Dr. N. V. Jones, Dr. D. S. Lewis, Dr. J. S. Pethick and Mr. D. G. Symes, with the technical assistance of M. P. Atkinson, C. R. Brickle, N. D. Cutts, S. C. Jacques, D. A. Meakin, B. J. Murphy and C. M. Stapleton and with additional information supplied by Dr. B. Denness, Bureau of Applied Sciences, Isle of Wight, and Dr. J. Hardisty, Unico GeoSystems Ltd., University of Hull with the help of Professor S. J. Lockwood.

Thus the result, the 'Filey Bay Environmental Statement' (© Copyright Filey Against Dredging — all rights reserved) was an independent report from then expert coastal geomorphologists, fishery experts, etc. uncompromised by being dependent upon funding from those dredging organisations who identify, appoint and pay those they select to perform the Environmental Impact Assessments that are accepted by the licensing bodies without any second opinion being permitted.

It is a very long and detailed comprehensive report containing much valuable well researched information, which has a powerful message for those who unhesitatingly accept the assurances constantly given by those supporting the continuity of the exploitation of our offshore seabed.

It serves as an example to local councils faced with similar threats, by showing that the costs of a truly independent assessment are possible, and that the cost involved would undoubtedly be far less than that of the consequences of not doing so.

The report is to be found by visiting www.filey.org.uk/fbes.pdf.

Wish you were here?… preserving America's Beaches

A coastal conference brought leading experts together for the betterment of America's beaches, when coastal experts from around the U.S. gathered to advance the cause of preserving America's shorelines at the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association's (ASBPA) National Coastal Conference on St. Pete Beach at Fort Myers, Florida.

The conference, entitled "Integrating Coastal Science and Policy," was held Oct. 14-16th '09 at the Tradewinds Islands Grande Resort on St. Pete Beach, attended by many delegates over a wide area. The programme included educating attendees on current coastal issues facing the nation, and included a half-day guided field trip with participants travelling by coach and boat for a tour of Treasure Island and Long Key (St. Pete Beach), both segments of the Pinellas County federal shore protection project.

For more information visit www.asbpa.org/conferences/conf_fall_09.htm

New Hope for Norfolk's marine habitat?

The article 'New legal protection for the region's coastline' by Ed Foss in the EDP tells how the marine conservation areas content of the Marine Bill appears to have been widely welcomed by Norfolk Wildlife Trust after ten years of campaigning, both by them and many other conservation organisations, not least MARINET.

Wildlife heads hailed a new dawn of legal protection for the region's "magnificent" marine species and habitats, which up to now have been poorly safeguarded. Norfolk Wildlife Trust Director Brendan Joyce said "Our seas are home to over 44,000 different animals and plants, many of which are declining, and yet until now there has been little protection for marine habitats and species. In Norfolk, coastal waters are important for much wildlife, including common scoters and red-throated divers in winter time. Norfolk's marine wildlife is magnificent, but for most marine species living just offshore, there has been both a lack of public awareness and little protection for even endangered species".

Unmanaged Retreat

The loss of the nudist beach at Corton was described in December 2008 in our Latest News section under 'Nudists Feeling the Pinch'. Since then the sea wall has collapsed, and in mid-October '09 Waveney District Council had to take steps to prevent people from walking on the cliff top above the failure site due to the danger of cliff face collapse.

The full story of the latest happening can be seen under 'Sea wall collapses near Lowestoft', an item in the 20th October '09 Eastern Evening News written by Hayley Mace.

Threat of another oil spill off East Anglia

The prospect of another huge oil spill decimating the Suffolk, Essex and Norfolk coastline due to many massive oil tankers 'parked' off the north Suffolk coast serially transferring Russian oil to maintain the price, raised fear of another catastrophe (see www.marinet.org.uk/regional/stst.html )
In the Eastern Daily Press of 17th November '09 Stephen Pullinger wrote "Ship-to-ship oil transfers off Suffolk set to be banned".
His article reads:

Ship-to-ship oil transfers off the north Suffolk coast, which have raised fears of pollution, could be banned before Christmas. Suffolk Coastal MP John Gummer, who has championed a local campaign to stop the practice, said he had received a personal commitment from secretary of state for transport Lord Adonis that the government would move fast to use its powers to stop transfers in UK waters.

The sea between Lowestoft and Southwold has become a favoured place for small tankers bringing oil from Russia to transfer their cargo to larger vessels unable to negotiate the Baltic Sea. In recent months, more than 30 tankers at a time have been anchored off the Suffolk coast. While local businesses such as hotels, bed and breakfasts, shops and taxis have welcomed the increase in trade from crew members coming ashore, an environmental lobby spearheaded by Mr Gummer and Waveney MP Bob Blizzard has highlighted the potential risks.

Mr Gummer said: "If you want to unload oil in a port, you have to observe proper environmental practices, and yet out to sea, where it is potentially much rougher and a far less safe environment, there are not the same rules. There is a real possibility of pollution along a stretch of coast, which includes Southwold and Aldeburgh, where a lot of people make their living from tourism." He acknowledged the boost to the local economy but said that would be the case if they came into port to transfer oil in a regulated way. Mr Gummer said he hoped the ban in oil transfers would also help to reduce the number of ships using the area as a parking place as even cleaning out tanks and cleaning decks posed a risk of pollution.

A spokesman for the Department for Transport said: "Ship-to-ship transfer operations have been common in UK waters for many years, with an excellent safety record both in terms of potential accidents and the impact on the environment. But, we have long said we are keen to ensure such operations are man-aged appropriately, which is why the Maritime and Coastguard Agency consulted on proposals last summer to regulate this practice. These proposals are under consideration."

A Flood Barrier for Great Yarmouth?

Yarmouth flood barrier plans back on the agenda

Anthony Carroll writes in the Eastern Daily Press of 18th November '09 that the Environment Agency are reconsidering establishing a multi-million pound barrier across the River Yare to protect Great Yarmouth and the adjacent low laying areas, and to prevent the environmental destruction of the Norfolk Broads and its villages. (And any Norfolkian will readily tell you that this is far more important than Westminster)

For his full story see 'Yarmouth flood barrier plan 'back on the agenda'.

Lord Smith's Olive Branch of Compensation

The item "Hope of compensation over threatened coastal homes" written by Anthony Carroll in the Eastern Daily Press of 9th November tells how Lord Smith, Chairman of the Environment Agency, has proposed that those losing their homes due to the dictates of 'Managed Retreat' be offered compensation for their loss, by the provision of funding from the local Council to purchase and then lease back up to 250 homes that are likely to fall into the sea over the next 20 years due to failure to protect.

The government's Coastal Change Policy had earlier suggested that home owners should receive up to £6,000 if they lose their homes because sea defences are given up, but under Lord Smith's new suggestion councils would buy properties at their original pre-blight value and then lease them back to the owners until such time as they became uninhabitable.

This new proclamation has been welcomed in comments from one North Norfolk coastal campaigner who was "absolutely delighted" hailing it as "the biggest step forward in ten year's" further commenting "this clearly has the stamp of social justice on it and is very welcome indeed".

But MARINET has other ideas and fears a hidden agenda, Pat Gowen commenting:

Whilst Lord Smith's proposition may appear as good news to those threatened with the loss of their homes due to historical government dictate and myopia, it is decidedly not so for the local economy and the environment as a whole. Lord Smith estimated that between 200 and 250 properties were likely to fall into the sea in Norfolk, Suffolk and Lincolnshire in the next 20 years, whilst in fact over 2,000 properties are at risk.

Where initially the government's Coastal Change Policy suggested that homeowners should receive up to £6,000 should they lose their homes when sea defences were abandoned, under Lord Smith's new proposal local councils would purchase these properties at their original pre-blighted value to then lease them back to the owners until the time came when they become uninhabitable. But thus the area's population would probably still have to pay any such compensation through the wider area poll tax.

This approach is not good news for the environment and the overall local economy, as tourist income derived from beaches, amenity value, infrastructure and businesses in coastal and low laying inland resorts will continue to be lost to due to the crumbling cliffs and dunes, the undermined sea defences, the disappearing beaches and the encroaching sea. Furthermore, what's left of the fishing industry would continue to decline. What is even more, the move may be seen as divisive, as it would undoubtedly marginalise the support of many thousands prior supporting the preservation and conservation of our overall coastal environment and its income once their personal impact appears to be part-relieved.

The approach needed is not to deal with a small part of the results of the ongoing situation but to stop the escalating erosion at source, by addressing the cause of sea rise, by outlawing offshore aggregate dredging and by the provision of adequate defences, and to levy the cost of these measures to those who have profited by them.

'Managed Retreat' needs to become 'Managed Defence' and 'Making Room for Water' should become 'Making No Room for Exploitation'.

Research fish catch programme terminated in Lowestoft

An important research programme that up to now has allowed a group of Lowestoft fishermen to land fish above their quotas has been scrapped. To date just ten boats from the port have been taking part in an environmentally responsible fishing programme launched last year by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).

The scheme, which involved 31 under-10m fishing boats from Lowestoft, Hartlepool and the Thames Estuary, has been providing data about fish stocks off the east coast since August last year. Participants were allowed to land everything they caught above their quotas on specifically allocated days to allow scientists to discover more about the numbers and types of fish living in the North Sea. But in early November the fishermen involved in the scheme were contacted by DEFRA who said that the project had been closed because of the large amounts of fish being landed.

The fishermen considered the closure as a "really frustrating situation" because the programme was created to give a proper picture of stocks in the sea, when last year was an exceptional year for cod, and the catch rate in the Lowestoft area was particularly high. They stated that this past year was quite different because of the warmer summer, and it is those cycles (which take about five years to come round) that this study was supposed to provide meaningful evidence to the scientists. The fishermen thus wondered just how this termination was supposed to show DEFRA how much fish there is to catch when DEFRA stopped the project so abruptly. Their boats are now restricted to their normal quota of 500kg of cod per month. Since it costs around £300 a day to run a boat and the cod fetches about £2 per kilogram, this sudden closure has angered them.

A DEFRA spokesman said "that they had taken the decision to close the Environmentally Responsible Fishing (ERF) programme after the latest analysis of catch data showed higher levels of catch than anticipated. The ERF findings will be a key element of the evidence base for the Sustainable Access to Inshore Fisheries (SAIF) project."

UK South West fishermen angry over new EU fishing proposals

The following item appeared in the Western Morning News, 17th October 2009. MARINET observes that the EU Common Fisheries Policy is currently being considered for reform, and many of the issues featured in this article clearly need to be resolved. If people have proposals for reform, they should be submitted to the European Commission by 31st December 2009 see, http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/reform
The Western Morning News reports:

The Westcountry fishing industry could be devastated by strict new EU fishing quotas which Brussels wants to impose on the region to give endangered fish stocks a chance to recover. Industry insiders warned the European Commission's ruling could send fish prices soaring and raised fears the move could simply lead to increasing numbers of endangered fish being dumped overboard. There are also fears more fish could be imported as restaurants and suppliers turn to overseas markets to keep costs down — adding a further blow to the region's already struggling fishing industry.

Conservation measures for desperately depleted cod have not delivered the promised revival of supplies — partly because of continued over-fishing exceeding agreed quota limits. Now EU Fisheries Commissioner Joe Borg is recommending cuts of up to 25 per cent in permitted catches for cod and other main species next year. Last night, members of the fishing community and business chiefs united in their condemnation of the ruling, which they warned could send shockwaves to those livelihoods and businesses which depend on the fishing industry. The proposal by Mr Borg to cut permitted catches for some species of fish is the latest blow to the Westcountry's fishing trade.

Tim Jones, chairman of the Devon and Cornwall Business Council, told the Western Morning News the ruling was a major blow to the region. "Cornwall and Devon have built up a niche market around specialist fish and that market is price-sensitive. This quota will have an enormous impact on the fishing community and those who rely upon it. We are facing devastating consequences, and yet again, European legislation does not take into account the impact of fishing generally on the community."

Although the EU's figures are provisional and will not be decided until December, those within the industry fear they are "over-cautious" and are based on "out-of-date and inaccurate science". Fishermen have been told for years they must endure short-term sacrifices to allow main fish stocks to recover and secure the fishing industry's long-term future. But yesterday's proposals acknowledge that stocks are still in dire straits, with fleets accused of prolonging the agony by exceeding annual catch quotas and delaying the time when fish are plentiful once more.

Paul Trebilcock, chief executive of Cornish Fish Producers Organisation, stressed the Commission's proposed quota was still up for negotiation. "This can cause unnecessary alarm, but yes, the quota could have an impact on fish prices. I suspect that they may be being over-cautious, and we will work with them to negotiate. I think we know the direction we want to go in and there are discussions to be had yet."

Former fisherman Mick Mahon, who fished waters around the globe, said a one-year quota never had an impact on the amount of fish caught. Mr Mahon, from Praa Sands in Cornwall, added: "A reduction in the quota will mean one thing — more fish being dumped. And the price of fish may not increase either. Fish is traded worldwide now so it may mean more is imported."

Jim Portus, chief executive of South West Fish Producers agreed. "Some of the fish stocks would not rise an awful lot. In fact, there would be zero change in some." But Brixham-based Mr Portus, who is also chairman of the UK Association of Fish Producers, criticised the science behind the Commission's projections. The science is out of date, dangerous and very sketchy. The problem is that the information does not get used immediately — instead, it may have an impact on fish stocks in the years ahead." He added that the European Commission had published the information earlier than usual to ensure that there was the "widest possible debate" about the proposals.

A Government spokesman said the latest proposals — published ahead of the annual quota-fixing negotiations between EU fisheries ministers in December — would be considered carefully in the coming weeks. "The scientific prognosis for most stocks is not encouraging, with many in a worse state than last year."

Meanwhile, Padstow-based seafood chef Rick Stein has reportedly vowed to go on using endangered species of fish in his restaurants despite warnings of over-fishing. He has reportedly questioned whether the fish stocks situation is really as bad as the Government and marine conservationists are saying.

Legal Clout for the Environment

In The Times of 26th September columnist Simon Barnes reports how ClientEarth, a small charity group of lawyers are taking on a Goliath by using the Aarhus Convention to challenge the EU, because it does not allow environmental groups to bring cases to the European Court of Justice. They took on the UK in Geneva this week, using the Port of Tyne case heralded by Bob Latimer as an illustration.

To see the whole report please see 'This time the lawyers have my support… because they are working on the right side in the Port of Tyne case' here on the Times website.

Escalating South West Coast Erosion

174 miles (280km) of Britain's south west coastline is now critically threatened by escalating erosion, including Studland Beach in Dorset, South Milton Sands and Godrevy in Devon and St Michael's Mount and Cotehele Quay in Cornwall.

The BBC reports the concern of the National Trust, which owns 35% of the coastline, in its 'Shifting Shores' report. Yet amazingly the NT continues to state that 'little can be done' and that 'nature should take its course'! To the best of our knowledge they have never opposed offshore dredging.

The full reports can be seen under 'Beach fears over coastal erosion# at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7799234.stm and under 'Trust's fear over coastal erosion' at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/7665333.stm

EA Announces Flood Protection Plans

The 'Engineer on Line' published on 10th November 2009 reported that The Environment Agency has announced plans to increase flood protection to 200,000 homes and businesses in England and Wales by 2015. Under the heading "The Agency to increase flood protection" the news reported from the EA annual conference in London the corporate strategy for increasing flood protection to 200,000 homes and businesses in England and Wales by 2015, due to more properties facing an increasing risk of coastal erosion and flooding from rivers and the sea due to climate change and population growth.

Robert Runcie, Environment Agency director of flooding and coastal-erosion risk management said:that the number of properties in England and Wales at significant risk of flooding could increase from 570,000 in 2009 to over 900,000 by 2035 at current levels of flood-defence investment. Since 2007, the Environment Agency has completed 102 flood-defence schemes protecting over 63,000 additional homes in England and Wales. Earlier this year, construction started on a £50m defence project to protect 16,000 properties in Nottingham and work has recently begun on the final stage of a £29m scheme in Weston-Super-Mare to protect 4500 homes and businesses from the risk of coastal flooding. Work is also well underway at Dymchurch, Kent, where a £60m scheme is increasing protection to 2,471 residential properties and 7,672 hectares of agricultural land.

The Environment Agency is already planning to manage a predicted 1m rise in sea levels. The Thames Barrier and its associated schemes, which protect 1.25m people across the capital, will need to be upgraded or replaced by 2070 to cope with the effects of climate change. By 2115, a predicted 10 per cent increase in wave heights and wind speeds will increase the threat from coastal surges.

Peter Boggis battles on… Pat Gowen's thoughts about the issue

Peter Boggis standing outside the Royal Court of Justice

There can be only one reasonable assumption as to why Natural England are so dedicated on using public money to promote, aid and abet the erosion of our coastline when it could and should be used for its protection. The only logical explanation is that further supplies of aggregate will become available for dredging and so benefit The Crown Estate, the governments aims and ambitions of 'Managed Retreat', the Treasury VAT take, and the pockets of the dredging industry shareholders. The fossils they claim to protect will be lost if erosion continues, but preserved if it is stabilsed, which practice they should be upholding.

A series of new media items are now avaliable on Peter Boggis's continuing and relentless struggle. There's 'Anger over state of stretch of north Suffolk coastline' describing the appearance of the cliff base, to be seen on the Eastern Daily Press website

… and there's 'Retired engineer vows to continue sea defence battle' that may be seen by by visiting here:

… and …

'Cliff erosion row misery for retired engineer' to be found by going here:

… and finally there's an excellent BBC-TV video to be seen on the topic by visiting here.

Conference highlights the importance of Marine Spatial Planning

We provide below the text of a report prepared by Lesley Hampshire, Isle of Wight FOE and Marinet member, on the C-Scope (Combining Sea and Coastal Planning in Europe) conference in Dorset on 19-20th October 2009. Marine Spatial Planning is an essential part of the Ecosystem approach to marine management and will establish the priorities between different conservation, social and economic uses of the sea in local areas, and is a main feature of the UK Marine Bill, shortly to receive Royal Assent. Marine Spatial Planning is akin to the current system town and country planning on land, and will be administered in the UK by the Marine Management Organisation, shortly to be established in Newcastle.

The full set of papers presented at the C-Scope conference may be viewed at their website www.dorsetforyou.com/C-SCOPE_MSP_Conference. We would particularly draw your attention to the following C-Scope conference papers:

Kate Thomson : The Firth of Clyde Marine Spatial Plan
Mick Bishop : Great Barrier Reef Marine Park
Lorraine Gray : A Marine Spatial Plan for the Shetland Islands

Also, The Firth of Clyde Marine Spatial Plan (MSP) has been developed by the Scottish Government as a pilot MSP project, and therefore how marine spatial plans may actually function can be seen from this specific example. In order to view this work, visit www.clydeforum.com/ssmei

Lesley Hampshire's Report on Marine Spatial Planning Conference, 19-20 October 2009:

"I attended this conference on the Isle of Portland, Dorset to represent Isle of Wight FOE (IWFoE). The aim of the gathering was to build on existing knowledge by bringing together international, national and local speakers to explore the theory, practice and future of Marine Spatial Planning. The 120 or so delegates represented such organisations as the Environment Agency, Natural England, The National Trust, WWF, English Heritage, The Crown Estate, Defra, and the EU together with government officials from the Isle of Man, Scotland and Wales. Local councils, businesses, sailing associations, fishermen, port authorities, diving clubs, universities (and of course IWFoE) also sent representatives so the gathering was truly diverse. Presentations were (sensibly) limited to 20 minutes which gave a large number of speakers the chance to contribute and we learnt about projects in places as varied as Belgium, the Shetland Isles, the Baltic and the Great Barrier Reef as well as those nearer home. On day 2 there were also workshop sessions on such topics as 'Indicators and their use for Marine Spatial Planning at the local level.'

"With its wealth of natural resources, the UK coast is under continuous and increasing pressure. Many activities such as fishing, dredging, shipping, tourism and marine energy are competing for the same space but until recently, planning and management at the coast has been complex and disjointed. The new Marine and Coastal Access Bill is currently going through its final stages in Parliament and by this means the government hopes to simplify the process with a more integrated approach. One of the ways to achieve this is through a process known as Marine Spatial Planning. It is a system that has been 'borrowed' and adapted from proven land-based planning techniques and is a way of managing, protecting and regulating the marine environment, taking into account the many users and uses of the coast.

"The conference was hosted by the Dorset Coast Forum (DCF), and C-SCOPE (Combining Sea and Coastal Planning in Europe). These two organisations joined forces and secured a European grant worth €1.8 million, part of which is being used to pilot a Marine Spatial Plan for a section of the Dorset coast. The area chosen covers approximately 1000 square kilometres of coastal waters between Durlston Head and Portland Bill, out to 12 nautical miles. It was selected because it includes the waters where the 2012 Olympic sailing events will be held. Also it includes a variety of coastline types and has a wide range of uses.
"The most important thing about the project is that it will be driven by local users of the coast and over the next three years there will be workshops, meetings and coastal 'surgeries' to ensure that everyone who wants to get involved can do so. Information on the Marine Management Area (MMA) will be accessible through touch-screen Coastal Explorer Access Points. The planning tool will contain all the information layers of the Geographic Information System (GIS) map which covers not only details of how, when and where different sectors (e.g. tourism, shipping, fishing) use the area but also detailed seabed survey data and international, national and local policies that apply within the MMA. This all-encompassing approach should simplify the making of future marine planning decisions. There is a great deal that we on the Isle of Wight can learn from this project and I'm grateful to have been given the opportunity to attend the conference."

The vital rôle of Ocean Floor flora

The Times on Line of October 14th reports how Marine plant life, though covering less than 1 per cent of the world's seabed, holds the secret to the prevention of global warming. The item details how the now rapidly disappearing salt marshes and seagrass beds lock away well over half of all carbon to be buried in the ocean floor.

Yet another good reason to outlaw Offshore Aggregate Dredging, now to abate Global Warming.

For the full report go to 'Marine plant life holds the secret to preventing global warming' here.

Offshore Windfarms at Docking Shoal and The Race Bank

photograph showing a line of windturbines

It would appear that the truly massive £725m 270Mw Centrica (parent company of British Gas) Offshore Windfarm at Docking Shoal and The Race Bank, off the Lincolnshire/Norfolk Coast, is to go ahead, with construction beginning in 2010.

MARINET earlier questioned this proposal, on grounds of the disturbance and distribution of potentially smothering silt when channelling in the seabed cables, on the likely low frequency vibration impact and the likelihood of any induced disturbing electromagnetic effects from the power lines, etc.

The Race Bank has already been impacted by the decimation of the crab stocks brought about by ongoing offshore aggregate dredging. The licence to permit this was strongly objected to by CEEFAS, MARINET, the NSAG and the fishermen but nevertheless the operation was given the go-ahead.

On the windfarm proposal, Pat Gowen) o.b.o. MARINET wrote on 18th September '09 to Jennifer Wilson, Environmental Officer and Kathy Wood of AMEC saying:

"I regret that my huge and varied workload has prevented me from taking the amount of time really needed to go further into investigations of my concerns with the establishment of the Docking Shoal and Race Bank Offshore Wind Farms.

"As you are well aware, my main concerns addressed to you were/are of the potential impact upon the crab population, on the degree of siltation smothering of the surrounding sea and downtide seabed and its flora/fauna brought about in the course of excavating the channels for the windfarm to shore power lines, and on the potential electromagnetic field impact upon fish navigation.

"Whilst it is apparent that more work needs to be done on these issues, it is also obvious from the literature that you have kindly supplied to me on that research already performed, that established and that intended, that these factors are being taken seriously into account. I am happy that you are now fully aware of these potential impacts and that such work to fully evaluate will be undertaken.

"Such covers my remit. I will be content if the outcome of these studies conclusively proves that any impact from any or all of the above concerns is benign, and thus should not need bother you further on this issue. However, it would reassure me if you were able to inform me of the outcome of the investigations.

"I rest my case. Thank you again for your thorough communications on this matter".

They replied, writing:

"On behalf of Kathy Wood, thank you for your email of the 18th September, regarding the proposed Docking Shoal and Race Bank Offshore Wind Farms. We're pleased to read that you are happy with Centrica's awareness of the issues you have raised, and I can assure you that the potential impacts on the flora and fauna of the region, including the crab populations, will continue to be a priority for Centrica as the projects progress.

"With regards to the outcomes of investigations into the potential impacts of offshore wind farms on the environment, we will be happy to inform you of significant further information in this area as it becomes available in the future. In the meantime, we would direct you to the COWRIE website (www.offshorewind.co.uk/Pages/COWRIE), where details of new research can be found, and the Centrica website (www.centricaenergy.com/renewables), which contains the latest information regarding the two projects, including the recently submitted Supplementary Environmental Information.

"Thank you again for your interest in the proposed Docking Shoal and Race Bank Offshore Wind Farm projects, and if you have any further queries in the future, please do not hesitate to contact myself or Kathy"

The relative documents can be seen by visiting: www.offshorewindfarms.co.uk/Pages/Search_Results/?SearchTerm=emf and www.berr.gov.uk/files/file43528.pdf

Protecting the West African Coastline from Erosion

The United Nations News Service explains how the precious West African Coastline (Mauritania, Senegal, Gambia, Guinea Bissau, and the Cape Verde Islands) currently suffering serious erosion due to the combination of sand extraction and climate change, needs to be protected by national and regional pilot projects schemes and ICZMs with funding from UNDP/GEF.

For the full story please visit the ACCC website

The ongoing battle in the north-east

Here follows a series of items from the press showing how Bob Latimer's tenacity and stickability in long opposing and addressing the bathing water quality of his local beach and the toxic sludge dumped to sea near Whitburn is gaining ground.
It gives an excellent example that tenacity is effective, and that despite the tortuous odds, one should never give up.

The picture on the left taken by Bob Latimer, shows condoms, sanitary towels, tampons and faeces being placed to the sea at at Whitburn South in Sunderland

From Home News North East of September 13th 2009, an article by Mike Kelly:

Storm clouds over North East's dirty sea water

Bathing water was described as "excellent" despite hundreds of items of sewage being found on the beach the same day, it has been revealed. Resident Bob Latimer has council documents that said on August 1, 2008, there was so much waste it was "not able to estimate" the amount. Yet the Environment Agency had labelled the bathing water at Whitburn South in Sunderland as "excellent".

Mr Latimer has several other council papers which reveal the same EA description on and around dates when sewage debris had been found.

Whitburn South — or Roker — is one of five UK beaches at the centre of a European Commission legal challenge about the treatment and discharge of sewage in this country.

An EA spokesman said sewage debris does not necessarily affect the bathing quality of water. "Bathing water quality at beaches is judged by bacteria levels. Bacteria die off rapidly when exposed to the elements, whereas sewage litter — largely plastic items flushed by householders — can be washed around the coast for decades before landing on a beach."

Concerns about possible health risks on beaches including some in the North were raised on Monday's BBC Panorama programme which detailed how after years of improvement, bathing water quality had began to deteriorate in the last couple of years.

Last year saw a 23 per cent decline in recommended North beaches in the Good Beach Guide. Meanwhile, the number attaining the minimum European "mandatory" standard was 38pc in 2008, compared to just 12pc in 2006, with the rest gaining the higher "guideline" standard.

According to the Marine Conservation Society which publishes the Good Beach Guide, people bathing at "mandatory" level beaches run the risk of being hit by diseases like the stomach bug, gastroenteritis, with one in seven bathes. A spokesman said: "That figure is according to the World Health Organisation."

A spokesman for Northumbrian Water, which supplies the region's water and treats waste water, said: "We have made huge strides and brought vast improvement to bathing waters and the environment. We're not complacent and will continue to bring further improvement in the future."

= = = = = = = = = =

From Mike Kelly's report in the Sunday Sun of 13th September 2009:

What lurks in our waves?

FEARS were expressed last week about the potential health hazards on North beaches. So how safe are our waters? On August 1, 2008, the water quality of the sea at Whitburn South beach in Sunderland was given an "excellent" grade by the Environment Agency. Yet on that day a Sunderland City Council report said there was so much sewage on the very same beach it could not be counted.

Local campaigner, Bob Latimer, said: "In other reports they've counted up to 8000 items at Hendon. So you just can guess at the amount they must have found." There have been other occasions when this has happened, too, but the EA claimed there is no contradiction.

A spokesman said: "Bathing water quality at Roker (Whitburn South) and Seaburn (Whitburn North) beaches is judged by bacteria levels. Bacteria die off rapidly when exposed to the elements, whereas sewage litter — largely plastic items flushed by householders — can be washed around for decades before landing on a beach."

It's safe to assume Bob isn't on the Christmas card list of Northumbrian Water Ltd, which is responsible for the region's water. Likewise the EA which sets the guidelines within which Northumbrian Water operates.

Since a storm water pumping station was built near his home in Whitburn, Sunderland, Bob has highlighted what he sees as overuse of combined sewer outlets which pump storm water and sewage into rivers and sea during heavy rainfall. It is supposed to be a last resort — if it did not happen there is the risk of the effluent washing back into people's homes — yet Bob and the group Surfers Against Sewage allege: "Whitburn is used so regularly that some see it as part of the sewage treatment process instead of a last resort." Northumbrian Water and the Environment Agency vehemently deny this.

Emotive pictures of raw sewage running onto beaches were broadcast. Yet still Blue Flags saying it was safe to bathe there were flown. And most people don't know what has been washed onto the beach as there are no apparent publics warnings when the CSOs have discharged.

More worrying still is the fact that of the 776 UK beaches tested, 43% reached the minimum European quality standard. The figure for the North East is 38%. According to the Marine Conservation Society, that means people have a one-in-seven chance of getting gastroenteritis when they go into the sea or onto our beaches. Thomas Bell of the MCS which publishes the Good Beach Guide said: "That figure is according to the World Health organisation."

Andy Cummins, born in Tynemouth, North Tyneside, is spokesman for the Surfers Against Sewage group. He said over recent months numerous surfers had filled in questionnaires on its website relating to health problems suffered after they surfed off UK beaches including some in the North. Andy said he could not give personal details of those who were struck down as the questionnaire was confidential. He added: "We've been seeing CSOs discharge 10 or 20 times in the bathing season. When this happens people need to be made aware."

There are 20,000 CSOs in the UK, 1470 of which are in the region.

According to Alistair Baker, PR and communications manager of Northumbrian Water, their use is policed by the EA which in turn sets the operating standard by EU guidelines. He said: "During the period 2005 to 2010 we will have invested £85 million to upgrade and screen 481 CSOs. Since 1995 we have spent £750 million on investment to clean up the coastal waters."

Climate change is creating a wetter environment meaning CSOs are operating more often while it also adds to the run off from agricultural land. There are many other contributing factors, down to the non-permeable flagstones used on home driveways which are generating concentrated masses of water which are affecting the country's drainage system.

The problem stems from the Victorian sewage system which is the basis of the network which combines sewage and surface water.

The EA spokesman commented: "We want to see the separation of sewage and surface water in future developments, rather than combined sewer overflows, and we are working with farmers to prevent chemicals and manure from running off their land and into the sea.

"Bathing water samples are collected by us at every one of our 495 designated bathing waters once a week — 20 times during the bathing season. They are then tested at our accredited laboratory within 24 hours and we give the information to councils and local organisations on a weekly basis."

= = = = = = = = = =

Campaigner's bid to take polluters to court, 2nd October 2009.

A CLEAN-UP campaigner is taking on the Government over toxic sludge dumped off the coast at Whitburn. Bob Latimer is part of a legal battle about people's rights to raise allegations of environmental damage in court which has now reached the United Nations (UN). The businessman and former engineer, from Bents Road, claims that financial risks prevent anyone taking legal action over green issues.

UN officials in Geneva, Switzerland, have started hearing evidence in the case, which could have wider ramifications if Mr Latimer and the Marine Conservation Society (MCS) win. "It will give people the chance to take on big corporations in court and keep them in check," he said.

The case claims that Mr Latimer and the MCS have been prevented from challenging an alleged breach of environmental laws relating to a Port of Tyne Authority project. It was given a licence to dump thousands of tonnes of waste dredged from the Tyne's dock areas contaminated with toxic substances such as arsenic and mercury from the shipbuilding industry under the sea off Souter Point. The waste was capped by sand and silt, but campaigners say that because of the wave energy of the North Sea, there is a "grave environmental threat of the toxic substances escaping into the marine environment outside the dispersal site".

Their legal case is that alleged breaches of environmental laws and a perceived lack of an adequate environmental impact assessment cannot be challenged in court because of "unreasonable" financial risks.

Mr Latimer and the MCS are being represented in court by a team of activist lawyers from ClientEarth. They are arguing that the UK has breached the Aarhaus Convention, an international agreement it ratified in 1998 and which says individuals should not be prevented from taking environmental cases to court due to cost.

"Until the UK makes the legal system accessible and fair from a financial perspective, citizens and many organisations are in effect denied their right to raise legitimate environmental concerns in court."

A decision by the UN is expected within three months.

The Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs has previously said that a licence was given to the Port of Tyne for dredged waste disposal after a detailed environmental impact assessment, and consultations were conducted with organisations including the Environment Agency and English Nature.

= = = = = = = = = =

Finally, an item by Tim Booler published in the Sunderland Echo on Thursday 1st October 2009:

Clean-up legal battle reaches United Nations

A clean-up campaigner is taking on the Government over toxic sludge dumped off the coast at Whitburn. Bob Latimer is part of a legal battle about people's rights to challenge allegations of environmental damage in court which has reached the United Nations (UN). The businessman and former engineer, from Bents Road, claims that financial risks prevent anyone taking legal action over green issues.

UN officials in Geneva, Switzerland, have started hearing evidence in the case, which could have wider ramifications if Mr Latimer and the Marine Conservation Society (MCS), win. "It will give people the chance to take on big corporations in court and keep them in check," he said.

The case claims that Mr Latimer and the MCS have been prevented from challenging an alleged breach of environmental laws relating to a Port of Tyne Authority project.

It was given a licence to dump thousands of tonnes of waste dredged from the Tyne's dock areas "contaminated with toxic substances such as arsenic and mercury from the shipbuilding industry" under the sea off Souter Point. The waste was capped by sand and silt, but campaigners say that because of the wave energy of the North Sea, there is a "grave environmental threat of the toxic substances escaping into the marine environment outside the dispersal site".

The legal battle is that alleged breaches of environmental laws, and a perceived lack of an adequate environmental impact assessment, cannot be challenged in court because of "unreasonable" financial risks.

Mr Latimer and the MCS are being represented in court by a team activist lawyers from ClientEarth. They are arguing that the UK has breached the Aarhaus Convention, an international agreement it ratified in 1998 and says individuals should not be prevented from taking environmental cases to court due to cost.

James Thornton, of ClientEarth, said: "Not only is it prohibitively expensive to bring cases in the UK, the financial risk of losing a court challenge and having to pay the opposition's legal expenses can amount to £100,000s. Until the UK makes the legal system accessible and fair from a financial perspective, citizens and many organisations are in effect denied their right to raise legitimate environmental concerns in court."

A decision by the UN is expected within three months.

The Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs has previously said that a licence was given to the Port of Tyne dredged waste disposal after a detailed environmental impact assessment and consultation with organisations including the Environment Agency and English Nature.

Activists fight to save 'people's law on the environment'

Up to now there has been a major impediment to those suffering from environmental damage who cannot afford to mount a legal case. The system was highly assistive to the well heeled exploiters who benefit, but extremely restrictive to those who do not, so preventing a fair decision. Now some hope is in sight, as seen in the following item from The Ecologist of 23rd September 2009.

Ruling would allow NGOs and individuals to challenge environmental damage in courts without prohibitive financial risks

A team of activist lawyers are to start a legal challenge to get UK courts to accept Aarhus Convention on access to justice. In a case being heard by the UN in Geneva tomorrow, lawyers from ClientEarth will argue that bad environmental decisions are not being challenged because of the unreasonable financial risks of bringing a case to court.

Under the Aarhus Convention, ratified both in the EU and UK in 1998, NGO's and individuals should not be denied because of the prohibitive costs of bringing cases.

Recently, the Marine Conservation Society was unable to mount a legal challenge against allegations of toxic waste dumping near the Port of Tyne, Newcastle, because of fears over the potentially crippling costs of losing the case.

'Not only is it prohibitively expensive to bring cases in the UK,' said ClientEarth CEO James Thornton, 'the financial risk of losing a court challenge and having to pay the opposition's legal expenses can amount to £100,000s. Until the UK makes the legal system accessible and fair from a financial perspective, citizens and many organisations are in effect denied their right to raise legitimate environmental concerns in court.'

A decision on ClientEarth's case is expected within three months.

EC to take the UK to Court over Waste Water Directive 91/271/EEC

In no small part due to the perseverance and tenacity of Bob Latimer in dealing with the appalling sewage outfall at his Whitburn locale, the European Commission issued the following Press Release at 11 am on Thursday 8th October.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION PRESS RELEASE — 8 Storey's Gate, London SW1P 3AT — http://ec.europa.eu/uk

European Commission takes UK to European Court of Justice over waste water collection systems

The European Commission has today decided to take the United Kingdom to the European Court of Justice over non-compliance with EU environment legislation. The Commission is concerned that the urban waste water collecting systems and treatment facilities in London and Whitburn in North East England are inadequate and a threat to human health.

European Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said: "More attention needs to be paid to upgrading collecting systems to ensure full compliance with EU legislation on waste water treatment. Such investment will bring enormous benefits in terms of improving the quality of the environment."The Commission is taking action because it believes that the waste water collecting systems in London and Whitburn are being allowed to spill untreated waste waters from storm water overflows (known as 'combined sewer overflows' in the UK) too frequently and in excessive quantities. The Commission is also concerned that treatment capacity for the waste waters collected in London is in need of improvement. These shortcomings amount to an infringement of the 1991 EU directive on urban waste water treatment.

The directive required EU member states to put in place adequate waste water collecting systems and treatment facilities for large towns and cities by the end of 2000. The waste waters collected are required to undergo appropriate treatment before they are released. The directive provides that collecting systems and treatment plants may be allowed to spill waste water in certain situations such as emergency shutdowns or unusually heavy rainfall, but the spills being authorised in these two cases are excessive and go beyond what the legislation provides for.

Untreated waste water can be a serious threat to human health, since untreated waste water can carry harmful bacteria and viruses into waters used for bathing or other related forms of recreation. Untreated waste water also contains nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous, which can damage the marine environment by promoting excessive growth of algae that chokes off other life.

Legal Process

Article 226 of the Treaty gives the Commission powers to take legal action against a member state that is not respecting its obligations.

If the Commission considers that there may be such an infringement of EU law that warrants the opening of an infringement procedure, it addresses a "letter of formal notice" (first written warning) to the member state concerned, requesting it to submit its observations within a specified period, usually within two months.

In the light of the reply or absence of a reply from the member state concerned, the Commission may decide to address a "reasoned opinion" (final written warning) to the member state. This clearly and definitively sets out the reasons why it considers there to have been an infringement of EU law and calls upon the member state to comply within a specified period, normally two months.

If the member state fails to comply with the Reasoned Opinion, the Commission may decide to bring the case before the European Court of Justice. Where the Court of Justice finds that the Treaty has been infringed, the offending member state is required to take the measures necessary to conform.

Article 228 of the EU Treaty gives the Commission power to act against a member state that does not comply with a previous judgement of the European Court of Justice. The article also allows the Commission to ask the Court to impose a financial penalty on the member state concerned.

For current statistics on infringements in general, see: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/implementation_en.htm
For more information, please contact the London press office on 020 7973 1971.

To see the history of Britain's failure to meet the Waste Water rulings do a Google Search on the MARINET website using the key words 'Waste Water'.

Coastal access plan 'a waste of cash'

From the Eastern Daily Press of 28th October '09, journalist Ed Foss comes the CLA's comments on that part of the Marine Bill dealing with Coastal Access.

A country lobby group has said the government could save the public purse tens of millions of pounds by scrapping “unnecessary and unwarranted” proposals for a statutory right of access to the English coast. The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the relevant part of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill, which started its final passage through parliament on Monday, would be far more costly than it needed to be. The CLA urged MPs to take the opportunity to save nearly £50m by scrapping the contentious coastal access section in order to ensure the rest of the bill can be implemented.

“Access to the coast — where it doesn't already exist — can be better provided using existing legislation such as the Highways Act and for a far more modest sum,” said Rob Wise, coastal access adviser for the CLA eastern region. “Our arithmetic shows the government can deliver a better outcome for less than £1m, yet the cost, as it stands, will be almost £50m. We are in the middle of the deepest and longest recession since records began. How can ministers seriously justify spending on what is no more than political posturing?”

The CLA said the government's own figures proved that only 8% of the English coast is genuinely inaccessible. Over 84% already has access.

“Creating a new public footpath using the Highways Act costs about £2 per metre which means that providing access to the 8pc of the coast where access doesn't exist could be done for around £700,000,” said Mr Wise. “The grandiose scheme the government is proposing simply isn't necessary — it could better and more cheaply meet the needs of the public by using existing legislation.”

Atlantic cod stocks still collapsed or near collapse

The following article appeared in the Huffington Post, 16th October 2009:

BRUSSELS — Cod is slipping closer to disappearing from key European fishing grounds, officials warned Friday, saying that only steep catch cuts will prevent the disappearance of a species prized for centuries for its flaky white flesh.

The European Union's executive body called for sharp cuts in the amount of cod fisherman can catch next year — up to 25 percent in some areas. The European Commission said recent studies showed cod catches in some areas are far outstripping the rate of reproduction.

Scientists estimated that in the 1970s there were more than 250,000 tons of cod in fishing grounds in the North Sea, eastern English Channel and Scandinavia's Skagerrak strait. In recent years, however, stocks have dropped to 50,000 tons.

"We are not that far away from a situation of complete collapse," said Jose Rodriguez, a marine biologist with the environmental group Oceana. He and other environmentalists said pressure from the fishing industry had kept quotas at levels too high to sustain a viable populations around Europe, while lack of enforcement meant illegal fishing made the problem worse.

The European Commission said Friday it would seek in 2010 to cut the catch in some fishing grounds around Britain, France, Spain and much of Scandinavia from 5,700 tons to 4,250 tons.

In the Mediterranean, bluefin tuna has been overfished for years to satisfy increasing world demand for sushi and sashimi. The tuna population is now a fraction of what it was a few decades ago, but the EU's Mediterranean nations last month refused to impose even a temporary ban. Oceana estimated that illegal fishing doubled the amount of tuna caught.

Meanwhile Cod, which once sustained vibrant fishing communities from Portugal to Britain to Canada, is increasingly consumed by the ton as salt cod and fish-and-chips. "People don't ask for fish and chips, they ask for cod and chips," said Mike Guo, a manager at Great Fish and Chips in Essex, England. "It's a traditional dish."

The depletion of the species has caused the decay and disappearance of hundreds of fishing villages on both sides of the Atlantic.

Overfishing off Canada's maritime provinces exhausted the world's richest cod grounds and forced the government to impose a fishing moratorium. The collapse wiped out more than 42,000 jobs, and 18 years later the fish have still not returned. "It was devastating," said Tom Hedderson, minister of fisheries in Newfoundland. "This affected whole communities… all up and down the coast here in Newfoundland and Labrador."

He welcomed the EU call to cut catches by 25 percent, but suggested more drastic cuts may be needed. Some Canadian scientists believe the collapse of cod stocks off Newfoundland and Nova Scotia changed the marine ecosystem so dramatically that it may be impossible for cod to recover. Off Newfoundland alone, cod stocks once exceeded more than 400,000 tons but now scale only 5,500 tons, Hedderson said.

There are signs of recovery of Atlantic cod off New England, however, after years of conservation efforts. And international regulators have reopened some areas off Canada for limited fishing, Canada's Fisheries and Oceans Department spokesman Scott Cantin said.

The fishing industry in Europe, however, is in decline. The number of vessels in the 15 nations that were part of the EU in 1995 has dropped from 104,000 then to 81,000 in 2006. In Britain, employment in the fishing sector sank from 21,600 in 1990 to 16,100 in 2006.

The EU Commission's demand for cod cuts will be discussed by the bloc's 27-member states in a Dec. 14-15 meeting, when the fishing quotas for 2010 will be finalized. "The scientific prognosis for most stocks is not encouraging, with many in a worse state than last year," Britain's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said Friday. "This, combined with the difficult economic climate, will mean that the negotiations will be even more challenging this time around." Keeping fishermen in port with excessive quotas will add to their economic woes, said Bertie Armstrong of the Scottish Fishermen's Federation.

Norway and the EU jointly oversee cod stocks in North Sea, with each party regulating the stocks in its waters. Norway and the EU will begin annual negotiations on cod stock management in November. Ann Kristin Westberg, deputy director-general of Norway's Fishery Ministry, said her country was unlikely to accept a 25 percent quota. "We probably want to have it lower," she said. "We would like to point out that stock the EU are involved in managing are in terrible shape."

The cod harvest from the Georges Bank and Gulf of Maine fishing grounds, the two primary New England fishing grounds, in 2007 totalled 3,868 metric tons, the biggest catch since 2003 but far under the landings of the 1980s when fishermen often caught more than 20,000 tons annually. "The Gulf of Maine stock is responding to the recovery plan, and the Georges Bank stock is recovering but not as much," said Teri Frady of NOAA's Northeast Fisheries Science Centre in Woods Hole, Massachusetts.

Associated Press writers Clarke Canfield in Portland, Maine, Rob Gillies in Toronto, Karl Ritter in Stockholm and Rachel Leamon and Maresa Patience in London contributed to this report.

Film of Strangford Lough tidal power generator

James May, the BBC broadcaster, has made a short item about the Strangford Lough tidal power electricity generator. The film gives good pictures of the generator in situ in the Lough. The item is on You Tube at www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLzxsWxIquw&NR=1.

Scallop dredging in Cardigan Bay to be banned

It is reported (George Monbiot, The Guardian, 9th October 2009) that scallop fishing in Cardigan Bay is to be banned. Most of Cardigan Bay is a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) under EU law but, until now, this conservation designation has not prevented scallop dredging which, many argue, inflicts damage upon the marine ecosystem out of all proportion to the value of the scallop fishery.

The ban has been issued by the local Sea Fisheries Committee following an ecological survey by Lancaster University, but the fear is that the scallop dredgers will now simply move to another part of the UK. It is alleged that the scallop fishers were only dredging Cardigan Bay because of an earlier ban on their fishing practices in Lyme Bay, Dorset.

MARINET's view is that all this underlines the necessity for a strong Marine and Coastal Access Act, which is shortly to complete its final stages in Parliament. At present the legislation is weak, and does not contain highly protected marine reserves which could protect fisheries. Nor does it seek to establish a management regime for our marine ecosystem where fisheries and marine conservation are seen as equal partners with common, indivisible goals.

Without a Marine Act that unites fisherman and conservationists, and enables conservation and economic uses of the sea to work in partnership, the problem exemplified by Lyme Bay and Cardigan Bay will remain unresolved, will continue to be replicated, and a huge opportunity to bring our fish stocks and marine ecosystem back into health will have been lost.

Read the full article on the MARINET website www.marinet.org.uk/mreserves/cardiganbay.html.

Erosion threatens Norfolk coastguard station

From the Eastern Daily Press of 9th October 2009

Coastguards at an erosion-hit north Norfolk village are looking for a new home, as the cliffs edge closer to their front door.

Happisburgh has had a coastguard station for more than a century and its current headquarters at the end of Beach Road dates back to 1994. But the lifeboat station next door closed in the winter 2002 after its ramp was swept away in a fierce storm and has relocated a mile down the coast at Cart Gap.

Now the coastguards are looking to follow suit as the waves slowly eat away at the cliffs, which are now less than 10 metres away.

Arctic Ocean acid 'will dissolve shells of sea creatures within 10 years'

By Matthew Moore from the Telegraph 4th October '09

Waters around the North Pole are absorbing carbon dioxide at such a rate that they will soon start dissolving the shells of living sea creatures.

The potentially disastrous consequences for the food chain have been highlighted by Professor Jean-Pierre Gattuso of the National Centre for Scientific Research in France. His team of oceanographers have produced startling predictions about the acidity of the Arctic Ocean after research carried out on the Svalbard archipelago, a group of islands half way between Norway and the North Pole, revealed that the problem is more advanced than scientists thought.

Their forecasts suggest that by 2018, 10 per cent of the ocean will be corrosively acidic, rising to 50 per cent in 2050. By 2100 the entire Arctic Ocean will be inhospitable to shellfish, they predict.

"This is extremely worrying," Prof Gattuso told the Oceans of Tomorrow conference in Barcelona. "We knew that the seas were getting more acidic and this would disrupt the ability of shellfish — like mussels — to grow their shells. But now we realise the situation is much worse."

One of the most vulnerable creatures is likely to be the mollusc Limacina helicina, which seabirds, whales and several species of fish rely on for food.

The process of acidification — by which carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere as pollution is absorbed by water and converted into carbonic acid — is taking places in seas and oceans across the world. But the prognosis is particularly bleak in the polar regions because the gas is more soluble in cold water than hot water.

"Over the whole planet, there will be a threefold increase in the average acidity of the oceans, which is unprecedented during the past 20 million years," Prof Gattuso said "That level of acidification will cause immense damage to the ecosystem and the food chain, particularly in the Arctic."

Prof Gattuso told the conference that hi-tech proposals for limiting the extent of climate change would have no affect on reducing the acidity of the oceans, and urged immediate action to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

"Scientists have proposed all sorts of geo-engineering solutions to global warming. For instance, they have proposed spraying the upper atmosphere with aerosol particles that would reduce sunlight reaching the Earth, mitigating the warming caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide," he said. "But these ideas miss the point. They will still allow carbon dioxide emissions to continue to increase — and thus the oceans to become more and more acidic. "There is only one way to stop the devastation the oceans are now facing and that is to limit carbon-dioxide emissions as a matter of urgency."

The increasing acidity of the Arctic Ocean may have a direct impact on the marine life of the British Isles, as the Lophelia pertusa coral responsible for creating reefs off the coast of Scotland is killed off.

Wave power sets back Wave Trident Power tests

The power of the sea has dictated a postponement of the Trident generator off the coast of Southwold, North Suffolk. Sarah Brealy relates the full story in the Eastern Daily Press of 21st September '09 under "Wave power setback as giant machine capsizes"

A pioneering plan to create power from the waves suffered a major setback last night when the machine capsized off the north Suffolk coast. The seabed off Southwold was being used to test a new way of harnessing power from the waves which could ultimately generate electricity on a large scale. But as the experimental wave generator, weighing 80 tonnes, was being towed into position on a floating pontoon yesterday, the pontoon capsized. Local shipping had to be warned as the 18 metre (59ft) high generator was floating loose and drifting with the tide.

It was later connected to one of the tugs which had been towing the pontoon and towed to a safe location at Dunwich Bay, near the beach, where it was out of the way of shipping.

The drama unfolded at 12.30pm as it was being towed into position by two tugs. For reasons which are still not clear, the pontoon capsized, dumping its expensive cargo into the sea. None of the crew were hurt. It was not clear whether the machine itself was badly damaged or whether it will be able to be salvaged and put up as planned. The wave energy machine was being put in place five miles off Southwold for a year-long sea trial, which was intended to gather detailed information on how the machine performed. It is planned as the forerunner to full-size wave farms which could power 60,000 homes.

Mario Siano, watch manager at Yarmouth Coastguard, said: "We are pleased to say there were no injuries sustained to any of the crew on board. There were no pollutants on board. The tugs remain on scene until a salvage operation is put into place. All appropriate authorities have been informed and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency counter-pollution officer is aware and is monitoring the situation."

Southend-based Trident Energy and their wave energy plans were featured in Leonardo Di Caprio's eco-documentary, The 11th Hour, and were described last year by energy and climate change minister Lord Hunt as "a very exciting project by Trident".

When the test model was unveiled in Lowestoft earlier this year, company founder Hugh-Peter Kelly said: "It's our aim to crack wave energy… We want to prove to the world that this works, and that Trident can produce grid-ready AC electricity."

The machine's inventors say its strength is in its simplicity. No hydraulic equipment or air compression is needed and there are few moving parts. The machine stands on a giant pair of legs, supported by submerged pontoons anchored to the sea bed, to hold it above the waves. The framework for the machine has been built by Lowestoft marine engineers Small and Co.

Special floats move up and down with the waves to drive generators, which convert the motion into electricity. Special sensors to detect stormy conditions pull the floats up automatically and protect them from serious damage until the danger has passed.

If they don't, we can…

Here's an item by Hayley Mace that appeared in the East Anglian Daily Times of 18th September '09, a good example of self-sufficiency in the face of official denial.

DIY flood defences for the Blyth Estuary

Campaigners fighting to protect a north Suffolk estuary are preparing to spend up to eight years repairing damaged river banks themselves now that plans for DIY flood defences have been given the green light.

The Environment Agency announced in 2007 that it could no longer justify large-scale investment to repair the defences around the Blyth Estuary, near Southwold, in the face of predicted rising sea levels. It proposed a strategy of managed retreat, which would see the existing walls protecting land around Southwold, Walberswick, Reydon and Blythburgh, maintained for a maximum of 20 years, but with some sections allowed to breach much sooner. Now the Blyth Estuary Group, which has been campaigning against the Environment Agency's proposals, has been given the permission to take on the task and rebuild the mud walls themselves so that the flood defences will last for at least a few more decades.

The plans, which were approved by Suffolk Coastal and Waveney District Councils on Wednesday, involve an 8km stretch of river banks right around the estuary.

Sue Allen, chairman of the Blyth Estuary Group, said that allowing landowners and locals to repair and maintain the river banks will help to secure the estuary for future generations. She said: "This is a truly unique application. It is an innovative and nationally important test case, and an excellent example of Suffolk's communities working together. The Blyth Estuary Group is working towards the next 30 or 40 years. Each generation should be able to make its own decision about the future of the estuary and whether it is viable, which at the moment it is."

The project, which could take between five and eight years to complete, will see all the river banks raised to 2.7m high to protect the surrounding area, including the A12 Lowestoft to Ipswich road, dozens of homes, Southwold harbour and acres of farmland and protected wildlife habitat. An access track will be built across the marshes using waste soil from building sites so that clay from the marshes can then be used to bolster the defences. The work will be carried out in four phases, starting with Tinkers and Delacroix Marshes near Walberswick and then moving round to Robinsons Marsh and Reydon Marshes to finish at the Southwold town marshes.

UN take a stand on the Marine Environment

Marguerite kindly sent us in this item from the UN News Service

UN OFFICIALS PUSH FOR CREATION OF MONITORING SYSTEM FOR MARINE ENVIRONMENT

Significant gaps exist in the understanding and management of the complex processes and trends at work in the world's oceans and seas, which cover 70 per cent of the Earth's surface, warned senior United Nations officials today as they urged governments to approve expert recommendations establishing a system that plugs the holes.

At the opening of a week-long governmental session tasked with considering proposals for the creation of a mechanism that monitors oceans and seas worldwide, Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro www.un.org/apps/dsg/dsgstats.asp?nid=178 called for "a continuous, comprehensive and integrated review of the problems facing the marine environment, including socio-economic aspects."

UN Environment Programme

(www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=594ArticleID=6291&l=en UNEP)
Executive Director Achim Steiner said that declining fish stocks and land-based sources of pollution are some of the persistent challenges facing the marine environment, while the emergence of 'dead zones' and the impacts of climate change — including acidification — are among the more rapidly emerging challenges.

"A systematic assessment process is long overdue," said Mr. Steiner. "This meeting in New York represents a tremendous opportunity for governments to put the best marine science at their service in order to make the best management choices over the coming years and decades."

If the General Assembly's special working group, meeting from 31 August to 4 September, reaches agreement, the first globally integrated UN-backed assessment of the oceans could be delivered by 2014, according to a joint news release issued by UNEP and the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=29008&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO).

UNESCO Director-General Koïchiro Matsuura underscored concerns in the Assessment of Assessments report — the first-ever comprehensive overview of scientific marine assessments — which also considers socio-economic issues.

"The report is a clear signal that the world needs a more inclusive approach on its oceans and resources," said Mr. Matsuura, adding that it "provides a framework and options for how this can be done."

UNEP and UNESCO noted that despite the central role oceans play in the economic, environmental and social affairs of the world's 6.7 billion people, not enough is known about their processes from the global climate system, the water cycle and circulation of nutrients, to changes affecting marine habitats.

The clearing of mangroves and coastal wetlands, the over-exploitation of fish stocks and rising tides of pollution are affecting the marine environment's ability to sustain livelihoods and life itself, while climbing concentrations of greenhouse gases — equal to a third or more of annual carbon dioxide emissions — are being absorbed, as well as untold amounts of heavy metals, triggering mounting concern over the marine food chain.

To deal with this situation, improved monitoring and observation practices, regular assessments to provide a deeper understanding of the status and trends of environmental changes, and the know-how and ability to prevent, mitigate and adapt to these changes are urgently required, said the agencies.

This week's meeting of the Working Group will consider the establishment of a management oversight body, a new expert group, and secretariat support mechanisms, which could cost between $4 million and $5.6 million a year.

Aug 31 2009 3:10PM

For more details go to UN News Centre at www.un.org/news

Sewage Pollution in the North-East

Bob Latimer, our man in Whitburn in the North-east, has relentlessly been fighting out a prolonged involving the EA, the local Council and the EC regarding the dreadful level of sewage pollution at his local beach. Here are two (similar) items from the press describing the current situation.

Storm clouds over North East's dirty sea water

September 13th 2009 by Mike Kelly, Sunday Sun

4 images showing sewage waste and fast flowing waters

Some of the horrific amounts of rubbish, top, found in our seas, and below, fast flowing waters due to flooding

BATHING water was described as "excellent" despite hundreds of items of sewage being found on the beach the same day, it has been revealed.

Resident Bob Latimer has council documents that said on August 1, 2008, there was so much waste it was "not able to estimate" the amount. Yet the Environment Agency had labelled the bathing water at Whitburn South in Sunderland as "excellent". Mr Latimer has several other council papers which reveal the same EA description on and around dates when sewage debris had been found. Whitburn South — or Roker — is one of five UK beaches at the centre of a European Commission legal challenge about the treatment and discharge of sewage in this country.

An EA spokesman said sewage debris does not necessarily affect the bathing quality of water. "Bathing water quality at beaches is judged by bacteria levels. "Bacteria die off rapidly when exposed to the elements, whereas sewage litter — largely plastic items flushed by householders — can be washed around the coast for decades before landing on a beach."

An EA spokesman said: "UK bathing water quality has improved dramatically over the last 20 years. We have worked with the water industry to invest over £8billion to improve sewage treatment and reduce sewage overflow." A spokesman for Northumbrian Water, which supplies the region's water and treats waste water, said: "We have made huge strides and brought vast improvement to bathing waters and the environment. We're not complacent and will continue to bring further improvement in the future."

What lurks in our waves?

Sep 13 2009 Sunday Sun

FEARS were expressed last week about the potential health hazards on North beaches. So how safe are our waters? Mike Kelly reports.

ON August 1, 2008, the water quality of the sea at Whitburn South beach in Sunderland was given an "excellent" grade by the Environment Agency. Yet on that day a Sunderland City Council report said there was so much sewage on the very same beach it could not be counted. Local campaigner, Bob Latimer, said: "In other reports they've counted up to 8000 items at Hendon. So you just can guess at the amount they must have found." There have been other occasions when this has happened, too, but the EA claimed there is no contradiction.

Northumbrian Water and the Environment Agency vehemently deny this.

The situation was highlighted last Monday on the BBC's Panorama programme which painted a grim picture of the nation's beaches. While accepting several factors had contributed to the worsening of bathing water quality in the last couple of years, including run-off from a variety of sources including agricultural land, it seemed to lay most of the blame at the feet of the CSOs. Emotive pictures of raw sewage running onto beaches were broadcast. Yet still Blue Flags saying it was safe to bathe there were flown. And most people don't know what has been washed onto the beach as there are no apparent publics warnings when the CSOs have discharged.

The statistics are concerning, too. In May the North East Good Beach Guide was published and saw a 23 per cent decline in recommended beaches. Last year there were no failures in County Durham, Tyne and Wear or Northumberland. This year beaches at Seaham Hall in County Durham, Whitburn North in Wearside and Seaton Sluice and Spittal near Berwick, Northumberland, all failed water tests. More worrying still is the fact that of the 776 UK beaches tested, 43pc reached the minimum European quality standard. The figure for the North East is 38pc. According to the Marine Conservation Society, that means people have a one-in-seven chance of getting gastroenteritis when they go into the sea or onto our beaches.

Thomas Bell of the MCS which publishes the Good Beach Guide said: "That figure is according to the World Health organisation."

There are 20,000 CSOs in the UK, 1470 of which are in the region. According to Alistair Baker, PR and communications manager of Northumbrian Water, their use is policed by the EA which in turn sets the operating standard by EU guidelines. He said: "During the period 2005 to 2010 we will have invested £85 million to upgrade and screen 481 CSOs. Since 1995 we have spent £750 million on investment to clean up the coastal waters."

What isn't in doubt on all sides is that since the 1990s the quality of bathing water has improved massively. In 1998 no beaches met the guideline standard while in 2006 87.9pc of them did. That figure dipped to 61.8pc last year, the reason being the poor weather. Climate change is creating a wetter environment meaning CSOs are operating more often while it also adds to the run off from agricultural land. There are many other contributing factors, down to the non-permeable flagstones used on home driveways which are generating concentrated masses of water which are affecting the country's drainage system.

The problem stems from the Victorian sewage system which is the basis of the network which combines sewage and surface water. The EA spokesman commented: "We want to see the separation of sewage and surface water in future developments, rather than combined sewer overflows, and we are working with farmers to prevent chemicals and manure from running off their land and into the sea. "Bathing water samples are collected by us at every one of our 495 designated bathing waters once a week — 20 times during the bathing season. They are then tested at our accredited laboratory within 24 hours and we give the information to councils and local organisations on a weekly basis."

Latest Newsletter on the Kelling to Lowestoft Shoreline Management Plan

This can be viewed as a PDF here.

Thoughts on the latest Shoreline Management Plan

Dr. Harry Buckland of Grimsby, one of our most active Coastal Group members gives his thoughts on the latest modifications to the Shoreline Management Plan, which notes some interesting comparators.

I am glad to note that the Environment Agency has agreed to maintain the current sea defence standard north of Great Yarmouth for the next 50 years, although this number compares unfavourably with the Netherlands standard of 1:1000 years. The Grimsby and Ancholme Catchments Flood Management Plan (June 2006) considered a 1:100 standard 'appropriate'. Now there is a suggestion that this standard should be reduced to 1:50 i.e. within the lifetime of the average house. I am trying, so far without success, to discover where, how and by whom such fundamental standards affecting 500,000 homes from the Humber to the Hamble are arrived at and whether there is a statutory right of appeal.

25 square miles of the Broads were threatened which at a land price of £6000 per acre equates to £96 million capital loss, to say nothing of the ongoing economic benefits of some of the most productive farming land in Britain. Somewhere I have read that tourist income from the Norfolk Broads accounts for one third of North Norfolk District Councils revenue.

Comparable figures for housing land are — Netherlands €3,500, UK €14,500. The Netherlands GDP per capita is €52,000, the UK €43,000.

Perhaps two years ago when the Broads were threatened with reversion to saltmarsh I wrote to the Chief Executive of Great Yarmouth Borough Council asking whether plans existed to put the A47 and its accompanying railway line on stilts. My letter was never acknowledged but I note that the Joint Working Group of GYBC, NNDC and Waveney and Suffolk Coast is looking at the long term outlook for the next 100 years. Assuming they accept that sea levels will rise by 1 metre in that time presumably they are investigating the feasibility and costs of re-locating the port of Yarmouth upstream perhaps in Norwich, as was done by King John when he created the port of Kingston-upon Hull a thousand years ago.

The Manchester Ship Canal completed in 1894 cost £1.22 billion at today's prices. It is 36 miles long and was 7 years in construction. The distance from Norwich to Yarmouth is 20 miles.

Sarah Nason's paper 'Uneconomic Sea Defences' was fundamentally flawed in that it used Average Annual Damage insurance figures which completely failed to take account of the total loss of property and land allowed to revert to saltmarsh. Hopefully the next EA assessment will be rather more sophisticated and do something to repair the damaged confidence of householders and businesses.

Dr H M Buckland, 18 Augusta Close, Grimsby, NE Lincs, DN34 4TQ — 14/9/2009

DEFRA's Coastal Erosion plans upset Norfolk Councillors

The following article from The Great Yarmouth Mercury of 8th September 2009 tells of the disatisfaction of North Norfolk District Councils cabinet members with the governments latest proposals that fail to address the issue of losses due to their plans to abandon much of Norfolk to the sea.

Coastal erosion plans slammed

Government proposals to support communities threatened by coastal erosion were slammed as "derisory" yesterday, as councillors agreed to launch a bid for more financial help.

At a North Norfolk District Council meeting, cabinet members were asked for their views on Defra's Coastal Change Policy which aims to address some of the issues faced by businesses and homeowners left to deal with a changing coastline.

The council has long been lobbying for a fair deal for people affected by changes to the way the coast is defended and councillors agreed the policy was a step in the right direction. But head of coastal strategy Frew said it fell far short of what was needed. "It goes along way to what we want but it doesn't go far enough," he said. "The financial support the government is proposing to give homeowners who lose their homes as a result of a change of government policy is — I think you could use the word derisory in this instance — a total of £4,000 or £5,000."

Councillor Peter Moore said the support suggested by the policy would barely touch the surface. He said: "The amount of money that's being talked of seems to me to be worse than derisory. It doesn't even cover the estate agent fees for their next house."

At the same meeting, councillors were also asked to back a bid for a share of £11m of government funding which NNDC could use to help communities adapt to changes brought on by the threat of coastal erosion.

The Coastal Change Fund hopes to support innovative projects helping places where sea defences have been deemed unjustifiable by the government to tackle issues such as a loss of investment, blight and harm to the environment. Councillors agreed to submit a bid, which will ask for a total of more than £2.5m for a range of projects. The proposals include a scheme where the council could buy properties at risk and lease them. Further funds will also be asked for to finance the "rolling back" of businesses, community facilities and dwellings in threatened areas.

Hilary Nelson, NNDC's portfolio holder for tourism, said the bid would help to show communities that the council was not going to let them "fall into the sea".

Cash hope for erosion hit communities

Here's an item by Richard Batson on DEFRA's proposals that appeared in the Eastern Daily Press on 14th August '09.

Cash hope for erosion hit communities

Erosion hit communities in north Norfolk could be helped by a share of an £11m government pot to help them adapt to their changing coastline. The district council, whose experts are already in the forefront of formulating national policy, is seeking to table "pathfinder" bids for cash to support innovative projects helping places where sea defences cannot be justified.

Pathfinder projects are expected to develop imaginative local solutions to issues such as loss of investment and confidence, blight and harm to the environmental. Measures could include taking a different approach to development control, giving councils the power to buy at-risk properties and lease them back to residents, giving people practical help if they lose their homes, and maintaining infrastructure that is vital for businesses and householders.

Clive Stockton, the council's cabinet member for coastal strategy, said: "This initiative represents a step change in government policy towards coastal management, recognising for the first time the plight of coastal communities and their need for support in confronting the changes which they face." The council will also continue to campaign for long-term solutions by responding to an ongoing consultation about its coastal change policy.

The council was working closely with the Happisburgh-based Coastal Concern Action Group. It was anxious to ensure it had the support of coastal communities, and that its projects responded appropriately to local needs. It was also keen to find partners to deliver the projects if the funding bid was successful. Mr Stockton, who also sits on the Local Government Association's national coastal special interest group, urged the public to respond, saying: "What happens to our coast, and to the communities on it, affects the livelihood of the whole district."

The government consultation runs until 25th September '09. Documents can be found on the government's website: www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/coastal-change

EU Commission says it will act on UK sewage pollution

In a BBC TV Panorama programme, broadcast 7th September 2009, it is reported that the European Commission will be taking action under the Bathing Water Directive, 76/160/EC, over what is believed to be illegal amounts of sewage present in the sea at Torbay and other UK resorts.

The European Commission believes that combined sewer overflows (CSOs) [see MARINET Briefing on CSOs www.marinet.org.uk/ukbw/whitburncso.html] spill so much untreated sewage into the sea that they are breaking EU law.

CSOs are an overflow system which prevents the sewage works being flooded, and the sewage from backing up into domestic properties when excessive water enters the foul water sewer system following heavy rainfall. There are more than 20,000 CSOs around the UK, all owned and operated by UK water companies.

The European Commission has started legal action against the UK over CSOs at Torbay, Whitburn, London, Kilbarchan in Scotland and the Burry Inlet in Wales.

The Environment Agency (EA) stated in the BBC Panorama programme that without CSOs, sewage would back up into people's homes. MARINET observes that whilst CSOs are necessary as an emergency facility, the real issue is the construction of storm sewage storage capacity at sewage works. If this storage capacity existed throughout the UK (and it does exist in areas where the water companies have invested properly) then the frequent use of CSOs would be unnecessary. However there has been a conspicuous failure by the water companies to build this storm storage capacity throughout the UK, and a failure by the regulator (Environment Agency) to protect the environment and enforce the building of this capacity.

In the Panorama programme Thomas Bell, Marine Conservation Society, said that in some parts of the UK, CSOs were spilling far too much and not just after heavy rainfall. "We do know that on some beaches, these CSOs are discharging all the time, up to hundreds of times a year," he said. "It's more than possible that we've built ourselves a system in this country where they're being used as a means of regular sewage disposal." Commenting upon this, Miranda Kavanagh, Director of Evidence at the Environment Agency, said: "The alternative is to have sewage backing up into people's homes and up the street. It's a matter, for us, of balancing risks to public health against risk to the environment and trying to find a balance between those two things. It's not a black-and-white situation."

According to a calculation by the Marine Conservation Society (MCS) and reported in the Panorama programme, of all the beaches tested for water quality in the UK, 43% give rise to at least a one in 20 chance of getting gastroenteritis after a swim. This relates to water quality meeting the Guideline Standard of the Bathing Water Directive. If water meets this Guideline Standard, it is referred to by UK authorities as "excellent". The odds referred to here are derived from World Health Organisation figures.

For bathing water that just passes the minimum legal standard of the Bathing Water Directive, the odds of falling ill can be as high as one in seven.

MARINET observes that, in reality, the sampling undertaken by UK authorities to assess water quality against the minimum legal standard of the Bathing Water Directive does not, in most instances, sample for salmonella and enteroviruses (both mandatory parameters stipulated in the Bathing Water Directive). Therefore actual compliance of UK bathing waters with the mandatory minimum standard of the Directive is largely unknown, see the 2008 monitoring results (www.marinet.org.uk/ukbw/gbeachg.html).

This failure to monitor for salmonella and enteroviruses is, in the opinion of MARINET, very serious. This type of monitoring — for salmonella and enteroviruses — is sampling for actual pathogens in the bathing water, and not just "indicators" of the possible presence of these pathogens. The kinds of pathogens that can be present in bathing water as a result of the presence of sewage are recorded on the MARINET website (www.marinet.org.uk/ukbw/pressrelease0407.html).

In the Panorama programme Thomas Bell, coastal pollution officer for the MCS and editor of the Good Beach Guide, said the latest available figures reveal a decline in bathing water quality over the past three years, with the number of beaches in the guide recommended as 'excellent' down by almost 17% over 2008. The drop represents the biggest year-on-year fall in the Good Beach Guide's 22-year history.

Andy Cummins, Surfers Against Sewage, said in the Panorama programme: "We've had people call us from Wales, from Scotland, from the north-east and from the south-west telling us about how they've contracted illnesses after rain, how they've noticed raw sewage and sewerage related debris in the sea. It's filthy, you are surfing in a sewer."

Responding to this in the Panorama programme, the Environment Agency's Ms Kavanagh said CSO sewage spills that are not deemed to be a risk to bathing water do not need to be reported. The EA grants consent for limited spills when necessary. Spills directly onto designated beaches are limited to three times a year, but those upriver, which flow onto nearby beaches, are given more leeway. "If it is within consented limits and has no impact on the bathing water quality then unless we have particular concerns that would not necessarily be something that would come to our attention."

Commenting on this assertion by the EA, Thomas Bell of the Marine Conservation Society said the bigger concern is that the general water quality testing system approved by the EA does not take the impact of CSOs into account. "There is no — at the moment — testing regime in place to monitor on a systematic basis for discharge from those pipes."

For most people on a day out at the seaside steering clear of a nearby CSO would be a priority, and the Environment Agency recommends that people avoid bathing for 24 hours in the vicinity of a CSO after heavy rain. According to the Marine Conservation Society's Good Beach Guide, 45% of the 1,134 beaches which the Guide records have a CSO close enough to affect them.

MARINET, who has long tried to bring these facts to public attention, welcomes the BBC Panorama report. However MARINET notes that it was broadcast at the end of the summer sea bathing season, and not at the beginning.

Sources:
BBC News, 7th September 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/8241035.stm
BBC Panorama, 7th September 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_8236000/8236995.stm

The Threat to Norfolk and its Churches

David Keller of BBC Norfolk tells of the coming catastrophe for Norfolk should no effective action be taken to prevent erosion and its causes:

At least six villages wiped off the map, hundreds of people turned out of their homes and some of the Broads' best freshwater lakes swamped by seawater. Thousands of acres of agricultural land turned into mudflats, the loss of bird species such as bitterns, cranes and marsh harriers and the extinction of traditional crafts such as reed cutting.

Read the full article on our website at www.marinet.org.uk/coastaldefences/churches.html

A New Threat from Coastal Erosion

Increasing erosion and the failure to protect our coastline threatens a new hazard in the form of potential hazardous waste from former industrial and domestic landfill sites situated along the UK coastline. Sam Bond wrote on the August 21st '09 Edie Net Website the following 'Crumbling Coastline threatens landfill spills'.

Coastal rubbish tips that long since covered over and abandoned could cause a fresh headache as erosion threatens to open them up and wash the waste into the sea. Predicted impacts of climate change resulting in changing weather patterns and sea level rise put an ever-increasing pressure on the UK coastline to support flood and erosion management.

This possible increased level of coastal erosion places risk of wash-out of potential hazardous waste from former industrial and domestic landfill sites situated along the coastline in the UK.

Research and information broker CIRIA is now planning to develop guidance for those responsible for managing these time-bombs. "Completed landfill sites may have had very little monitoring undertaken to assess the potential for pollution incidents, so very little may be known about their likely risk to the environment or human health," said a statement from CIRIA. "Identifying the most important closed landfill sites can be particularly difficult due to limited data available on waste types and quantities deposited and also the type and extent of environmental monitoring already undertaken. It is more than likely that upon further investigations additional landfill sites posing a risk to the maritime environment and human health due to erosion will be identified."

"Also, considering the preparation of a second round of Shoreline Management Plans in progress in England and Wales a number of new sites may emerge as potential problem areas, especially in the medium to longer term."

It guidance plans to look at engineering solutions, the potential environmental impacts and how legislation will shape the response of those tasks with dealing with the problem.

Mock 'Trees' along the North Sea Coast?

A novel Idea to abate Sea Rise appeared in the 27th August '09 'Eastern Evening News' entitled 'Artificial trees could save planet'

Norwich-based scientists have given the thumbs up to new engineering technology which could see forests of artificial trees sprout up along motorways or off the North Sea coast to help cut greenhouse gas emissions. A team from the University of East Anglia's school of Environmental Sciences has run the rule over research by the Institute of Mechanical Engineers looking at the possibilities of 'geo-engineering' to help in the battle against climate change.

Researchers highlighted three types of technology which could help remove carbon and store it. Top of that list was the artificial trees idea followed by using containers of algae reactors on buildings to soak up the carbon from the air during photosynthesis. The third proposal involved reflecting sunlight back into space, possibly using reflective roofs.

According to the report a forest of 100,000 trees, each costing around £15,000, would be enough to soak up the UK's transport pollution. A prototype 'tree' the size of a shipping container has already been developed and the report suggests that the North Sea could be a good place to locate any 'forests'.

Nem Vaughan, a researcher at the University of East Anglia's school of environmental sciences, who evaluated the proposals, said the idea was to look at how existing technology could be adapted to help find a solution to the greenhouse gas problem. "The artificial trees idea came out as the front runner," she said. "If they were put in the North Sea you could have wind turbines to power them by placing them you could link them to the carbon capture and storage part."

This year the UEA established a new geo-engineering assessment and research initiative (GEAR) as part of an offshoot of its world-renowned Tyndall Centre to study new climate change cutting concepts. But Dr Vaughan said there is still work to be done on the science and the side effects, and the technology would only work alongside mitigation measures to cut emissions in the first place. "They are not a solution in themselves to the problem and it's very important that we mitigate the transition to low carbon as soon as possible," she added.

Dr Tim Fox, the report's lead author said the findings were exciting innovative and novel and could help inspire a generation of young engineers. "For the first time we really examine some of the practical initiatives we could adopt to essentially clean up the mess we have made," he said. "Geo-engineering may give us those extra few years to transition to a low carbon world and prevent any one of the future climate change scenarios we all fear."

Further Dredging off Southwold

The Lowestoft Journal of 26th August '09 produced the following item entitled 'Campaigners voice fears over dredging'

Campaigners have urged a council to reconsider scientific evidence before backing plans for dredging off the Suffolk coast.

United Marine Dredging and Cemex UK Marine applied to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) last year for permission to continue dredging an area about 20 miles off Southwold, where they have operated for 12 years. Now Suffolk County Council's officers have recommended that the authority backs the renewal application because they do not think that continued dredging will have a significant impact on the area. Currently 14 licences are being dredged between Caister and Lowestoft, from four miles out to about 20 miles offshore, providing about eight million tonnes of raw construction material every year.

The county council's development control committee will discuss its response to a consultation about the Southwold application at a meeting on September 3. A report to the meeting said that an environmental statement compiled by the applicants shows that there is no link between aggregate dredging and adverse effects on coastal erosion or fish stocks. However coastal campaigners have already lodged a formal objection to the renewal application because they believe dredging can speed up erosion and damage fish stocks.

Pat Gowen from Marinet, part of Friends of the Earth, said: "There is scientific evidence which recognises the damage done by dredging, and the council should take that on board. We have several grounds for objecting, as we think the further removal of aggregate offshore will increase the slope of the beaches, leading to greater gravitational run-off of sand and deeper water leans bigger waves, which lead to more erosion."

The council's recommendation also specifies that a programme of coastal impact assessments must be carried out to monitor any effects on the local coastline. The Anglian Offshore Dredging Association, which represents five of the UK's largest dredging companies, is already undertaking a 12-month study to look at the effects of dredging on fishing and erosion around the Norfolk and Suffolk coast.

A final decision on the renewal application will be made by the Marine and Fisheries Agency at a later date.

Worldwatch report claims the ecosystem approach grants "freedom for our seas"

In a report published in late 2007 by the Worldwatch Institute, titled Worldwatch Report 174, Oceans in Peril : Protecting Marine Biodiversity, the use of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management is identified as the key, central change that must occur worldwide at government level if our management of the seas is to restore heavily depleted fish stocks and marine biodiversity.

The ecosystems of our seas must be managed in terms of the limits of the resources which they can provide, and not simply concentrate on single species, and it is essential the Report asserts that the precautionary approach, in conjunction with marine reserves, is employed as the basis of the management system. In other words, the Report asserts " current presumptions that favour freedom to fish and freedom of the seas will need to be replaced with the new concept of freedom for the seas."

Further details about this Worldwatch report and how to obtain it may be seen on our website at www.marinet.org.uk/eatmm/oceansinperil.html.

OSPAR prepares for Ministerial Conference in 2010

The Oslo Paris Convention (www.ospar.org) of countries bordering the N. E. Atlantic has been in existence for 10 years. The OSPAR Convention is charged with a responsibility to promote protection of the N. E Atlantic, and it will shortly be producing its Quality Status Report (QSR 2010) which records the condition of marine life and the ecosystem in these seas, and the changes that have taken place over the past 10 years.

The 2010 Quality Status Report will provide the background to an OSPAR Ministerial Conference in Bergen, Norway, in September 2010 at which the Ministers from the OSPAR countries will agree the new policy base for OSPAR's work over the next ten years until 2020.

Central to this Bergen Conference and OSPAR's new policy base will be the adoption of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management. This requires the marine management decisions of member governments to not just respond adaptively to marine problems, but also to develop as a management regime which actually promotes the integrity of the marine ecosystem, thereby rebuilding and maintaining good levels marine biodiversity. Central to this ecosystem-based approach is a suite of management tools, which include the extensive use of marine reserves and the precautionary principle.

MARINET is a member of the OSPAR Committee which is developing this new management approach, and MARINET has helped define the nature and practice of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management for OSPAR, see www.marinet.org.uk/eatmm/definition.pdf.

Natural England and JNCC launch Regional MCZ Stakeholder Projects

With the imminent passage of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill into law, and thus the establishment of powers for Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) to establish a network of marine conservation zones (MCZs) in our seas out to 200 nautical miles, Natural England and JNCC are establishing Regional Stakeholder Groups who will advise NE and JNCC as to where these MCZs should be located and the nature of the protection within each of the individual MCZs. In England regional MCZ project groups have been established for the Irish Sea, South West Seas, the Eastern Channel, and the North Sea. In Scotland, this process is being undertaken by the Scottish Parliament under delegated powers, and in the case of Welsh inshore waters (i.e. out to 12 nautical miles) by the Welsh Assembly.

Crucial to this process will be the membership of these regional MCZ project groups, and MARINET has applied to be a member of each regional project, and will be training its members to be involved with these regional projects.

Equally important will be the basis on which the marine conservation zones (MCZs) are selected. Natural England and JNCC will be producing guidance for the regional project groups, and MARINET has just re-issued its own statement of the key principles involved in this most important matter, see MARINET's Guide to the Ecosystem-based Approach in the Selection and Management of Marine Reserves at www.marinet.org.uk/eatmm/ecosystem.html.

Islay to be entirely powered by tides

ScottishPower is planning to build 10MW of tidal power to provide electricity for the isle of Islay's 3,500 inhabitants and the island's famous distilleries.

Read the full article in the Guardian of the 25th August '09

Our Declining Marine Species

It's not just fish stocks declining in our North Sea, but many other creatures too. Four years ago your author would push a shrimp net for just ten minutes to catch a couple of pints of brown shrimp (Crangon crangon or Crangon vulgaris) for tea. This year saw just three shrimps caught in two 30 minute sessions of hard net pushing.

Anglers along the beach who would once catch six to ten fish in a few hours of fishing are now getting nothing in ten hours of trying. Now we see that other species are declining rapidly. An article by Anthony Carroll in the Eastern Daily Press of 28th August tells of the demise of Cuttlefish.
(See our Illustrated Guide to Marine Animals www.marinet.org.uk/mreserves/marineanimals.html)

Fears over future of sea creature sparks major survey

They are elusive alien-like creatures that dart through the waters off the Norfolk coast. And now colourful cuttlefish are the subject of a major hunt by a concerned marine group, which fears they may be declining in number. But as divers from Norfolk Seaquest carry out their first cuttlefish survey along the Norfolk shoreline they face a challenge — trying to spot the chameleon-like cuttlefish.

Seaquest volunteers are trying to find proof of any dwindling population in the squid-like creatures, which can change their skin colour to blend into the background. The hunt was set up after group members noticed that the number of cuttlefish and their remains found over the last 15 year had fallen. If numbers have declined it could mean that other aquatic species are also declining in numbers.

So far divers have found a pair of cuttlefish off West Runton and members have discovered several washed-up cuttlebones, including one on Cley beach. Seaquest co-ordinator Helen Nott said:

"Over the last 15 years there seems to have been a decline in the number of cuttlefish found in The Wash and the north Norfolk coast. "At Heacham, beach cuttlebones used to be commonly found washed up 15 years ago, indicating a healthy population off the coast. Over the years hardly any have been found there. We are hoping there is not a downward trend in their numbers. They are part of the North Sea's ecosystem and if they are disappearing then it could be the same with other life. Cuttlefish are very good at camouflage, but they are not too hard to find if they are near the surface."

Seaquest hopes that families can join in the survey by recording any cuttlebones they find on the county's beaches. Last year the group carried out a comprehensive survey of pipefish numbers.

Darren Gook, senior aquarist at Yarmouth's Sea Life Centre, welcomed the survey. He said: "Cuttlefish are quite elusive with their camouflage and they jet away if you stumble upon them. It will be nice to get a baseline survey of their numbers."

For more information on the cuttlefish survey or to send in any evidence, email norfolkseaquest@yahoo.co.uk or visit www.norfolkseaquest.co.uk

Substantial rise in CO₂ emissions by shipping

The European Federation for Transport and the Environment (British member: Environment Transport Association) has stated that in the period between 1990 and 2007 the European CO₂ releases from shipping rose by 60%. Also, the Federation states that aviation emissions more than doubled during this same period of 1990 to 2007.

The Federation states that in the EU transport sector overall, carbon emissions rose by more than 35% between 1990 and 2007. Interestingly, whilst aviation and shipping emissions rose as described above, the emissions from other elements in the transport sector decreased by 8.9%.

Shipping and aviation activities accounted for 24% of EU transport emissions in 2007. Transport's share of total EU emissions has risen from 3.8% in 1990 to 6.9% in 2007, according to the Federation. Emissions from shipping grew by 0.9% in 2007, compared with 2.8% for aviation.

According to the Federation, carbon dioxide emissions from the EU transport sector are underestimated in official reporting because data submitted to the UN under the Kyoto Protocol does not include international aviation and shipping. The Federation's full report may be viewed at www.transportenvironment.org/Publications/prep_hand_out/lid:545

"Aviation and shipping are the fastest growing sectors in terms of transport emissions in Europe, so if you leave them out it hides the true extent of the overall growth," the Federation's Director Jos Dings told ENDS.

Source : Environmental News and Data Service (ENDS), 17th August 2009.

Très Bon

French PM gives the thumbs up to the Marine Reserves Campaign

Mr Sarkozy has made a personal statement which commits France to setting up a network of Highly Protected Marine Reserves on the lines of the MARINET recommendations to our own government. In addition, he has also recognised his duty to act beyond the limits of European waters and include those parts of the sea in the control of French overseas territories. If this same principle were to be adopted in the UK, over three million square kilometres would be included in the scope of protection, in addition to the 0.75m square kilometres of the UK Exclusive Economic Zone in the scope of the Marine Bill.

He also binds his government to a timetable.

His speech, delivered on 16 July 2009, can be seen in full at www.ambafrance-uk.org/President-Sarkozy-on-France-s.html

The whole speech is of great interest to marine conservation campaigners, but the key extract says:-

France's maritime policy — Speech by Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the Republic
Le Havre, 16 July 2009

FRENCH MARITIME AREA/FISHERY RESERVES/MARINE DIVERSITY

"I want to take up the compromise which emerged from the Grenelle Maritime Forum. France today protects less than 1% of her maritime area. By 2012 I'm determined that 10% of it will be protected, and, by 2020, 20% of the 11 million km² of sea under France's sovereignty will have to be included. And I expect half this area to consist of fishery reserves and boxes, to be designated with the assistance of fishermen, scientists and local stakeholders. It's here that marine biodiversity will be preserved. It's here that we will be able to recover the resources which will in future enable fishing to go on for ever in our country.

"So, in 2020, the network of maritime areas will protect over 2 million km² of oceans and seas under French sovereignty. This network will extend both the length of the coasts of metropolitan France, particularly in the Mediterranean, and of Overseas France: from the French West Indies to New Caledonia and Polynesia. This maritime network will complement the green and blue belts created by the Grenelle Environment Forum on land, without forgetting the "navy blue belt" so dear to Isabelle Autissier [French round-the-world sailor]. What we're going to do in pursuit of this goal of maritime protection, no other State in the world has ever done. The example France is going to set will pave the way for an unprecedented effort to preserve the oceans, recover fish stocks and safeguard all those who depend every day on the fertility of the seas for their livelihood.

PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE/"SEA ORBITER"

"During the Grenelle Maritime Forum, requests were made every day for moratoria, in the name of the precautionary principle. Admittedly, we still know too little and are too ill-informed about the life concealed beneath the world's oceans. It's also true that evidence of an exhaustion of the natural marine reserves is piling up. Finally, it's true that threats to the existence of some species like bluefin tuna can no longer be ignored. In this instance, the precautionary principle dictates that we very swiftly beef up our scientific knowledge of the sea bed, exploration of the marine worlds, stocks assessment and understanding of the ecosystems. The precautionary principle dictates too that we substantially increase our scientific expertise on the state of natural marine resources. We will, I most solemnly pledge here, commit the necessary funding. I am keen to see our country return to a great oceanographic policy, drawing, of course, on the network of French expertise in the marine sciences, without ever neglecting such new initiatives as, for example, the building of the "Sea Orbiter" international [floating] oceanic station."

MARINET member contributes to Big Issue article on UK Marine Bill

The Big Issue in the North published in its edition at the end of July an article about the troubled state of UK seas and the need for the UK Marine Bill to seriously address these matters. This article can be seen here at www.marinet.org.uk/mreserves/bigissue.html.

The article cites evidence from Natural England that at least 70% of UK fish stocks have declined in reproductive capacity and that whereas in 1998 UK vessels landed £137 million of cod and haddock, this fell to just £70 million in 2002.

The Living Seas report by the Wildlife Trusts is also cited in the Big Issue article. This report states that basking sharks have declined by 95% and the once ubiquitous common skate is on the verge of extinction. The report also observes that dolphins, whales and seals have all suffered in recent years and that fish stocks have collapsed. "The marine environment — our life support system — is on its knees" the Wildlife Trusts report states.

Abigail Herron, a member of MARINET and Manchester FOE, is a diver and has first-hand experience of how marine wildlife has declined near Anglesey. "The waters around Anglesey" she says "are very rich in biodiversity and you used to find a lot of dogfish there, but you just don't see them anymore."

MARINET believes that the only way to reverse this decline in marine biodiversity, which is not just due to over-fishing but also pollution, development and, increasingly, climate change is to establish a widespread and extensive network of marine reserves throughout UK seas out 200 nautical miles where all damaging human activities are forbidden. This way the marine ecosystem as a whole can be protected, and be allowed to heal and recover. MARINET is proposing an amendment to the Report Stage of the Marine Bill in the House of Commons which will allow for precisely this. The amendment will mean that marine reserves can be created not just to protect habitats, species and geomorphological features (as the current draft of the Marine Bill proposes), but that marine reserves can also be created in areas to protect "the marine ecosystem as a whole". This is the key phrase and concept that will ensure that the UK Marine Bill can deliver on its political promises. At present, this phrase and concept is absent from the legislation.

Political Matters

As you will be well aware from the wide national publicity given to the issue, the recent by-election in Norwich North resulted in the loss of our great supporter and MP Dr. Ian Gibson. The refusal of the New Labour kangaroo Court to hear his evidence, in singling him out, and their not permitting an appeal resulted in his deselection and self-resignation.

Ian, though not a coastal constituency MP, was instrumental in placing many Parliamentary Questions and providing Ministerial approaches for us on offshore dredging, coastal defence, the Shoreline Management Plan on and Managed Retreat. This support might well have been a major factor in his deselection. He was undoubtedly a thorn in the side of the autocratic government because of this and the support that he gave to other constituency issues rather than how ordered to do so by the current undemocratic system.

The Kangaroo Court of three identified by ex-DEFRA Minister Nick Brown, the Chief Whip and New Labour Party General Secretary Ray Collins and could hardly have been less unbiased. For instance, Nick Brown himself voted strongly against a transparent Parliament and an investigation into the Iraq War, strongly for introducing ID cards, for introducing foundation hospitals, for introducing student top-up fees, for Labour's anti-terrorism laws, for the Iraq war and for replacing Trident. He is a strong supporter of offshore industry. But Ian voted exactly opposite on all these. Other MPs, particularly those on the Cabinet who attracted more opprobrium, over expenses or other misbehaviour, were not so victimised.

But in the resulting Norwich North by election the Green Party with candidate Dr. Rupert Read doubled their vote in a less-than-50% poll to come only just behind the imposed New Labour candidate, sadly with insufficient votes to win the seat. Rupert is a great supporter of our cause. You may wish to read some of his pennings on marine environmental issues, as:

We have reason to hope that he may become the Norwich North MP at the forthcoming election.

Regards, Pat

Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy : EU consultation

The European Commission has launched a wide-ranging debate on the way that EU fisheries are managed via the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The aim is to gather views from all those with an interest in the future of Europe's fisheries: fishermen, fish processors, retailers, environmentalists, consumers, taxpayers — in fact, the European Commission claims "every EU citizen". That includes you!

To enable this consultation to take place, the European Commission has issued an Green Paper on CFP Reform, and is asking for comments to be submitted between now and the end of December. You can obtain a copy of the Green Paper and the consultation form by visiting http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/reform

MARINET will be engaging with this CFP Reform process, and is particularly interested in seeing that policies are established which enable "no-take" marine reserves to be established in the spawning and nursery areas of commercial fish species, and that the requirement of the EU's Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) that "populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish are within safe biological limits, exhibiting a population age and size distribution that is indicative of a healthy stock" is adhered to. To see the MSFD on the MARINET website, visit www.marinet.org.uk/marinebill/euframeworkdirective.pdf

The EU's CFP Reform Green Paper notes that currently 88% of commercial fish stocks in seas covered by the CFP are being fished beyond their "maximum sustainable yield". The impact of this level of fishing on the marine ecosystem as a whole is considerable, and MARINET believes that the CFP must adopt an "ecosystem-based approach" to the management of fish stocks. This means that the needs of the marine ecosystem itself must become paramount, rather than fishing quotas. Unless this change in management philosophy occurs European commercial fish stocks will collapse into extinction, as has befallen the largest cod fishery in the North Atlantic located off Newfoundland, Canada, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_cod

Double Dutch Dikes

The Dutch have long shown Britain how to defend their land from the sea and are now coming up with further innovative methods from which the UK could learn if only the will and sanity were there. Could the recent use of double dikes in Holland be an idea to help save our disappearing coast? Read our full article at www.marinet.org.uk/coastaldefences/dutchdikes.html

The MFA advises that it is not a member of the Regulator Advisory Group for REAs

The Marine and Fisheries Agency advises that it is not a member of the Regulator Advisory Group for REAs involving Marine Minerals — Correspondence between MARINET & the MFA, and a copy of the "Terms of Reference for Regional Environmental assessments involving the extraction of Marine Minerals" can be viewed at www.marinet.org.uk/mad/marea.html.

UK government publishes newsletter on EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) is a very important item of marine legislation emanating from the EU.It will require all European seas to attain "good environmental status" by 2020. Thus the UK Government is obligated to deliver this for our seas.

It will mean that our seas will, for example, have to meet the following standards by 2020:

All fish and shellfish populations must be within safe biological limits.
We must maintain the biological biodiversity of marine species and habitats.
Contaminants released to sea must be limited so that they do not cause pollution.
Marine food chains must be at normal abundance and diversity.

Defra has now published the first in a series of newsletters advising people about the MSFD and what it means and how it will be implemented. If you would like to receive copies of this newsletter, visit here for details.

Government publishes terms of reference for E. Anglian aggregate dredging REA

The Marine and Fisheries Agency, which determines offshore aggregate dredging licences and is shortly to become part of the overarching planning and licensing agency known as the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) under the UK Marine and Coastal Access Bill, has advised MARINET that it is not part of the Regulatory Advisory Group which is overseeing the Marine Aggregate Regional Environmental Assessment (MAREA) which is being undertaken voluntarily by the Anglian Offshore Dredging Association (AODA) of marine aggregate companies, see for further details see www.marinet.org.uk/mad/marea.html.

The Regulatory Advisory Group for this East Anglian offshore aggregate dredging REA consists of the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Natural England, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) and English Heritage.

With the support of Defra, the Crown Estate, and the British Marine Aggregate Producers Association, these Regulatory Advisory Group members (i.e. Cefas, NE, JNCC and English Heritage) have published a document in March 2008 which provides the terms of reference for Regional Environmental Assessments involving Marine Minerals.

This document which provides these terms of reference may be seen as a PDF file on the CEFAS website as a pdf file.

Is the East Anglian offshore aggregate dredging REA a genuine study of the facts?

The East Anglian Association of offshore aggregate dredging companies (AODA) is undertaking as a voluntary action, supported by the UK Government, a Regional Environmental Assessment (MAREA) of the East Anglian marine aggregate dredging licences (see: www.thecrownestate.co.uk/active_dredge_chart_east_jan09-4.pdf)

This REA has been out to public consultation over its Scoping Report (i.e. the issues which the REA should or should not consider), and MARINET members have made several submissions to the REA's consultant (Emu Ltd) at the Scoping Report stage, see www.marinet.org.uk/mad/objection.html#rea.

When the Scoping Report was published in February 2009, MARINET's concerns were not included in the future programme of study under the REA. These concerns involve the need for the REA to study the movement of sand from the beaches to the offshore dredging sites, and the movement of sand in the opposite direction, in order to establish whether there is a link between the dredging sites and coastal erosion. The aggregate companies claim there is no link, but without a scientific study of this matter using tracer studies (marked particles whose movement can be traced) this claim by the aggregate companies remains unsubstantiated. The REA is refusing at present to undertake such a tracer study and to review evidence on this matter assembled by an EU scientific study (known as the "Sandpit Study"). Also, MARINET believes that the wave regime model used by the aggregate companies to determine the impact of waves breaking on the shore and its link to coastal erosion (the wave regime can be affected by offshore aggregate dredging) is out of date and deficient. MARINET wants the REA to undertake a new calculation of the wave regime. So far, the REA is refusing to do so.

MARINET has expressed its concerns about the failure of the REA Scoping Report to include these issues in the forthcoming work of the Regional Environmental Assessment (REA). If the REA does not include these matters, MARINET believes the REA will be seriously deficient. This is a significant matter because the REA will be used by the aggregate companies as a scientific basis to support future marine aggregate dredging licence applications.

In correspondence MARINET has requested to the aggregate dredging companies' consultant that the Scoping Report is amended and includes a tracer study and a new wave regime model, and MARINET has advised the Government (Marine and Fisheries Agency who issues marine aggregate dredging licences) of this request. The consultant said in February that it is in receipt of MARINET's requests but could not determine them until the aggregate dredging companies determined Phase 2 of the MAREA contract i.e. which consultant would be given the money to perform the actual REA.

Phase 2 of the REA contract was decided in June. It has been awarded to the same consultant who performed the Scoping Study for the REA (i.e. Phase 1). This consultant is Emu Ltd. MARINET has now written to this consultant to ask whether the concerns which MARINET raised at the beginning of the year about the inadequacies in the Scoping Report will be addressed.

MARINET is awaiting this reply and the response of the Marine and Fisheries Agency. The East Anglian Marine Aggregate Regional Environmental Assessment (MAREA) will determine the impact of marine aggregate dredging on the East Anglian coast and offshore seas since licences were first issued in the late 1960s, and thus whether it is safe to continue to operate these licences and to issue new ones. This safety can only be determined if the REA is based on sound science. MARINET is currently wondering and asking whether this will be so.

Access to the Coast

Access to our coastline is becoming a grave problem, not without its dangers. Where beaches have been drawn down by sand-stripping the sea at high tide now surges at the base of tall unscalable sand cliffs threatening inescapable drowning when the tide comes in, whilst what is left of many peoples private gardens now forms a further dangerous impediment to access. Many a route, footpath and ramp to the beach and sea is no longer navigable. Where there was once a gentle and full means of perambulation, this has been terminated by erosion and incursion of the sea.
Along some parts of the East Anglian coastline the ruins of eroded buildings and World War II defences form dangerous obstacles, and beaches have disappeared. especially at high tide. Others have had their sand stripped to leave mud and clay marl. At some the loss of sand cohesivity has brought about quicksands from which many people have had to be rescued in the past few months. In other words, much of that path which ran along the East Anglian Coast has been lost already.
The coastal path has been a major part of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill, much vaunted by Government, yet much of this path that has prior existed along the East Anglian coast for many years has already disappeared due to coastal erosion caused in large part by aggregate dredging.
Natural England seem to have little idea of this, and have blithely gone ahead with their wish see a right of way created around England's entire coastline, with little awareness of the consequences or the difficulties and dangers presented. The Marine and Coastal Access Bill now forms a part of National Policy to be enacted later this year. It is demanding a route which is being progressively denied because of the actions and inactions of these government bodies themselves.
Although statutory bodies, not once have the Environment Agency or Natural England objected to licensing further areas for offshore aggregate dredging. Both are in full approval of the Managed Retreat a.k.a. Making Room for Water policy that will cause a further reduction of coastal access.
The issue has been part presented as an item by Victoria Leggett in the Eastern Daily Press of 31st July '09.

Fears over access to Coastal Areas

Nearly a third of the coastline in the east of England has no legal access for the public, according to a report released today - but it is unlikely to lead to sunbathers being barred from beautiful beaches.

map of East Anglia showing the whereabouts of coastal paths

Natural England has drawn up a map which reveals 32%, or 169 miles, of the east coast has "no legally secure path" on which visitors can access it. The region has the fourth-highest level of access in the UK, which overall has almost 1,000 miles lacking official right of ways.

That can mean:
Right of way is based on a de facto or informal agreement with a landowner. Only permissive access is available — 10-year agreements where farmers and landowners receive payment in return for allowing access to the public. There is no public access at all. This may be because of the presence of a nature reserve or due to the impact of coastal erosion and high tides.

The majority of those areas are in Norfolk and north Suffolk — the map appears to show nearly half of Norfolk lacking legal paths — with large stretches between King's Lynn and Hunstanton, and Sheringham and Caister.

Abi Townsend, regional recreation and access officer for Natural England, said that while the findings did not mean beachgoers were trespassing every time they headed out to build a sandcastle, access was sometimes unofficial. But she admitted, in reality, that landowners who had given de facto access were unlikely to change their minds.

Last night a spokesman from the Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the map painted an unfair picture by not explaining the reasons why legal access was not available. She added: "It seems very hard on landowners who have provided permissive access that it is assumed they wouldn't go on providing that."

The map has been drawn up by Natural England as part of its research for the Marine and Coastal Access Bill, set to go through parliament later this year, which would see a right of way created around England's entire coastline. The legislation, which is expected to take around 10 years to implement fully, would also allow the paths to move inland where the coastline is vulnerable to erosion.

The bill is supported by the Ramblers walking group, but the CLA is concerned about the effect the legislation will have on the rights of private land owners and businesses.
Miss Townsend said the process of creating the pathway would involve full consultation and there would also be a right to appeal.

[Link to Natural England's website where full details and maps can be seen.]

MARINET comments on monitoring of East Channel aggregate dredging sites

The East Channel Association (ECA), composed of the aggregate dredging companies which hold licences in the East Channel, held a meeting of the East Channel Environmental Network (ECEN) on 16th July 2009 in London. The ECEN is made up of persons, organisations and government agencies who are interested in the progress and outcome of the 5 year monitoring programme required by the Government (Marine and Fisheries Agency) in order to determine whether the environmental impact of the new aggregate dredging licences in the East Channel is acceptable or not. If the impact is not acceptable, the licences may be revised or withdrawn.

The reports issued by the ECA on the monitoring progress may be viewed on their website www.eastchannel.info.

MARINET welcomes this monitoring programme and the professional nature with which it is being undertaken. The monitoring programme is recording a host of scientific data about the East Channel offshore region. This data has hitherto simply not existed.

MARINET believes that the monitoring programme can be further consolidated in its value by considering the following aspects, and has recommended as such to the ECA:

Present level of dredging activity in the East Channel area is 23% of what the licences permit. Current impact assessment is based on this level of extraction. Therefore projected impact needs to be scaled up to the full permissible level of extraction i.e. to 100%.
The effect of the discharge back to sea of unwanted dredged material (silt and unsuitably sized sand and gravel) needs to be further analysed. In the case of the silt (mud-like material), its chemical toxicity needs to be analysed for it is known that historic toxic material discharged to sea tends to be re-concentrated in silt, and therefore the impact of the re-suspension of silt on marine life needs to be closely examined.
The East Channel region is an important herring fishing ground and an important spawning and nursery area for herring. If herring spawning and nursery sites are lost due to dredging activity, the importance of the loss of these sites relative to the size and extent of other herring spawning and nursery sites in the East Channel area needs to be established.
The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Natural England (NE) and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) are providing independent verification of the monitoring procedures. It is important that Cefas, NE and JNCC provide annually a public report on their verification procedures and findings.
Reference sites (where no dredging takes place) have been established next to the dredging sites. It is important that the similarity between the dredging sites and these reference sites, both physically and in terms of biodiversity, is made evident so that the monitoring of change in the area overall due to dredging can be clearly assessed.
The reference sites should be considered as candidates for Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) as part of the UK Government's network of MCZs to be established following Royal Assent for the Marine and Coastal Access Bill, expected before the end of 2009.

MARINET has advised the ECA of how it believes the monitoring programme can be strengthened, and this full text of this advice may be viewed at www.marinet.org.uk/mad/objection/eec-stephen4eca.pdf

Cycling the North Sea

In May this year Dutchmen Jos Wassink (50) and Koos Termorshuizen (54) mounted their fully packed bicycles for a three-month tour around the North Sea. The 6,328 kilometre long tour, counter clockwise around the North Sea by the nearest routes to the shoreline took them to many countries to visit seriously eroded and damaged sections of the coastline, declined fisheries as well as offshore windfarms, CO₂ sequestration projects, test locations for coastal defence and fishery projects.

Jos Wassink is a science writer, with more than a decade of experience producing for public television and radio. Last year he published the book Energierevolutie (Energy revolution) on sustainable energy projects in the Netherlands. Koos Termorshuizen is an economist and a independent market researcher. Apart from that, he is also a hobby photographer. Daily they reported to the Dutch newspaper 'De Pers', Radio Netherlands World Service and VROM.nl, the magazine of the Dutch Ministry of the Environment.

On route, the met with marine biologists, wind turbine constructors, fish farmers, energy pioneers, civil engineers and many people living and working by the coast. They took photographs and made Interviews with them on the problems encountered and discussed their views to help reveal what a more sustainable future could like if the will were there.

In mid July for two days Jos and Koos were the guests of MARINET's Pat and Norma Gowen at their bungalow at Hemsby close to the North Sea when they were taken by their hosts to see the Scroby offshore wind farm, to visit rapidly eroding Happisburgh, Winterton and Hemsby, the experimental rock reefs at Sea Palling, the sub-sea levels at Eccles, Horsey, Waxham and the low laying Brograve Levels,to the wind pumps ('windmills') long introduced by the Dutch and the vulnerable parts of the Norfolk Broads threatened with loss due to the dictates of the managed retreat policy and continuing offshore aggregate dredging. This came as rather a shock to them, coming from a country where protection of the coastline and marine eco-system is paramount, as their ancestors came to Norfolk to show us how to save the land from the sea. Their website at www.northseacycling.com is well worth a visit, as it contains much of direct relevance to the North Sea coast and marine environment, and gives the daily 'blogs'.

Their specific write up of their visit to Hemsby and those areas outlined in the paragraph above can be seen on our website at www.marinet.org.uk/coastaldefences/cycling.html

Fish stocks recover as conservation measures take effect

Global efforts to combat overfishing are starting to turn the tide to allow some fish stocks to recover, new analysis shows. Research from an international team of scientists shows that a handful of major fisheries across the world have managed to reduce the rate at which fish are exploited.

The experts say their study offers hope that overfishing can be brought under control, but they warn that fishermen in Ireland and the North Sea are still catching too many fish to allow stocks to recover. Some 63% of assessed fish stocks worldwide still require rebuilding, the scientists report.

Read the full article at The Guardian 30th July 2009

It ain't just England destroying their coastal environment and marine eco-system

From 'The Sur in English' comes this story of exploitive sand dredging in southern Spain, entitled ' Greenpeace highlights impact of Calahonda sand extraction. Greenpeace highlights impact of Calahonda sand extraction'

The Calahonda seabed is an area of great biodiversity. The ecological association Greenpeace has underlined the threats posed to the Calahonda seabed by sand extraction projects in its annual report 'Destruction at all costs.' The coast is the zone of maximum confluence between the Mediterranean sea and the Atlantic ocean, and as such is an area of great biodiversity, named 'the richest sea in Europe' by the Department of Zoology of the University of Malaga (UMA).

According to Greenpeace, this space between Cabopino and Calaburra, which is protected as a place of communal interest, is being hounded, not only by urbanisation and coastal pollution, but also by the proposed future dredging of 135 hectares of seafloor sand in the name of beach regeneration. The study of environmental impact carried out by the UMA disagrees, but the Environment Ministry has not yet ruled out this zone.

'The Mijas coast has an indeterminate biological worth. It is unique in its variety of exotic African, European, Mediterranean and Atlantic species, indeed it could be said that this stretch of 3,000 hectares six kilometres long is the only tropical coast in Europe,' points out the UMA.

Greenpeace also highlights the dressing down which the Spanish government received due to carrying out sand extractions in underwater seabeds, destroying plant species which are protected at a European level. The group also criticises future plans for the desalination of at least three kilometres of the Calahondan coast, which it classifies as a 'threat'.

New rules for coastal erosion-hit areas

From the North Norfolk News of 20th July by Ian Clarke

Campaigners have given a cautious welcome to government plans to relax rules allowing more developments in areas of East Anglia at risk of coastal erosion. The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) is considering removing the blanket ban on building in under-threat areas to boost local economies. While development such as housing will still be forbidden, temporary schemes which could boost tourism and recreation could be allowed under the proposed changes. In areas at risk in the short term, within the next 20 years, only development directly linked to the coast will be allowed - such as beach huts or holiday caravan and camping sites. In less vulnerable areas, where the risk of erosion is 50 to 100 years away, a wider range of development such as hotels, shops and leisure activities linked to the coast would be considered.

The North Norfolk coast could be among the areas which could benefit most and the district's MP and a leading coastal campaigner said the proposals were a positive step. But they urged ministers to ensure communities should be able to "move inland" and remain viable and sustainable.

North Norfolk MP Norman Lamb said: "It is essential that the starting point is that we want to protect communities that are threatened by coastal erosion and we will fight to do that. Where it becomes impossible, and genuinely impossible, then we have to find the mechanism to allow the community to grow inland." He said relaxed planning rules were "an important part" of the overall strategy for coastal areas — but he added that compensation had to be guaranteed for people who lose their homes.

Malcolm Kerby, co-ordinator of Coastal Concern Action Group, said the government had to allow "roll back" for communities to move inland and allow land which normally be considered for development to be built on. He added that coastal planning had to be "more flexible."

North Norfolk District Council recently produced new guidelines recognising that more needs to be done to help communities adapt to coastal change. A spokesman said: "There is still along way to go as far as fully recognising the real impact that coastal change has on communities."

Making yesterday's announcement, planning minister John Healey said: "What we're hearing from coastal communities is that right now temporary development that would be beneficial to the area's economy and tourist industry is unable to go ahead. It's really important for local businesses that they can keep going at this time of economic difficulties. That's why we're proposing to change the planning rules to allow safe time-limited development such as beach huts, car-parks and cafes to be built in coastal areas if there's an economic benefit."

The Whitehall announcement came as the Environment Agency yesterday launched its consultation on the North Norfolk Shoreline Management Plan, which covers an area from Old Hunstanton to Kelling Hard. The full document can be seen at local council offices and online by following the links from www.environment-agency.gov.uk.

There will be public drop-in sessions at The Maltings in Staithe Street, Wells, on Thursday September 10, 2-7pm, Brancaster Staithe Village Hall, on Friday September 11, 2-7pm and Saturday September 12, 9.30am-1.30pm.

Termination of Flood Warning Sirens

Amazingly, those in control of flood sirens along the Norfolk coast, including the Environment Agency and the Police, have arrived at a conclusion that the sirens sounded to warn coastal dwellers of an impending flood tidal surge should be abandoned as a telephone warning coupled with a local radio announcement would be more efficacious and (of course) far cheaper.
Perhaps they may be oblivious to the fact that in the 1953 the storm blew down most of the 'phone lines, and those few remaining were blocked with calls from and to concerned relatives. The power lines came down to, and underground mains supplies were salinated and absent, so radio and TV would not provide the information needed. But of course, uninformed 'experts' all know best.

The latest story on these vital sirens comes from Ed Foss in the Eastern Daily Press of 21st July '09.

Campaigners in fresh bid to save flood sirens

Flood sirens campaigners have urged a stay of execution of nine months to a year ahead of yet another key meeting on Monday. Members of Norfolk County Council's cabinet are expected to set a time frame for the possible passing of the sirens from their control to the hands of town and parish councils. An initial 'switch off' date of the end of this month has already been called into question because it doesn't give the parishes the time to make decisions about whether they want to commit to the financial and practical obligations associated with the sirens. It is understood the cabinet, which meets at 9am on Monday at County Hall, will discuss an extension of 12 weeks, but campaigners want this extended.

Paul Morse, who leads the Lib Dem group at the county council, said nine months to a year was necessary. "There is still a great deal of work which needs to be done on this matter," said Mr Morse. "We need to know what the cost would be of replacing the sirens with modern units and what the recent suggestion of using the Sustainable Communities Act to help the parishes really means. People don't trust the alterative Environment Agency floodline warnings direct system — I know that is true because my division was the only one directly affected by the flooding of November 2007 and people have told me often enough. The detail must be considered, rushing will not help - and all this in the context of a council with lots of new members, many of whom were not even aware of what happened at Walcott more than a year and a half ago."

Mr Morse repeated his concern that the Conservatives' June 4 county council elections manifesto committed them to "fight Environment Agency plans to shut down the flood sirens", but that did not appear to be happening.

Wells flood warden and newly elected Lib Dem county councillor Marie Strong said: "They must extend the time on this, I say it needs to be another year to deal with everything from health and safety, risk assessments and the key matter of the Sustainable Communities Act." She also said the Environment Agency needed to be "challenged" to prove the floodline warnings direct system was "infallible", which she and others have long argued it is not.

The idea of using the Sustainable Communities Act was put forward at a recent Fire and Community Protection panel meeting, where Tony Tomkinson, county councillor for Clavering, said it might even be able to compel the Environment Agency and police to use the sirens.

Saving Southwold

The Eastern Daily Press published on 23rd July '09 the following article by David Bale entitled "Rescue plan for Southwold harbour wall"

An historic harbour wall that is in poor condition and has been slowly crumbling into the sea is set to get a rescue package. Waveney District Councillors are being urged next week to adopt a policy to save Southwold Harbour North Quay Wall from further collapse.

Harbour users and council officers have already agreed urgent action needs to be taken to prevent the structure from becoming even more precarious but concerns were raised over where the money to fund the repairs would come from. That could be solved if councillors agree next week to use the £50,000 budget previously allocated to the Blyth Lower Estuary study — which campaigners say has already been done.

The recommendation before councillors at a cabinet meeting on Tuesday is to extend a previous contract with consultant HR Wallingford to fund two studies. One is an options appraisal study leading to a recommendation for a major scheme to stabilise the Harbour North wall; the second is a dredging viability assessment to advise on the viability of diverting the existing navigation channel away from the wall failure zone. Councillors are also urged to take a 'Reactive — Do Minimum' approach to manage the risk of wall failure prior to the implementation of the major repair works anticipated.

The recommendations were yesterday welcomed by Sue Allen, chairman of the Blyth Estuary Group based in Southwold, who said: "One of the aims of the group has always been to ensure the future of the harbour wall, so I will be urging councillors to go with the recommendations at next week's meeting. It's also better to spend the money on repairs to the wall rather than on the Blyth Lower Estuary study, which has virtually been done already."

The council is obligated as landowner and harbour authority to appropriately manage the risk of collapse at the wall, and Colin Law, deputy leader and portfolio holder for customer access, said: "We are exploring all the options at the moment, so until we have decided on the best way forward it's hard to discuss it. We have to consider both short-term and long-term measures. What we don't want to do is to have a short-term fix that does not prove to be cost-effective in the long-term."

As reported in the EDP earlier this month, the future management of the wall is looking more certain after a loan was secured to help set up an ownership trust. The harbour has been the subject of an ownership dispute for years and last year Waveney District Council, which has run the facility since the 1970s, agreed to start the process to get it signed back over to the town. The Southwold Harbour Lands Trust has been set up to take over the management of the site and nearby car park and campsite when they are handed back to the town next year. The harbour, which lies at the mouth of the Blyth estuary, is part of a system of walls which protect businesses, farmland and homes in Southwold, Walberswick, Reydon and Blythburgh from flooding.

The Environment Agency (EA) plans to stop maintaining defences around the estuary over the next 20 years because it cannot afford the estimated £35m needed to repair them.

Coastal protection plans for north Suffolk coast revealed

From the Eastern Daily Press of the 30th June

Conservationists and erosion experts will today unveil their visions of how the north Suffolk coastline might change over the next 100 years. Protecting popular beaches in Southwold and shoring up defences around Lowestoft harbour are among the proposals being put forward in the new shoreline management plan (SMP) for the coast from Lowestoft down to Felixstowe. The scheme has taken more than two years to create and is available for public consultation from today.

The SMP looks at the risks of erosion and flooding along the coast and also considers where defences need to be strengthened or where erosion should be allowed to continue over the next 100 years. The plan involves protecting Lowestoft Ness and the harbour around Lake Lothing, and continuing with existing defences along the resort's South Beach to keep the sand and sediment in place.

In Pakefield, the plan for managed retreat — allowing for controlled erosion — will help to maintain some sediment in front of the cliffs. Further south in Kessingland, the existing flood defence along the levels would be moved back to ensure that the A12 Lowestoft to Ipswich road is protected from flooding. Eroding cliffs between Kessingland and Southwold would help to maintain the beach at the popular seaside resort, but could increase the risks for the village of Covehithe, which is on top of the sandy cliff north of Southwold. Waveney and Suffolk Coastal District Councils, and the Environment Agency, have worked together to come up with the plan, which will now undergo three months of public consultation so that coastal communities can have their say.

Greg Guthrie, who has helped to draw up the consultation document for consultants Royal Haskoning, said: "We have to work hard to create a balance between maintaining things where we can to support the overall economic welfare of the region and protecting the communities, landscape and nature along the coast. This is a fascinating stretch of coast and we're sure we have come up with something which works for as many people as possible."

The SMP documents are available at www.suffolksmp2.org.uk and there is an online questionnaire for people to give comments. The consultation closes on September 30th.

Blyth Estuary Group DIY on Sea Defences

If those responsible fail to meet expectations levied upon them, then 'Do It Yourself'. That's the latest move by the Blyth Estuary Group, as reported in the Lowestoft Journal of 19th June '09.as:

Campaigners plan to repair flood walls

Campaigners battling to save flood defences protecting land around a north Suffolk estuary are putting the finishing touches to plans which could see them repairing and rebuilding the walls themselves.

The Environment Agency announced in September 2007 that it could no longer justify large-scale investment to repair the defences around the Blyth Estuary, near Southwold, in the face of rising sea levels. It proposed a strategy of managed retreat, which would see the existing walls protecting land around Walberswick, Southwold, Reydon and Blythburgh, maintained for a maximum of 20 years but with some sections allowed to breach much sooner.

Now the Blyth Estuary Group, which has been campaigning against the proposals ever since they were first put forward, is hoping to take on the task and rebuild the mud walls themselves so that they will last for at least a few more decades. The proposals, being submitted to Suffolk Coastal District Council through Walberswick Parish Council, involve building an access track across the marsh using waste soil from building sites so that clay from the marshes can then be put in place to bolster the defences.

Blyth Estuary group member Richard Steward, who has been drawing up the plans, said that the scheme would see about thirteen and a half thousand truck loads of soil put in place over the next six years. The finished walls would be about 12m wide and stretch about 8km right round the estuary. Mr Steward said: "It has taken us three years to get to this point and to really understand the processes at work in the estuary. We will build the wall so that it is the same height as the salting on the other side, near the river. We believe we can defend and protect these walls and we will do this with waste soil. The charges we get for disposing of the soil will help to fund the work. We will then use the marsh clay to build up the walls again." He added: "Men with spades have dug and protected not only the Blyth Estuary, but also the Deben, the Alde and large parts of the Broads, for hundreds of years. This will happen. We will defend the estuary. Every generation has to stand up and get on with the job in hand, that's all we can do."

Sue Allen, chairman of the Blyth Estuary Group, said: "It is nice to see things finally moving forward. This shows good community working as the local councils have put money forward to help pay for the application."

A spokesman for the Environment Agency said: "We have been working with the group very closely on this and giving them as much advice as we can. When the application is registered, we will then comment on it as we would consult on any other application."

Government's Tiny Shift to 'Compensation'

The government have grugingly made a very slight move thinking that they might be pacifying those losing all through failure to protect from erosion under 'Managed Retreat' and ongoing dredging. But it is not compensation, only assisting demolition and clearance apparently'. The North Norfolk News of 17th June '09 carried the following article.

More aid for coastal erosion victims

The government this week announced a raft of new ideas to help people who lose their homes to coastal erosion - but local campaigners say it still falls short of the full compensation package needed.

Launching a three-month consultation into coastal change policy, Defra officials said they would create a new pot of £11m to help investigate how to address change. Councils could bid to become coastal change "pathfinders" and obtain some of the money. The consultation will also discuss providing cash to meet certain costs of demolition and moving house for those faced with losing their homes to erosion. But the suggested figures look to be limited to a maximum of £1,000 to cover removals and redirection of post, and up to £5,000 to cover knocking down the threatened property.

The scheme would not extend to covering the value of homes, even if they had been previously defended and were now subject to damaged or removed sea defences. The documents make mention of the possibility of fuller compensation for people losing their homes and businesses — but this is not Defra's "preferred option".

Malcolm Kerby, co-ordinator of the Happisburgh-based Coastal Concern Action Group (CCAG), said the consultation was a significant step forward and a clear acknowledgement from the government of the problems that existed. He added: "It doesn't go far enough by any means, but at least the government has recognised there is a hole in the system that people are dropping through; they cannot deny that exists any more."

North Norfolk MP Norman Lamb said: "If you are on the front line of this and you are told all you will get is the cost of demolition - which in north Norfolk is already paid for by the local authority - plus a little money to help you move house, it is insulting. This falls fatally short of what should happen, which is adequate compensation for the loss of a home if it has been previously defended and is no longer defended following a change in policy."

To take part in the consultation process visit www.defra.gov.uk

UK Bathing Waters : 2009 compliance (from last years analyses)

MARINET have published the performance of bathing waters throughout the United Kingdom in 2008 against the mandatory and guideline standards of the EU Bathing Water Directive, 76/160/EEC. These performance figures have been prepared by MARINET, based on data supplied by the Environment Agencies of the UK constituent countries and the Dept of Environment for Northern Ireland.

Read the full results here at www.marinet.org.uk/ukbw/gbeachg.html

Threat to Coral

The Eastern Daily Press of 10th June '09 published the following report retailed by Tara Greaves

Norfolk scientists reveal coral threat

A disturbing report by East Anglian researchers reveals that coral reefs throughout the Caribbean have been comprehensively "flattened" in the last 40 years, which has serious implications for biodiversity and coastal defences.

It was already known that coral cover in the Caribbean is in decline but the study, by scientists at the University of East Anglia, is the first large-scale work to show exactly what this means for the architecture of the region's reefs.

Published online today by the peer-reviewed journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, the researchers found that the vast majority of reefs have lost their complex structure and become significantly flatter and more uniform. The most complex reefs have been virtually wiped out.

The researchers, working with colleagues at Simon Fraser University in Canada, analysed changes in the structure of reefs using 500 surveys across 200 reefs conducted between 1969 and 2008. They found that 75pc of the reefs are now largely flat, compared with 20pc in the 1970s.

Lead researcher Lorenzo Alvarez-Filip, of the UEA's School of Biological Sciences, said: "For many organisms, the complex structure of reefs provides refuge from predators. This drastic loss of architectural complexity is clearly driving substantial declines in biodiversity, which will in turn affect coastal fishing communities. The loss of structure also vastly reduces the Caribbean's natural coastal defences, significantly increasing the risk of coastal erosion and flooding."

Reversing the decline now poses a major challenge for scientists and policy-makers concerned with maintaining reef ecosystems and the security and wellbeing of Caribbean coastal communities.

UK Government says NO to highly protected marine reserves in UK Marine Bill

Despite detailed and extensive debate during April and May of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill in the House of Lords, both during its Committee and Report Stage, the Government has resisted all arguments and attempts to have highly protected marine reserves (known in the Bill as marine conservation zones or MCZs) incorporated into the text of the legislation.

The Government says that it believes in highly protected marine reserves, and indeed expects these reserves to be created, but insists that such a proscriptive act is unnecessary and would encumber the legislation without good purpose.

This is not the view of MARINET (www.marinet.org.uk/marinebill/30percent09feb.pdf), nor indeed of the Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament (click here) when they considered the draft legislation last summer.

MARINET believes that if a specific power to create highly protected marine reserves is not written into the Bill, then there will be a retreat from this commitment by future Governments as economic and social interests argue that such a restrictive provision (no extractive activity) would prejudice their freedom. Thus, the conservation of the sea, its habitats and biodiversity, will continue to remain subordinate to economic and social interests (e.g. fishing, mineral extraction and other commercial activities).

An amendment to include highly protected marine reserves was tabled at the Report Stage in the House of Lords on 12th May 2009 (click here) by the Liberal Democrats with Crossbench support, but it was not supported by the Conservatives who, like the Government, argued that to write the provision for highly protected MCZs into the Bill was "unnecessary". Thus the amendment failed to secure enough support and was not pressed to a vote by the Liberal Democrats.

MARINET has argued for five key amendments (www.marinet.org.uk/marinebill/amendments09apr.pdf) to the Marine Bill. These are:

The need for highly protected marine reserves to be written into the legislation.
The need for the selection of marine reserves (marine conservation zones) to be based primarily on scientific criteria, with social and economic factors taking a subordinate role in this process. At present the legislation does not specify the primacy of scientific criteria in the selection process, and the Government and the other political parties have refused to support this amendment.
The legislation recognises that marine reserves will need to constitute a network, but the legislation does not specify that this network should be "ecologically coherent" so an amendment to this effect is required. This amendment has been supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords, and the Government has been forced to concede that an amendment is required. This amendment will be tabled (precise wording presently unknown) at the Third Reading of the Bill in the House of Lords on 8th June. (see Hansard amendment debate)
The marine reserves network must be sufficiently large in order to ensure that UK seas are managed sustainably (i.e. there is a balance between conservation, social and economic interests). The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution recommended in 2004 (www.rcep.org.uk/fisheries/Chapter8.pdf) that at least 30% of UK seas should become highly protected marine reserves, but MARINET has found that no political party in the present UK Parliament will support this recommendation. MARINET has therefore had to desist from advocating this specific objective, and instead has argued that the Bill should be amended so "that the network [of marine reserves] is sufficiently extensive to enable economic and social uses of the sea to be environmentally sustainable". No political group in the House of Lords has supported this amendment.
The marine reserves network should be established in an initial ecologically coherent form by the 2012. Currently the legislation gives not date by which the network of marine reserves should be established, so MARINET has asked for the Bill to include this amendment which corresponds with the UK legal commits under OSPAR (www.ospar.org) and the World Summit on Sustainable Development (www.un.org/events/wssd). The Government said it will meet its international legal obligations, but wanted no dates to be included in the legislation. No other political party in the House of Lords felt compelled to table this amendment. Thus the date for the ecologically coherent network of marine reserves, either in an initial or a comprehensive form, remains undefined by the Marine Bill.

The other key purpose MARINET has argued the Marine Bill must serve is to rebuild our commercial fish stocks. At present, 88% of commercial fish stocks in EU seas are being exploited beyond their maximum sustainable yield and 30% are being exploited beyond their safe biological limit. These are the latest figure from the European Commission (see http://ec.europa.eu:80/fisheries/reform). This over-exploitation of our fisheries makes new management practices both essential and urgent, but the UK Government insists that the UK Marine Bill is not the place to address this issue. It argues that such reform can only come from the European Commission via the Common Fisheries Policy. However, as MARINET has pointed out to the UK Government, powers to prohibit fishing in spawning, nursery and other key marine areas of biodiversity already exist under the CFP (see www.marinet.org.uk/marinebill/eu2371.pdf). Moreover the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive which is now operative gives the UK conservation powers to recommend the cessation of fishing in areas of UK seas out to 200 nautical miles when conservation imperatives require. Such imperatives are defined in the Direcive as the maintenance of commercial fish stocks in a sound condition along with marine food chains (see, Annex 1 of the MSFD, www.marinet.org.uk/marinebill/euframeworkdirective.pdf).

MARINET has explained these facts to the UK Government and the political parties in the House of Lords during their consideration of the Marine Bill (www.marinet.org.uk/marinebill/legalpowers09feb.pdf). However, at the present time, no politician in the UK Parliament is prepared to act on this matter and no political party believes that the UK Marine Bill should address this issue.

It is MARINET's view that the UK Marine Bill can and must address the issue of the sustainability and re-building of the commercial fish stocks in UK seas, and that the UK Parliament has the necessary sovereign powers to do this in the UK Marine Bill.

MARINET presents evidence that offshore dredging will cause beach erosion

In a detailed study and report on the background literature and scientific studies from around the world MARINET presents evidence to the Anglian Offshore Dredging Association (AODA) that the dredging of sand and gravel from the seabed does cause coastal erosion.

This erosion involves the drawing down from beaches of their sand (known as "beach draw-down")

The forces causing this are two fold.

Firstly the depressions in the offshore seabed (pits caused due to the excavation of the seabed for its sand and gravel) result in a greater depth of water offshore and thus in larger waves and an intensified wave regime arriving on the beaches, and these more powerful waves cause greater erosion.

Secondly, the sand eroded by these larger waves and the intensified wave regime is drawn out to sea and eventually to the excavated areas.

The MARINET report also notes that beach replenishment (the practice whereby eroded beaches have their sand replaced by the aggregate dredging companies with sand excavated from offshore) is a pointless and futile exercise because the sand that is naturally on beaches is comprised mainly of grains of heavier minerals and the sand excavated from the sea bed comprises mainly grains of lighter minerals which are more easily eroded by wave action.

The remedy to beach erosion is therefore not beach replenishment, but rather preventing erosion in the first place. As offshore aggregate dredging is a primary cause of beach erosion, it makes sense to curtail this activity in areas where beach erosion is occurring.

The full MARINET report is here — www.marinet.org.uk/mad/earod09may.html.

Marine Reserves EDM approaches the "top ten"

The Early Day Motion in the House of Commons, EDM 337, is approaching the list of the "top ten" most signed EDMs in this session of Parliament out of over 1600 motions currently tabled. An Early Day Motion is tabled by Members of Parliament as an expression of opinion and as an indication of policy for future legislation.

EDM 337 has the support of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat front benches and a significant number of Labour back bench MPs and calls for highly protected marine reserves, chosen on the basis of scientific criteria, to be a part of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill currently before Parliament. Highly protected marine reserves are areas of the sea where no extractive activity takes place (including fishing) in order to protect and allow the marine ecosystem to recover, and have been recommended by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution in 2004. The Royal Commission considered the impact of fishing on our seas and how fish stocks, which are under severe stress due to over fishing, can be sensibly managed and helped to recover. At present time, the Government has decided not to include highly protected marine reserves in the Marine Bill.

MARINET is campaigning for the inclusion of highly protected marine reserves, and is seeking the amendment of the Bill in the House of Lords at the present time, and its amendment again when it comes before the House of Commons in June.

EDM 337 is a very important tool in securing the amendment of the Marine Bill in the House of Commons. If enough MPs sign the EDM, the Government can be persuaded of the necessity and good sense in amending the Bill.

You can see whether your constituency MP has signed EDM 337 by visiting here.

If your MP has not signed, you can obtain a draft letter asking for your MP to sign by visiting www.marinereserves.org.uk. MARINET believes that without highly protected marine reserves in the Marine Bill, the legislation will fail in its purpose to rebuild the health of our seas and their fish stocks. Therefore your action and the vote of your MP in this matter does count. Ask them to sign EDM 337, and to vote for this amendment of the Marine Bill.

The Day that Norfolk Shuddered

Last year the Eastern Daily Press revealed that conservation bosses were considering a radical plan to surrender a huge area of the Broads to the sea, prompting a public outcry and a vociferous campaign. Now Natural England has dropped the controversial proposals from its final report. At least six villages would have been wiped off the map, hundreds of people turned out of their homes, and thousands of acres of farmland and some of Norfolk's top wildlife sites lost to the sea.

A leaked draft report listed four possible courses of action in the Upper Thurne basin, including allowing the sea to breach defences between Horsey and Winterton, flooding 25 square miles (6,500 hectares) of the Broads as far inland as Stalham and Potter Heigham.

This devastating scenario came not from the pages of a lurid novel, but a report by the government's own conservation advisers, Natural England, as part off their plans for dealing with erosion and sea rise under the Managed Retreat. Not surprisingly, the news sparked fear, alarm, despondency, disbelief and anger in coastal communities, and although Natural England attempted to explain it as simply one of a number of scenarios in a draft report never intended for public consumption, subsequent official announcements only reinforced the impression that it was being given serious consideration.

Soon after the news broke, a campaign to fight the proposals swung into action. Hundreds of people attended public meetings and thousands signed petitions. MPs joined the battle, the issue was debated in parliament and the then flood minister Phil Woolas visited the coast last July, stating: "The scenario put forward by Natural England is not the flood defence policy of the government. I cannot see a situation where any elected government would allow the Norfolk Broads to flood."

But now it appears that Natural England have had their knuckles rapped and that following a much needed degree of consultation will belatedly publish the re-written final version of its Broads report, one of four dealing with different areas of the country. This mentions the need to consider "communities and their livelihoods — a concern totally absent from the draft document — and talks of the need for "a socially just approach" which, in this context, means compensation for anyone that loses their property to the sea.

The full reports can be read in the pages of the Eastern Daily Press of 31st March '09 in an article by Jon Welch entitled 'Flooding proposal sparked a major outcry' and 'Norfolk flood plans dramatically dropped'.

A further report on the issue of compensation is to be seen under 'Compensation hope for erosion-threatened homes', a further Eastern Daily Press article written by Richard Batson on 30th March '09.

Visualising the Dredged Volume

Our members and readers often say that they have great difficulty in imagining what the huge volume of sand and aggregate taken from the designated offshore dredging sites looks like. Indeed, the process is not quite so simple as it would first appear. But thankfully it all rounds up quite nicely once the basic sums are done.

Firstly,to clarify 'tons' and 'tonnes'. In Europe and the English-speaking countries that are now predominantly metric, the spelling tonne, that which the take is usually expressed in, is widespread. This is now generally true in Britain, however, the ton used prior to metrication was the 'long ton' of 2240 pounds (approximately 1016 kilograms) This is so close to the tonne that most draw little distinction and continue to use the old spelling 'ton'. But do note that in United States the metric ton is little used. There the name 'ton' almost invariably refers to a short ton of 2000 lb which is about 907 kg. Anyway, we can round up a 'tonne' to a 'ton' for simplicity.

A tonne or metric ton, also referred to as a metric tonne is a measurement of mass equal to 1,000 kilograms or 2204.6226 pounds to be precise. So one tonne is equivalent to 1,000,000 grams which rounds up to 2205 lbs. But sometimes shipping and industry use tons. But as aforesaid, this can be rounded up without losing accuracy.

Next, according to moisture content and stone to sand ratio, there's usually between 1.6 and 1.9 metric tonnes weight for each cubic metre of aggregate. But that related to uses a dry weight ratio of 1.72:1. Therefore, a typical take of say 24.3 million tons would give 24.3 divided by 1.72 = 13.95 million cubic metres. That's as near as dammit to 14 million cubic yards. This is best visualised by theoretically placing it on top of a town of known area. (Don't try this in practice unless you can chose Westminster).

Just divide the square area of say Buryingem-on-Sea into the cubic amount, be it metres or yards, and it will come out as to how deep the covering sand and gravel would be. A small graphic sketch showing the average roof height and/or that of the tallest building, say the church, then placing the level of dredged aggregate on top makes for an impressive picture that gets the story over in fully understandable but frighteningly visual terms. (Dare I say it 'speaks volumes ?) It could also be used to determine by what level the seabed would have been dropped to by extraction from any given surface area.

If we have a graphics expert out there it would be really appreciated if they could do such a diagram using 'Paint' or the like, or a scanned hand drawn picture, please send me a copy for our website, as we know there are many more than you out there wondering just how it would appear.

Pat Gowen, 3rd May '09

Public Consultation on Environment Agency Strategy Plans!

Residents of erosion stricken towns along the Yorkshire coast, Ravenscar, Robin Hood's Bay, Whitby Abbey, etc. are being invited to a public display on the strategy proposed by Environment Agency and will be invited to ask questions on it at the meeting to be held between 5pm and 7pm on Thursday, 7th May, at Fylingdales Village Hall in Robin Hood's Bay. All are invited to attend.

This is very good news that local knowledge is being sought, as up to now there has been widespread criticism that the issue of the risks to homes from the sea is far too dependent on armchair reports by consultants who have prior demonstrated a poor awareness and understanding of the situation. But now Scarborough Council's head of technical services, John Riby, underlined that they would be looking very much to local people to help provide solutions, saying:

"The council is leading on this, assisted by specialist consultants and would like to encourage as many local people and residents of the areas to get involved. They can attend the public meeting and contribute any local knowledge and views that may be useful in the development of the strategy. "We need to fully understand the characteristics of the area covered by this strategy in order to promote the right solutions for coastal management"

The full report is in given in an article by Mark Branegan in the Yorkshire Post of 23rd April 2009.

Seabed Recovery following Dredging

You will recall that the spokesman for BMAPA originally denied any damaging impact to the sea bed as a result of dredging. Following our provision of evidence disproving this claim in our objections to licence applications, this was later amended by a claim that full recovery resulted within a year of the termination of dredging operations.

A year later, following the findings published by CEFAS and HR Wallingford that no recovery was evident even after three years (see "Assessment of the rehabilitation of the seabed following marine aggregate dredging" at www.marinet.org.uk/mad/scientificstudies.html#cfn) BMAPA amended the claimed recovery period to be within 'two to three years' (see the interview with their spokesman Dr. Andrew Bellamy on our MARINET video film).

But we know that this myth has long been disputed by fisherman, who have discovered from first hand knowledge and practical experience that dredged out areas do not recover even after eighteen years. (See the findings by Rodney and Graham Burns of the Aldeburgh Fishing Guild under 'The Losses Account' in our Briefing Paper No.1 on this website and also on our MARINET video film).

Now some good news is at hand with possible remediation in sight as it was announced that CEFAS are instituting an experimental project that might just bring about recovery to dredged out areas.

This encouraging move was revealed at the the April 2009 meeting of the East Coast Dredging Liaison Committee which is made up of representatives from the MFA, The Crown Estate, Hanson Aggregates Marine Ltd, Westminster Gravels Ltd, BMAPA, ERM Cemex, UK Marine Ltd, United Marine Dredging, Britannia Aggregates Ltd, Southend Fishermen's Association, Environment Agency, DEME Building Materials, VDL Sea Aggregates and Kent and Essex SFC NFFO. (MARINET has been excluded from this committee)

The purpose of the experimental project is to set up a field trial to investigate the potential for gravel seeding as a means of restoring sediment composition in areas where dredging has resulted in an overburden of fine sediments. Specific objectives are to determine whether:

… it is practically feasible to perform gravel seeding' at a relinquished aggregate extraction site, and …
… whether the technique results in sediments more physically similar to that of non-impacted gravelly habitats in the wider environment, and …
… whether the technique results in the return of more gravelly fauna.

An initial attempt took place in Zone 2 within aggregate extraction Area 408 (offshore to the Humber) this chosen as the experimental site as there was some evidence for persistence of sand which may have resulted from screening operations at this site. Two 4000 tonne cargoes were dredged, using a commercial suction hopper trailer dredger, from within an active zone of Area 408 and deposited within the treatment box.

Prior to deposition, a baseline survey, using a combination of acoustic tools and grab sampling was undertaken. This survey was followed up, post deposition, by a further three surveys. Results showed that a commercial dredger, typical of those operating at extraction Area 408, could be used to undertake gravel seeding. Results also indicated that the technique was successful in increasing the proportion of gravel exposed at the seabed surface. The increase in gravel led to the establishment of a faunal community more similar to that of local gravel dominated reference sites. Although results suggest gravel seeding could be used for restoration, further work is required to assess the long-term success of the technique".

Wave energy machine approaching completion at Lowestoft

The giant Trident wave energy machine invented by Hugh-Peter Kelly, intended for placement five miles off Southwold on the Suffolk Coast in June, is rapidly approaching completion at the Small and Co boatyard at Lowestoft. Here the machine's pioneers, Trident Energy, are proudly showing off the fruits of their labours by offering invited guests the opportunity to scale the 16 metre high machine for a demonstration.

Wave machine on the dock
Trident Energy patented system for converting sea wave energy directly into electricity at Small & Co dock in Lowestoft.

The mechanism is simply a straight up-and-down motion of the floats in the waves. The smallest motion will create electricity and it will work in the most modest of wave conditions. Special sensors to detect stormy conditions will pull the floats up automatically and protect them from serious damage until the danger has passed.

The current test model could provide enough energy to power about 700 homes, larger wave farms based upon it could provide power for between 60,000 and 70,000 homes in the future.

The full details may be seen in the Eastern Daily Press 24th April article 'Wave energy machine's finishing touches' by Alasdair McGregor.

Coastal Erosion could cost billions

Climatologists working for the Association of British Insurers have predicted that the cost of coastal flooding in Suffolk and north Essex could run into billions of pounds. They are basing their predictions on that sea levels on the east coast could rise by 40cms (15.75 inches) during the next 40 years and that the financial impact on Lowestoft alone would be £550 million from over 17,500 homes and commercial properties at risk of flooding.

Even if a tidal surge came about even today 3,900 homes and commercial properties valued at £550million would be at risk, and that this figure does not take into account the impact this would have on tourism in the region and the disruption to transport and roads. But by 2050 an 830% increase would result.

Although the association only examined the impact of flooding in the Lowestoft region, they report impact further down the coast would be similar, especially in those areas already at risk. They said that the majority of flooding by 2050 will be around north Essex, north Norfolk and parts of Suffolk, but that an additional 130,000 homes from Hull to London on the east coast are at risk. Nationally the Association of British Insurers predict homes at risk of coastal flooding could soar by 40 percent.

They have published a series of measures they would like to see included in the Government's final Flood and Water Management Bill to ensure that flood insurance remains widely available to more than two million homeowners and businesses in areas that are known to be at risk. Insurers have pledged to continue to provide cover to existing customers whose properties are at risk of flooding until 2013, as long as adequate flood management is in place, and have called on the Government to set targets and give the Environment Agency a statutory duty to reduce flood risk. But the Environment Agency claim that this is unachievable and say that it is not possible to protect everyone everywhere at all times from the risk of flooding.

The details can be found from the story 'Coastal Erosion could cost billions' by Kate McGrath in the East Anglian Daily Times of 1st May.

Denuded Beach

You will have seen in our latest news the items entitled 'Nudists Feeling the Pinch' and 'Nudists no longer beached' telling how since dredging began the original 34 metre wide nudist beach at Corton in Suffolk had been reduced to just 7 metres, and how Waveney District Council felt that the 80% loss of area no longer allows sufficient spacing between the public and those wearing just a smile, so were considering closure.

That day has come, as the Council, following a three month consultation, have just given the stark news that they have axed and redesignated Corton as from November 1st this year. However, Waveney District Council has undertaken to explore potential alternative sites which are suitable for naturists but which are not currently affected by the erosion issues we have in Corton. We just hope they can find one!

The full story can be read under 'Council axes nudist beach' by Emily Dennis in the Eastern Daily Press of 27th April.

Severn Tidal Power Consultation

The government is consulting not about a final decision, but over which projects should be taken forward on the shortlist for further study — or which ones should be added. Marinet supports much opinion and local people in large majority who want the "megabarrage" dropped from the shortlist.

Read the full article and responses from LibDems, Plaid Cymru and Green World Trust here at www.marinet.org.uk/refts/severnconsult09apr.html.

New tidal turbine - CORMAT

A unique tidal power machine being developed at Strathclyde University. Such underwater turbines are envisaged for tethering to the seabed around the west and north coasts. With the right incentives 2000 of these turbines in a series of large tidal turbine farms could be in operation around the Scottish coast by the 2020s, researchers argue, replacing power from Hunterston and Torness nuclear plants.

Full article in Sunday Herald, 19 April 2009

Tidal power is the holy grail of renewable energy research because it offers potentially huge amounts of energy in a very predictable pattern. Because of the time lag in tides around the coast it could also supply constant power.

A team of engineers led by Cameron Johnstone from Strathclyde University's Energy Systems Research Unit has come up with a new machine which they believe could tap serious amounts of tidal energy within a few years. Looking a little like an aircraft engine with two propellers, the device uses the movement of the tides to turn turbines and generate electricity. It has two rotors designed to spin in opposite directions, giving it enough stability to operate in deep waters.

Unlike previous first-generation tidal machines, it will not be fixed to the seabed on a tower like a wind turbine, but moored by a cable. This will enable the device to move with the flow of the tide, like a kite on a windy day. The device has been christened Cormat, for Contra Rotating Marine Technology. It has already been successfully tested in the sea off Islay, and industrial backing is now being sought for a £1.6 million, 500-kilowatt commercial demonstration.

According to Johnstone, Cormat could be deployed in underwater farms off the Mull of Kintyre, in the sound of Islay, near Skye and in the Pentland Firth. "You could see tidal energy come up to complement and then potentially replace the nuclear power stations," he told the Sunday Herald. "This second generation turbine marks a new threshold in tidal energy technology, and could allow us to extract more energy from the sea than ever before." If the 500-kilowatt demonstration works, one megawatt machines with 14-metre rotors could start generating electricity under the sea soon after 2013, Johnstone said.

Johnstone said that he had already had "substantial interest" from private companies in the power, engineering and investment sectors. His design would cost at least 50% less than first generation tidal machines, he argued, because it was relatively simple and didn't require fixed foundations. "The need to develop advanced technologies to power homes and businesses has never been more apparent," he declared: "Scotland's vast natural resources mean we are well-placed to develop and test cleaner and greener systems that can help tackle climate change, as well as increasing sustainable economic growth."

The Scottish government praised Cormat as an exciting project that helped demonstrate the nation's "world-leading strengths in harnessing the vast clean, green renewable energy potential off our shores". Scotland had a quarter of all Europe's tidal resource, said a spokesman for the energy minister, Jim Mather: "Scotland simply doesn't want or need dangerous and unnecessary new nuclear power stations, with soaring decommissioning costs and the unresolved problem of storage of radioactive waste that burdens future generations for thousands of years," the spokesman added. "Renewable technologies including wind, water, biomass, wave and tidal, backed up by clean thermal baseload, can meet our energy needs many times over."

The industry body, Scottish Renewables, pointed out that the predicable nature of tidal energy had big advantages for the electricity grid. "Tidal will become a vital component in Scotland's mix of renewable technologies," said the organisation's marine officer, Morna Cannon. "Currently the sector requires a degree of public funding to help it get on its feet. The level of the renewables obligation funding is crucial, although there are strong views that additional funding is necessary."

Download a short video of Cormat in action here (2.2MB wmv).

Portuguese wave energy project halted by "credit crunch"

The world's first commercial wave energy project is on the brink of collapse after its main backer went into administration, casting doubt over the future of a project that has already been dogged by technical problems.

The Aguçadoura project was a joint venture between Edinburgh-based Pelamis Wave Power, Australian energy developer Babcock & Brown, Energias de Portugal (EdP) and Portuguese electrical engineering firm Efacec. But Australian-listed investment specialist Babcock and Brown, a majority investor in the £7m project, which as part of a consortium with EdP and Efacec holds a 77 per cent stake, was placed into voluntary administration last week, casting doubt over the future of the scheme.

The consortium successfully installed three of Pelamis' snake-like wave generators three miles off the north coast of Portugal last autumn, hailing the project as the first commercial wave energy project to provide power to the grid.

But in mid-November, all three generators were removed from the water because of leaks in the buoyancy tanks. Further technical problems have followed and cannot be repaired until a new backer is found to replace Babcock and Brown. The units are currently sitting idle in Leixões harbour.

Max Carcas, spokesman for Pelamis, told the Guardian newspaper that the technical problems were not serious and would be relatively easy to fix once an investor is found. "In a project of this nature, the world's first wave energy plant, it's inevitable that there will be niggles and issues to tackle," he said. "We have had nothing that isn't expected." However, he admitted the project was currently "in a state of limbo" while the company seeks to raise fresh financing.

Despite the setback, Pelamis' technology is continuing to attract interest from customers. Last month, energy firm E.ON placed an order with the company for its next generation of converters, known as the P-2. The P2, which is 180m long, 50m longer than the devices in Portugal, will be installed at the European Marine Energy Centre in Orkney and will be fully operational by 2010.

E.ON told the Guardian that despite the problems with the Portugal project, the Orkney installation was likely to go ahead.

Source: BusinessGreen, 20 Mar 2009

Overfishing to wipe out bluefin tuna

Overfishing will wipe out the breeding population of Atlantic bluefin tuna, one of the ocean's largest and fastest predators, in three years unless catches are dramatically reduced, according to conservation group WWF.

Read the article at Scientific American here.

Communities help tackle coastal erosion

In an item with the title above the Great Yarmouth Mercury of 8th April tells how Huw Irranca-Davies, Minister for the Natural and Marine Environment, Wildlife and Rural Affairs, on a recent visit to the rapidly eroding Norfolk and Suffolk Coast, stated that guidelines on how the government will try to tackle to problem of coastal erosion will be drawn up using knowledge from communities along the Norfolk and Suffolk coast.

He stated that information gathered from visits to the coast will be used to draw up future government policies and said:

"By the summer we hope to be able to bring forward a range of options for how to deal with problems along the whole coastline. This is not a 'one size fits all' approach and we will need a lot more tools in our toolbox if we are going to work out these problems. There is tremendous passion among the people I have met. When you're faced with the possibility of losing your house or your business then that is natural. It is vitally important to come out of Whitehall. I haven't come out with solutions or to preach a message pretending that I have all the answers. I'm trying to see whether there is agreement around the challenges we face".

If put into practice this measure will be most welcome as a complete change of policy from the remote non-listening non-thinking attitude demonstrated by central government so far. And if the information and advice supplied is heeded and acted upon, so much the better.

The press article can be seen in full here.

Plankton rôle in Climate Change

In an an item entitled 'Ocean organism key to climate change' the Eastern Daily Press of 10th April '09 reports on how work on the little previously studied Micromonas Photo-Plankton by Dr. Thomas Mock of the University of East Anglia has shown that it appears to have an important role in moderating the world's oceans and could prove to be an important indicator of climate change.

The full article can be read in this weeks 'Science' journal, or the press report by Tara Greaves here.

A Campaigning Victory For Public Pressure

This time last year (April 2008) English Nature (now renamed Natural England) issued a study report which was supposed to be confidential and for Defra and the Environment Agency's eyes only.
The report contained a recommendation to allow a vast coastal area of Norfolk (25 square miles) from Eccles-on-sea to Winterton-on-sea and as far inland as Stalham to be flooded by the sea.
Fortunately this report was leaked to the local press who published its contents — there was a public out-cry with severe opposition to this recommendation, not only by local people but by many other UK residents who had fond memories of Norfolk and the Norfolk Broads and wanted to preserve this unique holiday location.

The main questions asked were:

How could Natural England, an organisation that is supposed to care for our environment, propose such destruction to communities and the unique flora & fauna and wildlife in this area of the Norfolk Broads and its surrounding fresh water marshes? The Norfolk Broads and our fresh water marsh wild life habitats are precious, irreplaceable and should be preserved for future generations.
Coastal and inland low-lying villages, businesses, homes and infrastructure in this proposed 25 square mile area would also be destroyed by the ingress of sea flooding.
This low-lying area of coastal Norfolk also contains a large area of rich productive farm land which has been drained and developed from salt water wet-lands and the sea by our forefathers since the 16th Century — why should it now be surrendered to the sea in the 21st Century? The destruction of this large section of English farm land would also make the UK much more reliant on foreign imports and increase our CO₂ emissions.

Public meetings were organised and local groups campaigning for coastal defences came together with parish council partnership groups to campaign and put pressure on the then Minister for the Environment, Phil Woolas MP, to get Natural England to remove this recommendation from their report.

My (MARINET) campaign and correspondence with Phil Woolas (previous) Minister of the Environment, about this 'managed retreat' in Norfolk can be viewed on Marinet website at: www.marinet.org.uk/coastaldefences/philwoolas.html

In his letter to me dated 23rd April 2008 Phil Woolas did say that the preferred option for this area was to maintain sea defences for the Broads for the next 50 years and he also said in his letter to me dated 27th April 2008 (in reply to my suggestion) that "It would not be appropriate for me to instruct Natural England to remove the assessment of the impact of flooding from this report" — but!

Because of the combined efforts of local groups and the pressure of local support, both of these campaigned requirements are now in place:

Natural England (formerly English Nature) have now revised this report and removed the recommendation of allowing the sea to flood this section of Norfolk from the report; this was confirmed by the article on the front Page of the Eastern Daily Press (our local Paper) on 31st March 2009 "Victory for the People".
The Environment Agency (the Responsible Authority for this unit) have now pledged to maintain sea defences and hold the line for this section of the Norfolk coastline for the next 50 years and Natural England have supported this decision in their revised report.

This is a worthy victory for people power shows that local campaigning can change government department decisions which some times seem cast in stone.

Map showing the 25 square mile area of Norfolk (outlined in red) recommended by English Nature (now Natural England), to be flooded by the sea in their original report.

map showing area to be flooded

PNSD: Denotes location of proposed New Sea Defences at Stalham and Potter Heigham to protect the A149 main road

Mike King - Marinet Great Yarmouth Norfolk

Offshore Aggregate Dredging and Coastal Erosion

Yet a further paper has come to light on coastal erosion brought about by Offshore Aggregate Dredging in a paper entitled:

EFFECTS OF MARINE SAND EXPLOITATION ON COASTAL EROSION AND DEVELOPMENT OF RATIONAL SAND PRODUCTION CRITERIA written by Emre N. Otay, Paul A. Work and Osman S. Börekçi

It tells how such mining yields an inexpensive source of sand for construction or industrial uses. how it may modify nearshore wave conditions, create erosion and deposition rates, impact the sedimental drift and alter benthic habitats and nearshore circulation.

The goals of the project described in the proposal are to quantify the influences of sand mining on nearshore waves and currents, assess the magnitude of any mining-related erosion, and establish guidelines for acceptable mining rates and locations. The conclusions are based on numerical model results, but with validation of some aspects of the modelling via field data, and how although the findings are site specific, the methodology could be applied at any coastal site that features primarily non-cohesive sediments.

It shows how regardless of the final destination of marine sand, topographic changes caused by underwater dredge holes have immediate effects on nearshore waves and currents and that these hydrodynamic changes can rapidly lead to local perturbations in the ambient littoral transport patterns and eventually changes in the shoreline morphology. It is a very lengthy and detailed paper, the totality of which can be read by going to: www.ce.boun.edu.tr/otay/Kilyos/pdf/MarineSand.pdf

MARINET's response to MFA proposed amendments

The Marine and Fisheries Agency's (MFA) Sustainable Marine Resources and Climate Impacts Team put out a consultation on the Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007 appertaining to a proposed amendment that would enable and permit the re-use of harbour dredgings for beach recharge and the like.
Here is MARINET's response to that consultation.

FAO: Sustainable Marine Resources and Climate Impacts Team

Subject: Consultation response on an amendment to the Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007

From: Pat Gowen, MARINET and NSAG

Thank you for the opportunity to consult and provide the responses of the combined MARINET and North Sea Action Groups to you on the matter of amendment to the Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007. We are pleased to convey our considerations.

Prologue

Our mutual organisations have long been concerned on the impact(s) brought about by Harbour Dredging and the fact that no Environmental Impact Assessment have hitherto been demanded for such operations. That there are such environmental (and social) impacts are indisputable, as severe erosion has come about to local beaches due to draw down following deep dredging for deeper draft shipping navigation. e.g. Felixstowe (see 'Seeing is believing - the erosion at Felixstowe' www.marinet.org.uk/archive/archivelatestnews2007.html#sib and 'Huts tower over Felixstowe's beach' www.marinet.org.uk/archive/archivelatestnews2007.html#hto and others in the Latest News archive pages at www.marinet.org.uk/archive.html).

Yet the re-use of such dredged aggregate would, on the proviso that it is safe and free from toxic content such as Tri-Butyl Tin (TBT) and/or similar frayed hull coatings, appear eminently sensible, as this in itself would provide a viable alternative to that also causing beach draw down (and damage to the seabed and its ecosystem) e.g. the dredging for aggregate for construction purposes and for beach recharge taken from offshore.

MARINET and NSAG thus feel that the redeployment of the dredging should be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) including analyses of the dredged material, and that if the use of this is benign as beach recharge and/or for its employment in concrete etc. in the built environment, there is no good reason as to why such material should not be used as a recycled component. But such deployment must be subject to suitable findings on its content by an independent authority.

We are also very concerned that it appears that self-regulation is in vogue. It would obviously be advantageous in terms of cost and simplicity for any port operator to claim suitability as outlined above. It is thus felt necessary that a truly independent assessor must be instituted to evaluate each and every case of such dredging operation and the use of the proceeds, and to report to the MFA their findings and level of suitability before permission was provided.

Further, in that erosion resulting from such dredging could impact holiday beaches, the stability of the built environment, the coastal holiday trade and the tourist and holiday income of the area adjacent, an independent sourced EIA should also be sought for expert report consideration on the high probability, and that reparation, reimbursement and compensation be possible should such damage arise.

Subject to meeting the above considerations, we do not oppose the measures contemplated, but I would point out that under your listing 'Other Environmental Issues' no mention is made of the possible toxicological hazard nor of the likely resultant erosion. These elements vitally require inclusion.

I hope that you will find that the above comments adequately reply to the specific ten questions you questions levelled.

Please do not hesitate but to come back to you should any points made require clarification or further description.

Pat Gowen, 8th November 2008
o.b.o. MARINET and NSAG

Norwegian CO₂ sequestration is "working"

New seismic data from the Utsira formation in the North Sea indicate that the carbon dioxide being pumped into it is not leaking out, but is spreading through the structure as expected.

graphich showing process of gas injection into strata Carbon storage in the Utsira formation

Thirteen years have passed since StatoilHydro and the Sleipner gas field partners Exxon Mobil and Total decided to capture carbon dioxide and store it beneath the seabed. The reason for the decision was the carbon dioxide emission fee introduced by Norwegian authorities in 1993, which made it more profitable to capture and store the carbon dioxide than to pay the emission fee.

StatoilHydro extracts 2,600 tonnes of the greenhouse gas from Sleipner West production for storage 1,000 metres beneath the seabed, rather than releasing it to the air. More than 10 million tonnes of carbon dioxide have been injected into the Utsira sandstone formation since the autumn of 1996.

Monitoring

StatoilHydro conducts extensive monitoring and control of the carbon dioxide in the sub-surface store, and collects four-dimensional seismic data every other year. Intended to identify the way the gas is behaving in the formation, this information from the 2008 survey has now been analysed. The seven geophysical measurements conducted to date show a stable trend, with the carbon dioxide spreading upwards from the injection site and slowly through the rock. It is maintaining the same dispersion speed as in 2006, and the monitoring has established that the gas remains in the formation with no leakage to the surface. The injected carbon dioxide currently covers about three square kilometres of the roughly 26,000 square kilometres available in Utsira.

"In addition to seismic surveys, we monitor wellhead pressure," explains Edvin B Ytredal, vice president of operations for the Sleipner area. "These measurements show stable results, which again demonstrate that the reservoir is well suited for storage."

Researchers from StatoilHydro and its partners — Sintef, the British Geological Survey and the Dutch Institute of Applied Geoscience — have created mathematical simulation models. These are supplemented with forecasts for long-term storage of the greenhouse gas, which are based on experience and knowledge of seismic surveys and geophysical reservoir monitoring.

"Twelve years of data and seven surveys confirm the indications from the models and forecasts," says Eli Aamot, head of the new energy and ideas research programme in StatoilHydro. "They show that long-term carbon storage in sub-surface geological formations represents a secure approach."

Important

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) could provide one of several important measures for reaching the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The significance of such action is indicated by forecasts from the International Energy Agency (IEA) that world energy demand will grow by 50% up to 2030 and be 80% met from fossil sources. StatoilHydro is working purposefully to reduce carbon emissions from its operations, and CCS plays a significant role in these efforts.

The European Union aims to reduce its carbon emissions by 20% up to 2020, and reached agreement in December on a climate and energy package. This includes a framework for CCS, with a directive on the way EU members and Norway will regulate licences to ensure reliable carbon storage.

"The fact that we can produce oil and gas which has been held for millions of years provides a good illustration of the bedrock's ability to provide long-term storage," says Ms Aamot. "Our CCS programme in the Sleipner area has provided a groundbreaking demonstration that the sub-surface can also contain this gas for a long time."

Images of the dispersal of stored carbon dioxide through the Utsira formation since injection began more than 12 years ago. The colour scale shows seismic amplitudes, which correspond approximately to vertically summed thicknesses of carbon dioxide in the sandstone.

Facts about Utsira

Extends over 26,000 square kilometres in the Norwegian North Sea
250 metres thick in the Sleipner area
Sealed by a shale cap rock
Used as a store for carbon dioxide from the Sleipner area since 1996
Carbon dioxide now occupies about three square kilometres of the formation

Source: StatoilHydro News 5th March 2009

European Commission takes legal Action over UK UWWD failure

The EC is proceeding with legal action action against the UK for its failure to meet the demands of the Urban Waste Water Directive 91/271/EEC. The Press Release referring appears below.

United Kingdom: Commission to continue legal action for waste water pollution

The European Commission has decided to pursue legal action against the United Kingdom over a breach of EU rules for the collection and treatment of urban waste water. The UK has received a final warning before possible Court action for a case which concerns insufficient collection and treatment facilities for four urban centres (London, Torbay, Whitburn and Kilbarchan). This results in untreated urban waste water being discharged directly into rivers or sea, causing pollution of the environment and health hazards.

Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said: "To ensure that the health of citizens and the environment in the United Kingdom is protected, it is key that adequate collection and treatment facilities for sewage are put in place."

The Commission's action addresses inadequate collecting and treatment facilities for urban waste water in four agglomerations: London, Torbay and Whitburn in England; and Kilbarchan in Scotland. In each case, where the capacity of the existing facilities to deal with flows of urban waste water is exceeded, overflow systems are used, resulting in substantial amounts of untreated waste water being discharged into the receiving waters (rivers or the sea) on a regular basis. The frequency of these overflows can in certain cases exceed 80 times per year, causing millions of cubic metres of untreated waste water to be released. As a result, large scale fish kills may occur and the use of waters for recreational purposes, such as bathing or water sports, is prevented.

The Commission considers that this is in violation of the EU's Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive.This Directive aims at curbing pollution caused by urban waste water (sewage). Discharges of urban waste water causes pollution and threatens the survival of fish. By introducing potentially harmful bacteria and viruses, the discharges also pose human health risks.

The UK received first written warnings for these violations in April 2003 (with respect to Torbay, Whitburn and Kilbarchan) and March 2005 (with respect to London). The UK authorities responded with information on proposed actions to increase the capacity of the collection and treatment facilities. However the problems regarding discharges remain and as a result a second written warning will now be sent.

Legal Process

Article 226 of the Treaty gives the Commission powers to take legal action against a Member State that is not respecting its obligations.

If the Commission considers that there may be an infringement of EU law that warrants the opening of an infringement procedure, it addresses a "Letter of Formal Notice" (first written warning) to the Member State concerned, requesting it to submit its observations by a specified date, usually two months.

In the light of the reply or absence of a reply from the Member State concerned, the Commission may decide to address a "Reasoned Opinion" (final written warning) to the Member State. This clearly and definitively sets out the reasons why it considers there to have been an infringement of EU law, and calls upon the Member State to comply within a specified period, usually two months.

If the Member State fails to comply with the Reasoned Opinion, the Commission may decide to bring the case before the Court of Justice. Where the Court of Justice finds that the Treaty has been infringed, the offending Member State is required to take the measures necessary to conform.

Article 228 of the Treaty gives the Commission power to act against a Member State that does not comply with a previous judgement of the European Court of Justice. The article also allows the Commission to ask the Court to impose a financial penalty on the Member State concerned.

Robo-fish — with chips!

A Reuters report by Ben Hirschler, edited by Tim Pearce, tells how researchers at Essex University have combined with engineering group BMT have developed a Robot Fish with independent navigation and chemical sensors that will detect potentially hazardous pollutants, such as leaks from vessels or underwater pipelines to detect river, lake or marine pollution. The first trial will commence off the northern Spanish port of Gijon.

The 1.5 metre long carp like robots, costing £20,000 each, mimic the movement of real fish and are equipped with chemical sensors They will transmit the information back to shore using Wi-Fi technology. Unlike earlier robotic fish, which needed remote controls, they will be able to navigate independently without any human interaction.

BBC Look East have a short video on this, seen by going to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7964554.stm

CLBA want Managed Retreat reviewed

In the light of the latest damning predictions from the Government's chief scientific adviser, when Chief Scientist Prof John Beddington told the Sustainable Development Commission conference in London that the world was heading for a "perfect storm" of soaring demand for food, water and energy by 2030, the regional head of the Country Land & Business Association warned that flood defence policy and water resource management need to be re-assessed.

Prof. Beddington had pointed out that the problems of a growing global population coming out of poverty would be exacerbated by climate change, resulting in international food and water shortages in 20 years' time — and increased food and energy prices in the UK.

Nicola Currie, eastern region director of the CLA said "Surely protection of valuable, productive acres must become part of the equation. Can we really afford to lose land which was reclaimed from the sea in a bid to become self-sufficient in food after the last world war? Huge public investment went into that reclamation, but the nation appears content to discard all that was achieved in the past. Measures taken now to maintain defences — a stitch in time — will pay off in the future when we are going to need that land."

The full report with more detail is to be found in the Eastern Daily Press of 24th March '09 under 'Rural businesses challenge flood policy'.

The Parliamentary Opposition Steps In

Following much canvassing by MARINET, we are now gathering more support from within the Conservative Party and the cross party Parliamentary group looking at coastal erosion, which in turn will increase pressure on the existing Parliamentary MP's to do more. The 'Eastern Daily Press' of 24th March '09 reported the following:

Coastal erosion campaign stepped up

Brandon Lewis, the Conservative prospective Parliamentary candidate for Yarmouth, has recruited MP John Gummer in the battle to highlight the coastal erosion problems facing Scratby, Hemsby and Winterton. As a member of the cross party Parliamentary group looking at coastal erosion, Mr Gummer was able to gain valuable information on the issue and how it affects Yarmouth during a visit to the area.

Mr Lewis was joined by coastal erosion campaigners from the villages in making the case to Mr Gummer for investment to hold the line on this part of the coast. He said: "Hemsby alone puts £80m to £100m into the local economy. When you take that and the house and other business values that could be lost along this stretch of land you can easily see a cost of up to £200m for not holding the line here. It would only cost around £2.5m to finish the line of the rock protection that currently ends at Scratby and compared to the loss of property and business here that seems a very good investment."

A12 upgrade demand over Sizewell C

This article by Craig Robinson appeared in the East Anglian Daily Times on Monday 9th March 2009 revealing requirements before third nuclear power station is placed on the Suffolk coast. MARINET asserts that quite a few considerations need to be demanded before those stated by the MP, such as policies directed at safeguarding the plant from the threats of erosion and sea rise.

The third nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast must only get the go-ahead if the A12 is upgraded and affordable housing is provided, an MP warned last night.

EDF Energy has now formally nominated its land next to the existing Sizewell B for a new nuclear plant, where it wants to build two reactors - subject to planning consent and investment. But Suffolk Coastal MP John Gummer told the EADT that a number of key issues which must tackled if Sizewell C and D are to get his blessing. This includes an A12 bypass for the villages of Stratford St Andrew, Farnham, Marlesford and Little Glemham.
He also said any temporary accommodation created for workers should be converted into permanent affordable housing for local residents, and the materials used for the new power station should be brought in by sea to minimise the impact on the environment.

Last week EDF Energy — which now incorporates British Energy — put forward its land at Sizewell for the Government's Strategic Site Assessment process, which identifies suitable locations for new nuclear build. Mr Gummer, Conservative MP for Suffolk Coastal, said the plans had his full backing — so long as the four points were addressed. He said: "First of all I would want to see an upgrade of the A12 — otherwise the impact on the people living in the area will be far too great. "We need to have a bypass — the route is fixed and there's been a public inquiry — it would be very easy to put it in operation. It's not even terribly expensive — but would relieve the pressure on the four villages. "Secondly, they are going to have to bring in a lot of workers. On the last occasion they were housed in temporary accommodation and it was pulled down. But I would like to see a legacy so that what we then have is some additional low cost housing that's desperately needed for the area."

Mr Gummer said he would also like to see as many of the construction materials as possible brought in by sea. "This would be considerably more favourable than by road and means there would be far less impact in terms of noise and the environment," he said. "A lot of my constituents are retired and the last thing they want is a large number of lorries driving past their homes. Lastly there also has to be a much better way of keeping in touch with the parish councils so that as the construction continues they feel that they are entirely informed. I think the community is prepared to have another nuclear power station but if it's going to be a large development on an important stretch of our coast people want to feel they have a part to play."

A spokesman for EDF Energy said it was too early to comment on how specific proposals might be addressed but assured that consultations and feasibility studies were being carried out to understand the needs of the community. "We welcome the fact that there is significant support for new build in the local community as well as recognition of the economic and employment benefits our plans could bring to the area," he said. "We are fully committed to consulting with the community throughout the development of our plans."

The nuclear industry has until March 31 to nominate sites for the first wave of new nuclear power stations in the UK - after which a list will be published and members of the public will have a chance to express their views.

But Charles Barnett, chairman of the Shutdown Sizewell Campaign, said there was no need for new nuclear reactors. "What we should be doing is promoting energy efficiency and conservation and focusing on renewables such as wind, solar and tidal," he said. "All these other issues are peripheral — do we really want to saddle our decedents with the burden of dealing with nuclear waste?"

Threats to East Anglia

This item by Anthony Carroll entitled 'New warning on sea levels' appeared in the Eastern Daily Press of 9th March '09

The MP for north Norfolk has warned more should be done to prevent coastal communities being submerged by the North Sea. Norman Lamb's call to action comes as scientists prepare to meet in Denmark to announce that vast swathes of the coast and Broadland could be swamped by rising sea levels by 2100.

The global climate conference in Copenhagen this week will hear that the Broads is on an at risk list, which also includes The Thames, Hull, Holland, Florida and Bangladesh, due to melting ice caps leading to sea levels rising by 60cm by 2100.

Mr Lamb says more should be done to stop rising sea levels by slowing down the melting of ice caps which are disappearing due to global warming caused by carbon emissions. He said the government had failed in its pledge to develop eco-friendly industry and technology to mitigate the effects of climate change and that funding should be set aside to compensate people who lose their businesses and homes due to flooding.

Mr Lamb said: "There are effective things that should be happening that can make a difference. It is frustrating that the government is failing to act."

Losing the best of Norfolk

Mutually damaged by the threats of Shoreline Management Plans, 'Managed Retreat', Offshore Dredging and Rising Sea level, Norfolk is by far the area to lose even more in the coming years. This article entitled ''Norfolk Broads likely to be gone by 2100' written by Kate Scotter appeared in the Eastern Evening News of 9th March '09.

Large areas of the Norfolk Broads are likely to disappear by 2100, according to scientists. The stark warning will be issued at an international climate change conference this week when experts will outline their latest findings on rising sea levels and global warming. Over the three-day event in Copenhagen, which starts tomorrow, scientists will reveal how they have now realised that sea levels pose a far bigger eco threat than previously though and will sound an alarm over new floodings — enough to swamp the Norfolk Broads.

A report two years ago concluded that sea-level rises of between 20 and 60 centimetres would occur by 2100. But now, as Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets are melting faster than previously estimated, this figure is now suggested to be up to two metres.

Experts from the University of East Anglia said the rising sea levels will have a "huge impact". Dr Bruce Tofield, from the UEA's school of environmental sciences, said: "People are beginning to worry that it's going to be higher than previously thought. "I'm sure it's true it will have a huge impact on the Norfolk Broads. It won't make Norfolk uninhabitable but it will have a big impact. Few people think it will be two metres but that's the uncertainty. It's going to be equally damaging to low-lying area in Shanghai and Calcutta and will have an impact on hundreds and millions of people, not just Norfolk. And if people are being displaced, migrating away from these places, then it will have a huge impact worldwide."

Back in 2007, the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) presented its most up-to-date report on the likely impact of global warming, predicting sea-level rises of between 20 and 60 centimetres over the next 100 years. But now, after studying satellite images and seeing land sheets breaking up faster than anticipated, scientists are suggesting sea-level rises could easily top a metre by 2100.

The result will be the appearance of the "super-surge", a climatic double whammy that will savage low-lying regions that include Britain's south-eastern coastline, in particular East Anglia and the Thames Estuary, along with cities such as London, Portsmouth and Hull, which are rated as being particularly vulnerable to sea-level rise.

The future of the Broads has been the subject of much debate in recent years, with a controversial report published by government body Natural England suggesting some sea defences should be abandoned.

Carbon emissions creating acidic oceans not seen since dinosaurs

Chemical change placing 'unprecedented' pressure on marine life and could cause widespread extinctions, warn scientists

Read the full article at The Guardian, 10th March 2009

Scientists to issue stark warning over dramatic new sea level figures

Rising sea levels pose a far bigger eco threat than previously thought. This week's climate change conference in Copenhagen will sound an alarm over new floodings — enough to swamp Bangladesh, Florida, the Norfolk Broads and the Thames estuary.

Read the full article at The Observer 8th March 2009

Letter from America — Dredging and Erosion — Comparisons of Mis-management

Jerry Berne of Sustainable Coastlines wrote this philosophical treatise comparing the dredging and erosion situation (mal)practised in the USA and in the UK.

Read the full article on our Marine Aggregate Dredging page at www.marinet.org.uk/mad/letterfromamerica09mar.html

Phantom oil spills may be Red Tide foam

Researchers find that red tide algae can produce proteins that harm birds in ways that are difficult to distinguish from the damage caused by oil spills.

The frequency, size and duration of Red Tides have increased substantially around the world since 2004, and researchers link the rise to climate change and the impact on surface water temperatures.

Read the full article at Ars Technica 3rd March 2009

Our mobile beaches

'Winter's toll on beach defences' is written by Chris Bishop in the Eastern Daily Press of 2nd March '09, commencing with:

"It sounds like one of those conundrums once beloved of maths teachers: If it takes all winter for the sea to wash a beach away, how long does it take three men with dump trucks and diggers to put it back again? Not as long as it normally does this year, says the Environment Agency which reckons its annual beach recycle between Heacham and Snettisham will entail moving up to 10,000 tonnes of sand and shingle."

Although this last winter's storms were not as severe as those in previous years, some 'cliffing' has taken place, leaving a 6ft sheer drop in some parts of the narrow bank which protects farmland, marsh and thousands of holiday chalets and caravans. Nigel Woonton, the agency's flood risk manager, said: "They estimate there's £37m of property and infrastructure protected by this bit of the coast.

The rest of this article can be seen by visiting here.

North Norfolk attempts moderations to make ‘Managed Retreat’ acceptable

Richard Batson writes in the 2nd March '09 Eastern Daily Press of new moves by North Norfolk planners to try to make the demands of managed retreat acceptable to losing communities by offering ‘bribes’ to equate their loss, because “Villages are not just fighting to shore up their sea defences, but also trying to stop their crumbling cliffs sterilising local life by putting a block on progress. Moves are afoot to relax planning guidelines to allow more flexibility for developments, extensions and changes of use inside ‘no go areas’ likely to be lost to erosion.”

Planning officer Rob Young said: “We need to do something to keep communities viable and sustainable, by looking at what can be done without storing up problems for the future.” whilst Cabinet Cabinet member Clive Stockton is quoted as saying that allowing some alternative uses, extensions and fixed-term commercial uses gave control over the buildings’ lifetime. And exceptions to policy could also be made to help buildings with community uses, such as a village hall, to help local life. The guidelines could not be firmed up into policy until there was more detail on a national “adaptation” scheme aimed at helping communities adjust to the changes caused by erosion.

The full story is entitled "Help for Norfolk communities blighted by erosion"

Evidence to the All Party Parliamentary Group

MARINET has replied to the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) Coastal and Marine Inquiry into deprivation and disadvantage in coastal rural areas.

The APPG is a group of MPs and Peers, across all parties, who have a shared interest in coastal areas. They meet at least three times during the year, along with other stakeholders, to debate issues of common concern. As Parliamentarians they have a unique insight into government and an inside track on national policy. It is the only body which brings people together at a national level to consider UK policy in coastal areas. Established in 2006, the group has to date tracked the progress of the Marine Bill, and has investigated the issue of social justice in coastal flood and erosion policy.

You can read MARINET's response at www.marinet.org.uk/coastaldefences/appg09feb.html

Review of UK Marine Aggregate Extraction Activities

From The Crown Estate and BMAPA showing historic patterns of marine aggregate extraction in metric tonnes for 2000-2005, excluding beach replenishment and fill contracts.

Extraction Area	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	Total
Humber	3,122,080	2,933,623	2,710,881	2,928,366	3,031,699	3,392,015	18,118,664
E Coast	9,129,635	9,636,697	9,011,323	8,611,199	8,538,073	7,881,670	52,808,597
Thames	854,483	909,141	1,291,103	838,185	758,257	696,012	5,347,181
S Coast	5,613,538	5,628,008	5,399,080	5,658,262	5,148,959	5,389,346	32,837,193
SW Coast	1,602,394	1,549,431	1,467,122	1,515,241	1,633,383	1,591,610	9,359,181
NW Coast	316,090	421,068	482,270	470,962	558,398	611,983	2,860,771
Rivers & Misc	46,120	73,047	78,597	85,153	99,079	124,506	506,502
Yearly Total	20,684,340	21,151,015	20,440,376	20,107,368	19,767,848	19,687,142	121,838,089

According to moisture content and stone to sand ratio, there's usually between 1.6 and 1.9 metric tonnes weight for each cubic metre of aggregate. That related to uses a dry weight ratio of 1.72:1. Therefore, the six year total take of 121,838,089 tonnes would mean a removal of 70,836,052 cubic metres. The level given is undoubtedly that landed to destination. In practice over twice this would have been extracted as some half is rejected by washing off back to the sea so as to hold the prime coarse cohesive sand and gravel to be used for the best grade concrete.

Such a quantity is difficult to visualise, but can be estimated by theoretically placing it on top of a town or city of a known area. (Don't try this in practice unless you can chose Westminster) and calculating how high it would reach, or how many times it would fill the Albert Hall.

It is interesting to note that the findings of erosion of each area correlate quite powerfully with the levels taken, as does the lowering of the seabed when related to the cumulative active dredging areas.

Scientists repeat: "Sea levels rising faster than expected"

The U.N.'s climate change panel may be severely underestimating the sea-level rise caused by global warming, climate scientists said on Monday, calling for swift cuts in greenhouse emissions.

"The sea-level rise may well exceed one meter (3.28 feet) by 2100 if we continue on our path of increasing emissions," said Stefan Rahmstorf, professor at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. "Even for a low emission scenario, the best estimate is about one meter."Rahmstorf spoke at the International Scientific Congress on Climate Change in Copenhagen.

The U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007 predicted global warming would cause sea levels to rise by between 18 cm and 59 cm (7 inches and 23 inches) this century. The IPCC said at the time the estimate could not accurately take into account factors such as the melting of ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. Many scientists criticized the number as too conservative.

"The ice loss in Greenland shows an acceleration during the last decade," said veteran Greenland researcher Konrad Steffen, director of the Co-operative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado, Boulder. "The upper range of sea-level rise by 2100 might be above one meter or more on a global average, with large regional differences depending where the source of ice loss occurs," he said.

John Church, a researcher at the Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research in Hobart, said rising oceans will lead to more frequent devastating floods in coastal areas. The faster humans limit carbon dioxide emissions, the greater the chance to avoid the most extreme scenarios, he said. "We could pass a threshold during the 21st century that can commit the world to meters of sea-level rise," he said. "Short-term emission goals are critical."

Early reductions of emissions are much more effective than actions later in the century, the scientists said.

"With stiff reductions in 2050 you can end the temperature curve (rise) quite quickly, but there's not much you can do to the sea-level rise anymore," Rahmstorf said. "We are setting in motion processes that will lead to sea levels rising for centuries to come."

Source: Reuters March 10, 2009

Reports on Offshore Dredging Impacts in ‘Coastal Observatory’

'Coastal Observatory' (here) describes a number of reports under ‘General Information on Offshore Dredging’ relating to Offshore Aggregate Dredging, specifically stating “There are concerns by coastal local authorities, over shoreline erosion being caused or exacerbated by offshore aggregate dredging. Offshore dredging along the east coast could result in negative impacts on adjacent coastal areas, modifying nearshore wave conditions, affect erosion and deposition rates, and alter benthic habitats and nearshore circulation”.

Listed below are some general links to papers and websites on offshore dredging. For the links themselves please go to the URL above.

Coastal Defence and Marine Aggregate Dredging off the UK — a report by Dr Andrew Bellamy of the British Marine Aggregate Producers Association (BMAPA) on: Coastal Defence and Marine Aggregate Dredging off the UK.

Effects of Sand Extraction on Coastal Erosion - A paper by Otay et al from Georgia Tech — College of Engineering, United States on the effects of sand extraction on coastal erosion. Otay, E.N., Work, P.A. & Börekçi, O.S. Effects of marine sand exploitation on coastal erosion and development of rational sand production criteria.

Effects of the disposal of marine dredged spoil at Flamborough — A report on the effects of the disposal of marine dredged spoil around Flamborough Head. An appropriate assessment of existing consents for the sea disposal of dredged material, as required under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc) Regulations, 1994. CEFAS 2000. The impact of disposal of marine dredged material on the Flamborough Head Candidate Special Area of Conservation (cSAC).

Offshore Dredging and Integrated Coastal Zone Management — The theme of coastal erosion, the effects of offshore dredging and shoreline management is addressed in the newly published East Riding Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan under the section 'Managing the Coast'. East Riding of Yorkshire Council (2002). Link to the ICZM plan.

For further details on the environmental and economic effects of dredging and aggregate extraction, please refer to the appropriate sections within Business & Employment Environment.

Nudists no longer ‘beached’!

Further to our item ‘Nudists feel the Chill’ at www.marinet.org.uk/archive/archivelatestnews2008.html#nftp telling of the loss of the natural bathers designated spot at Corton due to massive beach erosion, readers will be pleased to learn the evolved bare facts, in that they can now swim at the newly opened (and heated!) High Street pool in Newmarket.

The full story by James Mortlock entitled ‘Naked swimmers’ new Saturday club’ is in the East Anglian Daily times of Monday 16th February '09

Britain's Best Beach

‘Coast Magazine’' readers have voted Holkham in North Norfolk as being Britain’s best beach by a considerable margin this year.

Indeed, Holkham is quite delightful and totally unspoiled, with a huge open sky and sandy beach, lots of wildlife, colourful beach huts with a backing of creeks and Mediterranean pine woods, a background used frequently by film crews such as the Hollywood movie setting with Gwyneth Paltrow’s memorable final scene from ‘Shakespeare in Love’ in 1998.

See www.holkham.co.uk/naturereserve

What is more It has the least polluted bathing water in the UK, often showing zero coliform levels in samples taken by MARINET’s Pat Gowen.

The only danger is that the tide goes out well over a mile, and when it comes in at a fast rate of knots that non-aware visitors cannot outrun, so often have to get rescued from sandbanks a considerable distance from the shoreline.

The full story can be read in ‘Holkham voted best beach’ in the Eastern Daily Press of 17th February '09

Coming Sand and Gravel Conferences

Sand and Gravel News announced on February 9/10th that two conferences relating to sediment management and dredging are about to happen. The 6th International SedNet conference takes place 6-8th October 2009, in Hamburg, Germany. This will address the issue of sediment management in river basin management plans, and the role of sediments in coastal management. The conference is hosted and co-organised by Hamburg Port Authority. They welcome abstracts for oral and poster presentations for the conference, with those with a special focus on case studies of North Sea projects particularly welcome. They can be submitted your abstract by email to the SedNet Secretariat marjan.euser@tno.nl. Full details can be seen by visiting www.sandandgravel.com/news/article.asp?v1=1163

Another is a meeting being organised by CIRIA and hosted by Arenia on 7/8th May 2009 in Rome by the EMSAGG, the European Marine Sand and Gravel Group. This is to allow the delegates to gain an understanding of the latest environmental, technical, regulatory, economic and future issues surrounding marine sand and gravel exploration, exploitation and extraction, marine sediments, sustainable beach nourishment and sea defences, and to share experiences and thoughts with international peers.

Full details can be seen by visiting www.sandandgravel.com/news/article.asp?v1=11645

Whilst MARINET would delight in effecting its prescience at both of these events, our funds would not be able to provide even a tiny fraction of the costs involved.

MARINET Backing from Dr.Ian Gibson MP

On Friday 13th February Dr. Ian Gibson, MP for Norwich North, produced a Press Release backing MARINET's efforts on maintaining the coastline. MARINET could do with some more like this from other local and general MPs. Constituents are asked to lobby their MPs for similar efforts. Messages to them can be sent using ‘Write to Them’ at www.writetothem.com

NORFOLK MP BACKS CAMPAIGN TO SAVE EAST ANGLIA COASTLINE

MP Ian Gibson has urged the Government to uphold its commitment to protect the Norfolk coastline until 2050 after the Environment Agency took the controversial decision last month to stop funding for flood defences around the Suffolk coast.

Flood walls protect thousands of acres of land, twenty homes and the main A road along Suffolk's coastline but the Environment Agency says it cannot afford the £35m needed to maintain their upkeep. This new approach to coastal erosion was given the go ahead at a meeting of the Eastern Regional Flood Defence Committee on Friday 16th January and has dealt a severe blow to the East Coast branch of MARINET, the Marine Network of local Friends of the Earth groups, who campaigned against the move.

Although the decision will only affect the Suffolk coastline Dr Gibson is worried that this is a step in the wrong direction in the fight to stop erosion along the East coast. He said: “The Environment Agency has done a complete about turn on coastal policy in just a matter of weeks. Only in December the Environment Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies, reiterated to me the Government’s commitment to ‘keep the sea at bay along the coastline, until at least 2050’. What makes the Suffolk coastline any less of a priority than Norfolk’s? It seems that it is only a matter of time before the Government decides it has run out of funding for Norfolk’s flood defences as well.”

Dr Gibson is also working alongside MARINET to monitor developments in the Anglian Offshore Dredging Association (AODA) investigation into the impact of offshore aggregate dredging on coastal erosion. There are concerns that the removal of sand and gravel has accelerated coastal land loss; MARINET are eager to see an outcome to the AODA investigation that will do away with this practice along the Suffolk and Norfolk coastline.

MMO to be Located in Tyneside

The new Marine Management Organisation (MMO) to be created as a result of the Marine Bill, which is currently before Parliament, will have its headquarters located in Tyneside. The MMO will be responsible for the new marine planning system and will operate the licensing regime for a wide range of marine industries.

Marine and Fisheries Minister Huw Irranca-Davies announced that the area was ideally placed to host the new Marine Management Organisation. He said that it had the right mix of environmental, business and adademic marine interests.

Mr Irranca-Davies said: “Tyneside was chosen for several reasons, not least because of its broad range and good balance of marine interests. It has a working port, a busy local fishing industry, and businesses including offshore renewable energy development, all of which fit well with the MMO’s role.”

The MMO will replace the Marine and Fisheries Agency.

Source: BBC 12th February 2009

Latest Happisburgh erosion

Although not the UK's fastest disappearing coastline, the delightful but slowly disappearing village of Happisburgh (pronounced 'Haze-borough') has achieved excellent publicity resulting in world-wide awareness, due to the continuing stalwart efforts of Malcolm Kerby, coordinator of the Happisburgh Coastal Concern Action Group, website www.happisburgh.org.uk.
Here is the latest situation described by Victoria Leggett in the Eastern Daily Press of 6th February '09.

New pictures highlight coastal erosion

aerial photograph showing receding cliffs threatening nearby houses

Houses on the edge in Happisburgh

Teetering on the edge, these precariously-placed houses on the cliff top at Happisburgh have become some of the most recognisable symbols of coastal erosion in the UK. These new aerial photographs of the village's coastline, taken on Wednesday, highlight the latest changes taking place at one of Norfolk's most vulnerable spots.

While the carefully balanced homes and dilapidated remnants of the revetments and groynes — the area's original sea defences built in 1959 — are familiar sights, a number of new landmarks illustrate the ongoing battle with the sea. To the south at Cart Gap, the new life-boat ramp can be seen just two weeks off completion. In 2003 the Happisburgh crew was forced to move along the coast after the lifeboat ramp running from the clifftop to the beach fell victim to erosion. The new ramp is being built to accommodate a new lifeboat which will soon come to Cart Gap. As well as the existing D class boat, the crew will operate an Atlantic 75, which has a greater range than the current boat and is better suited to operations in rough weather.

Between Happisburgh and Cart Gap, at Low Light, which is considered a potential 'back door to the Broads' because of its low height above sea level, 4,000 tonnes of rock has been recently placed to help temper the force of the tide.

aerial photograph showing rock emplacements and new ramp

The new lifeboat ramp at Cart Gap a mile and a bit to the south east of Happisburgh. Mike Page

The boulders were donated to North Norfolk District Council by the Environment Agency as leftovers from a major shoreline scheme nearby at Sea Palling and Eccles. Brian Farrow, from the council, said while some of the rock would stay where it was, a portion would be moved towards the centre of the village.

Malcolm Kerby, from the Coastal Concern Action Group (CCAG), hoped a much closer-to-earth look at this ever-decreasing village would stick in the minds of members of the Royal Commission who visited yesterday. About 20 of the government investigators were taken for a walk along the coast before listening to a talk by Mr Kerby, who campaigns for compensation for villagers losing their homes to the sea.

Mr Kerby said he did not expect the visit to prompt any instant action from the government but hoped it would add further pressure. “The meeting was part of the building blocks of the overall case we are presenting,” he said. The action group co-ordinator hoped to emphasis the human consequences of coastal erosion and help the group to understand what is happening in north Norfolk. He said: “I think that's the biggest obstacle. It's very easy for the government and government experts to say we can't afford to do this, but they have to understand what those decisions mean.”

Google Ocean

Google has just added a new dimension to 'Google Earth' by allowing us to virtually explore the other and even more important two-thirds of earth with 'Google Ocean', all without even getting your feet wet. Google said "Global Ocean is a powerful way to raise awareness about environmental issues, such as global warming."

Using photographs and video of marine life from the National Geographic Society and by employing sonar data from the US Navy, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association and others to create a visual representation of the bathymetric map of the landscape hidden beneath the sea, Google Ocean allows internet surfers to dive under waves and explore the sea, track labelled animals, see the surface and bottom landscape, glaciers, contours, canyons and trenches, shipwrecks, global marine chlorophyll levels and far more to generally explore the Maritime ecosystem. And it's all for free!

If you do not have Google Earth already aboard, then go to http://earth.google.co.uk to click on 'Download Google Earth 5.0' and follow through. If you are already running Google Earth, perhaps V3.3, then get the new V5.0 by going to HELP and then clicking UPDATE (three up on the listing provided).

If you are employing some filters, anti-virus, anti trojan and anti-intrusion programs and other forms of malware exclusion on your computer you may find impediments to the download, but which can be easily overcome by lowering your protection level or temporarily switching them off. (Remember to replace them afterwards). After you have it up and running try initially going to 'Explore the Ocean' and follow on from there.

Emissions from Shipping

Terry Trelawny-Gower has worries of the high emissions produced from shipping, and contributes his thoughts and concerns as follows.

Particulates Really Matter

Significant Technological Impacts on the Marine Industry with regard to the reduction of S0_x and N0_x emissions from marine propulsion units.

There have been many gadgets and devices developed in the last decade to the significant benefit of mariners. Advances in navigation, GPS, radar and communications - to name but a few. However, in the main, such devices tend to benefit individuals in specific situations: be it a major safety issue or a cold beer from a solar powered fridge.

I am of the opinion that a combination of the acceptance that a problem exists and the efforts to deal with the issue through international discussion, technological research and advancement, is probably one of the most significant developments in the marine world - the effects of which will impact upon millions of people. Efforts to reduce the volume emissions of Sulphur Oxides (SO_x) and Nitrogen Oxides (NO_x) produced by emissions from ship's propulsion units, are of paramount significance in the marine world. Equally important to small motor boat owners and Ultra Large Crude Carrier (ULCC) operators.

Over a decade ago, concerned that there was no readily available statistical information on the subject of atmospheric pollution directly attributed to emissions from marine engines, I wrote the Department of the Environment asking for the results of any research that might have been carried out. It was quite obvious that very high volumes of both SO_x and NO_x were being produced on a daily basis, by hundreds of ships. My main area of interest focused on vessels transiting the English Channel and the North Sea to UK and European ports.

The response to my letter was quite disturbing. Written no doubt by a faceless bureaucrat in London, it stated: "No data is available and no research is or will be carried out in the foreseeable future, because ships are always a long way away". In one sentence, millions of cubic metres of significant atmospheric pollution were dismissed as irrelevant.

I requested clarification of the statement, and also pointed out, that vessels transiting to Northern European ports, including cross channel ferries, rig supply vessels etc., were not "far away" — indeed, they were very close.

The letter was ignored, and consequently, I contacted my MP asking if he could make sense of the DoE response. Unfortunately, he was unable to elicit any useful information from them, other than they did not see any reason to pursue the subject. So there the matter lay for some time, until the subject of 'global warming' (now 'climate change'), prompted the Government into acceptance that a major problem does exist, and the myth of ships being too far from land to make any significant contribution to atmospheric pollution, and alleged Climate Change, was finally dispelled.

However, a decade on, and there is a realisation that emissions from ships engines are a major identifiable contributor to atmospheric pollution, climate change, and equally important, that of the degradation of quality of life for millions of human beings.

Much legislation is in place designed to ameliorate the problem; however, recent reports suggest that the impact on human health is far greater than initially anticipated. Also, the quality of air in coastal regions continues to degrade at a very significant rate. Emissions from ships have been identified as combining with industrial pollution at the ocean/land interface, resulting in high levels of Nitryl Chloride (NO₂Cl), which in turn reacts with Chlorine to reduce Ozone (O₃).

In the UK, MARPOL (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships) has introduced legislation designed to reduce the volume of SO_x and NO_x emissions from ships. However this applies more specifically to new builds, and is not necessarily retroactive in dealing with older vessels. The installation of exhaust gas scrubbers has not been made mandatory, although the quality of fuel oil is increasingly monitored, and subject to on-board testing by port state surveyors. Also, there is now a process of the issue of International Air Pollution Certificates (IAPC). However, how successful these will be in combating air pollution is probably debatable. There are cases where certain countries in West Africa have (allegedly), added liquid toxic waste to bunker fuel (the waste probably originated in Europe, so a case of return to sender), and emissions from vessels using this fuel combined with SO_x and NO_x are extremely dangerous to human health, as they include dioxins.

Emissions from ships engaged in European trade were estimated in 2000, to have been 2.6 million tonnes of Sulphur Dioxide and 3.6 million tonnes of Nitrogen Oxides. Whilst land-based sources of these pollutants are decreasing, those from ships show a significant increase. In fact, by 2010, emissions from international shipping in the North Sea and English Channel are expected to reach high levels of atmospheric pollution, with SO_x at 3.3 million tonnes predicted, and NO_x at 4.6 million tonnes. Disturbingly, by 2020, the emissions from shipping using European routes will have surpassed the total from all land-based sources in the 25 member states. The UN International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has estimated that emissions from ships may account for 1.8% of the global warming process.

SO_x and NO_x convert into sulphate and nitrate particles within the 2.5 to 10 micron band particulate matter — PM 2.5 & 10.0 — and are essentially distributed in the air. Long-term research and analysis of findings has confirmed that up to 45% of Europe's urban population are exposed to PM10.0 and PM2.5 micron fine particulate levels, which is estimated to cause approximately 100,000 deaths per year in Europe due to cardio-vascular and cardio-pulmonary diseases. Ship emissions are estimated to contribute between 20% & 30% of the air concentrations of secondary inorganic particles in most European coastal areas. Nitrogen oxides also contribute to the formation of ground level Ozone, which damages vegetation, as well as human health. Nitrogen oxides significantly contribute to eutrophication, which affects biodiversity in coastal waters and adjoining land. Of course, the effects of Nitrogen oxides, Sulphur oxides and Ozone can also be seen in the deterioration of buildings in urban areas.

What has been achieved so far toward reducing emissions? In truth, very little; IMO has been negotiating with concerned parties for years, and the result was an air pollution annex to the MARPOL 73/78 Convention. Unfortunately, this agreement was so weak it became ineffective, and by 2004, only 7 states, including the UK, had ratified the agreement. In 2007, there were further amendments to the MARPOL Annex VI, which ratified the proposal to establish Specific Emission Control Areas (SECAs), and a number of other actions that will be taken to improve the situation. By 2025 at the earliest, the positive effects of this legislation may become apparent.

The simplest and least expensive way of reducing SO_x emissions is to use low-Sulphur content fuels, which requires no engine modification, and long-term use has the advantage of resulting in less wear on machinery and reduction in the use of lubricating oil. However, with crude oil prices increasing dramatically (2008), attempts to persuade ship operators to use higher price, low-Sulphur fuels, may well not succeed for obvious economic reasons. In fact, high fuel prices may well result in atmospheric pollution legislation being sidelined.

The introduction of technology to deal with SO_x and NO_x has been developed mainly by engine manufacturers (influenced by legislation that would effectively reduce sales?), and at the moment, there are four main options available:

SEAWATER SCRUBBING
The unit transfers the oxides of Sulphur to the water and subsequently the water is filtered to remove particulate matter, which is trapped and collected for shore disposal. The filtered water is then recirculated back into the sea, where the Sulphur goes into solution as sulphate, a natural component of seawater. Trials of this technology indicate that seawater scrubbing can reduce Sulphur emissions by approximately 80%. However, there remains some concern in regards to the possible negative effect on the sea due to the release of wastewater containing sulphate. This technology may be at odds with MARPOL criteria. It may be that shore disposal facilities will need to be established by port authorities to receive wastes (particulate and water) from this process. If this does happen, classification and disposal will become an environmental issue. The volume of wastewater alone, might render this process economically unworkable.
REDUCING NOx EMISSIONS
Water is injected into the combustion chamber or mixed with fuel in order to lower combustion temperature and thus reduce NO_x formation. The potential for emission reduction is approximately 50%, but at the cost of increased fuel consumption.
SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION (SCR)
A system for the after-treatment of exhaust gas, which it is claimed, can reduce emissions of NO_x by 90% when used exclusively with low-Sulphur fuel. Nitrogen oxides are reduced to nitrogen gas by spraying urea or ammonia into the gases before they pass through a catalytic converter. The equipment is usually more effective if installed in a new builds.
HUMID AIR MOTOR (HAM)
Water vapour is added to combustion air to prevent the formation of NO_x during combustion. Performance is claimed to be unaffected either by the quality of fuel or engine workload. By reducing the consumption of fuel and lubricating oil, HAM has the advantage over SCR by reducing operating costs. This method is claimed to reduce NO_x by 70-80%, with a cost similar to SCR.

In summary, the problem has been identified, and technology has, and will continue, to be developed to effectively reduce polluting emissions. However, it will require more than a few European nations accepting anti-atmospheric pollution legislation and establishing SECAs to have a significant impact on the problem. As mentioned earlier, the effects of price increases of crude oil on emission reduction policies will need to be addressed.

In October 2008, concerns with regard to the Marpol emission rules were raised by Hanns Conzen, managing director of TT-Line, one of Germany's leading ro-ro operators. He said; "It is being proposed that the sulphur content in marine fuels will have to be reduced from 1% to 0.1%, but only in the North Sea and Baltic Sea. This will result in a further increase in already high bunker costs by 80%-100%". Mr Conzen believes that a consequence of the new rules will be a significant amount of traffic moving from sea to road, in these areas — the exact opposite of European Union policy.

By contrast, the maximum sulphur content for global shipping , including European sectors such as the Irish Sea and Mediterranean will remain for some time beyond 2015, at 3.5% — 35 times higher than the North Sea and Baltic.

T M Trelawny-Gower CEng MN., MSNAME., MIDiag E

Sources:

MARPOL (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships)
IMO (UN International Maritime Organisation)
MARPOL Annex VI 73.78 Limits on SOx and NOx Emissions (Inc. Halons/CFCs)
Germanischer Lloyd (Advice to Surveyors 13a 2005)
SEAWAYS (published November 2005)
Environment, Science Technology (Mortality from Ship Emissions) July 2007 University of Delaware
Lloyd's List (October 20 2008).

Clownfish lost at sea due to rising CO₂ levels

Tests on clownfish larvae showed they became disoriented and were unable to find a suitable place to live if they were raised in seawater that had absorbed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. They also are unable to distinguish between their own parents and other fish, and they become attracted to substances they previously avoided.

Read the full article at the Guardian 3rd February 2009

Global warming could lead to ocean dead zones

Even if humans can rein in the atmosphere's carbon dioxide content by the end of this century, large zones in the oceans could remain depleted of oxygen for hundreds or even thousands of years, researchers have revealed.

The lower oxygen content in the seas, a consequence of global warming, could threaten much of the world's marine life by the 22nd century, including the fish, shellfish, and other creatures on which humans depend for food.

Scientists have known for centuries that warmer water holds less dissolved oxygen. As temperatures rise, oxygen bubbles into the atmosphere. Too little dissolved oxygen and marine life begins to suffocate. Ever since global warming became a concern, researchers have been attempting to monitor the oxygen content of the seas.

One such study last year reported startling expansions of oceanic low-oxygen zones over the past half-century, though part of that development is due to agricultural pollution from streams and rivers. Other research has revealed that once deoxygenation starts, it triggers a feedback loop, wherein a cascade of physical and chemical reactions can greatly prolong its effects.

To determine how long ocean oxygen levels might remain low, Danish researchers constructed a computer model to track the phenomenon over the next 100,000 years. Under Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scenarios predicting atmospheric temperature increases of up to 4°C by the end of this century, the resulting ocean temperature increases would expand existing low-oxygen zones, the team reports online this week in Nature Geoscience. That would create so-called dead zones where, for 2 millennia or even longer, few fish and shellfish could survive.

These zones would cover tens of thousands of square kilometres in the northern Indian Ocean and in the eastern Pacific Ocean off the tropical coasts of North, Central, and South America. "We were surprised to find how ocean warming and associated oxygen depletion increased more than global warming itself," says lead author and oceanographer Gary Shaffer of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen.

The bad news doesn't end there. Shaffer says that the model does not take into account the effect of methane released by ocean sediments as the water warms. Methane reacts with oxygen and removes it from water. So it's possible, he says, that the "oxygen depletion would be much worse."

Oceanographer Gregory Johnson of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, Washington, says the model takes the complex interactions of the ocean and other climate systems and "collapses them into a simple framework." That framework, he says, will help researchers study the effects of climate over very long periods of time.

Source: ScienceNOW Daily News, 26th January 2009

World's toughest wind turbines set to make début off Germany's coast

After a decade in development, the toughest wind turbines ever built are ready to make their début.

The machines are the world's first designed specifically for the harsh and remote conditions of the sea and have been developed in Germany, by the French energy company Areva. The turbines have a new waterproofing system and a simplified and lighter design, which should mean they require fewer expensive maintenance visits and are cheaper and easier to install and maintain. The turbines will stand 90m above the water and have a blade diameter of almost 120m. At full power each of the 5MW turbines will supply enough electricity for 5,000 homes.

turbine blades being hoisted into position

Workers install a wind turbine produced by Multibrid. Multibrid is a German company that has been working on the development and manufacture of the offshore wind energy converter. Photograph: Multibrid GmbH

The offshore turbines in use today are simply windmills designed for use on land that have been taken out to sea. As such they are not optimised for reliability or ease of installation or maintenance, which drives up the cost of their operation. But, according to the Carbon Trust, a British government-backed company which invests in low-carbon technologies, driving down costs is crucial if the UK is to build the minimum of 29GW of offshore wind power needed by 2020 to hit the EU's renewable energy targets.

"Without urgent action", says the Carbon Trust, "there is a risk that little additional offshore wind power will be built by 2020 beyond the 8GW already planned or in operation."

In development for more than a decade, Areva has now unveiled plans to install six of the giant Multibrid M5000 turbines as part of the Alpha Ventus project, Germany's first offshore wind farm to be situated 45km from the island of Borkum. They are expected to be in place by the end of the summer.

Peter Madigan, offshore renewables development manager at the British Wind Energy Association said the Multibrid turbine was an important development: "At present we use onshore wind technology taken offshore. In terms of cost, having devices customised to the offshore environment will help bring prices down."

David Clarke, chief executive of the independent Energy Technologies Institute, agreed the design is a significant advance: "It is the only device at that full-scale 5MW that has been built and tested as an offshore-specific design. On that basis, Areva are leaders."

Turbines designed for use on land are relatively heavy and cost a lot to install and maintain. Areva's design tackles some of these problems by simplifying the engineering, in particular the electrical generator behind the blades. "Coupled with a simplified, novel gearbox, that's exactly the kind of innovation that we're looking for in offshore-specific machines," said Clarke.

The blades are reinforced with carbon fibre to make them as light as possible, and all of the mechanisms needed to change their position relative to the wind are enclosed to prevent sea air damaging them. The nacelle, which contains the generator and major engineering components, is also hermetically sealed against the ambient air.

An Areva spokesperson said reliability was a top priority for the design - all the sensors and power management systems that are critical for the operation of the turbine have been installed in duplicate, to avoid the system shutting down in the event of an individual technical failure. Areva also claims that its wind turbine is simpler to install than standard offshore machines since it is largely assembled and tested onshore, but it will still require a customised barge.

Other research teams have tried to tackle the installation problem by developing turbines that float, but experiments by renewables company Blue H and Norwegian oil giant Statoil are still in the earliest stages.

Both Clarke and Madigan said that offshore wind was important for the UK's future energy mix. "Offshore, you don't have local residents to worry about so you can do bigger turbines and operational noise isn't an issue," said Madigan.

Source: The Guardian 23rd January 2009

Nominations open for new nuclear sites

The nuclear industry has two months from 27th January 2009 to nominate sites for the first wave of new nuclear power stations in the UK, the Government has announced. The call for nominations came alongside publication of the criteria against which potential sites will be assessed.

The criteria include conditions that new sites should not be near major population centres or certain types of military activity. The industry has indicated that the most suitable sites for new build are in the vicinity of existing nuclear power stations.

Ed Miliband MP, Secretary of State at the Dept. of Energy and Climate Change, told the Nuclear Development Forum; "We've taken some big steps towards next generation nuclear in the year since the publication of our White Paper, the industry continues to gear up to invest and we are on course to see new nuclear feeding into the grid by 2018. EdF (EDF Energy, British subsidiary of Électricité de France) has firm plans for new reactors on British Energy land, and other companies have started to form joint ventures.

"We'll be judging each site that gets nominated against the criteria we have set out today and there will be plenty of opportunities for local authorities and the public to have their say on the options tabled.

"Nuclear power can improve energy security and help the drive towards low carbon energy supplies. Alongside renewables and cleaner fossil fuels, it will help us meet our climate change goals as well as ensuring the future supply of energy for the UK."

The criteria are published as part of the response to last year's Strategic Siting Assessment (SSA) consultation at a meeting of the Nuclear Development Forum (NDF) one year on from the publication of the Nuclear Energy White Paper. The NDF brings together senior representatives from the nuclear industry including vendors, operators, key suppliers, contractors and unions involved in the industry, and Government. It meets three times a year and aims to support and advise the Government's OND (Office for Nuclear Development) in its role to develop and maintain the UK as one of the best markets in the world for companies to invest in nuclear power.

Site nominations must be received by 31st March 2009. The list of nominated sites will be published shortly after and there will be an initial month-long opportunity for the public to express their views on how the sites match up to the criteria. The Government will then assess each site to decide if it meets a number of criteria. Sites assessed to be 'strategically suitable' will be listed on the draft Nuclear National Policy Statement (NPS), which will be open for consultation during which communities and Parliament can have their say on the draft list of sites. From 2010, developers may apply to the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) for planning permission for those sites which are found to be strategically suitable in the Nuclear NPS. Before a developer applies for permission it has to consult affected Local Authorities and local communities. Communities can also submit written evidence to the IPC on the application and may also be able to speak at particular hearings on a proposal.

Note: The leaflet "New nuclear power stations: how sites will be chosen and how you can have your say" can be found at: www.nuclearpowersiting.decc.gov.uk

Source: Department of Energy and Climate Change, 27th January 2009

Five projects on Severn tidal power shortlist

A proposed shortlist of schemes to generate clean, green electricity from the power of the tides in the Severn estuary has been unveiled by the Department of Energy and Climate Change. The shortlist includes a mixture of barrages and innovative lagoon schemes.

Ed Miliband MP, Secretary of State at the Dept. of Energy and Climate Change, has also announced £500,000 of new funding to further develop embryonic technologies like tidal reefs and fences. The progress of these technologies will be considered before decisions are taken whether to go ahead with a Severn tidal power scheme.

The tides in the Severn estuary are the second highest in the world. The largest proposal being taken forward has the potential to generate nearly 5% of the UK's electricity from a domestic, low carbon and sustainable source.

Over the past year, the Government-led feasibility study has been investigating a list of ten options, gathering information on the costs, benefits and environmental challenges of using the estuary to generate power.

Cardiff Weston Barrage: A barrage crossing the Severn estuary from Brean Down, near Weston super Mare to Lavernock Point, near Cardiff. Its estimated capacity is over 8.6 Gigawatts - twice that of the UK's largest fossil fuel power plant - and it could generate nearly 5% of UK electricity.
Shoots Barrage: Further upstream of the Cardiff Weston scheme. Capacity of 1.05GW, similar to a large fossil fuel plant.
Beachley Barrage: The smallest barrage on the proposed shortlist, just above the Wye River. It could generate 625MW.
Bridgwater Bay Lagoon: Lagoons are radical new proposals which impound a section of the estuary without damming it. This scheme is sited on the English shore between east of Hinkley Point and Weston super Mare. It could generate 1.36GW.
Fleming Lagoon: An impoundment on the Welsh shore of the estuary between Newport and the Severn road crossings. It too could generate 1.36GW.

All ten projects and the proposed shortlist will now be subject to a three month public consultation which begins today.

Ed Miliband said: "Fighting climate change is the biggest long term challenge we face and we must look to use the UK's own natural resources to generate clean, green electricity. The Severn estuary has massive potential to help achieve our climate change and renewable energy targets. We want to see how that potential compares against the other options for meeting our goals. The largest proposal to harness the power of the tides on the shortlist could save as much carbon dioxide as all the residential emissions from Wales. The five schemes shortlisted are what we believe can be feasible, but this doesn't mean we have lost sight of others. Half a million pounds of new funding will go some way to developing technologies still in their infancy, like tidal reef and fences. We will consider the progress of this work before any final decisions are taken. We have tough choices to make. Failing to act on climate change could see catastrophic effects on the environment and its wildlife, but the estuary itself is a protected environment, home to vulnerable species including birds and fish. We need to think about how to balance the value of this unique natural environment against the long-term threat of global climate change. It is vital we seek public views and collect all information we need to make sure our climate change actions are ambitious yet fair."

Jane Davidson, Welsh Assembly Government Minister for Environment, Sustainability and Housing, said: "Harnessing the power of the Severn Estuary tides could make a significant contribution towards achieving the UK targets for renewable energy and reducing carbon emissions, but we must ensure that environmental issues are taken fully into account. The shortlisted schemes are based on relatively well understood hydroelectric technologies, with a mix of existing and new engineering structures. It is proposed that the economic, social, and environmental impacts of these be studied further in the second phase of the government study. In addition to the shortlist other, less developed, schemes for capturing tidal energy could have potential in the longer term. I am pleased the Welsh Assembly Government, together with Defra and the South West Regional Development Agency are contributing £500,000 to support the development of innovative options for harnessing tidal power in the Severn Estuary. We are encouraging Welsh companies involved with marine technology to be among those applying for access to this fund to help demonstrate the potential of innovative technologies, as the South West RDA are encouraging those in South West England. We consider it essential that key stakeholders and the public at large are aware of the issues involved in capturing Severn Tidal Power and provide their input into the ongoing studies."

The Dept of Energy and Climate is also publishing, for consultation, the scope of the Strategic Environmental Assessment. This is a study which will ensure a detailed understanding of the environmental resource of the estuary, recognising the nature conservation significance and the rivers which flow in to it. The consultation began 26th January 2009 and runs until 23rd April 2009, see www.decc.gov.uk/severntidalpowerconsultation

Images from the DECC consultation website

More images and a map outlining the locations of the five schemes, and visualisations of how they could look, can be viewed on the DECC consultation website, www.decc.gov.uk/severntidalpowerconsultation

Source: Department of Energy and Climate Change Monday 26th January 2009

Poor Portugal!

Whilst Britain has its environmental problems, it appears that Portugal has even more. They are facing catastrophe from rising greenhouse gas emissions, wasted water, waste disposal, unbridled construction, natural land loss, increasing waste generation and severe coastal erosion due to offshore aggregate dredging. (See 2.2.2 'Human structures and activities have exacerbated coastal erosion' in the Eurosion Report, in which Cove do Vapor is cited, like North Norfolk and others, as experiencing coastal erosion due to marine aggregate dredging)
'Europe - EUROSION Project - 29th October 2005' see MARINET website www.marinet.org.uk/mad/scientificstudies.html#eep or direct at Eurosion www.eurosion.org/reports-online/reports.html

Green party (PEV) Deputy Isabel de Castro says:
"Although Portugal has some of the most advanced environmental laws in the world, and the constitution itself, in an innovative manner, consecrates the environment as a fundamental right, there is a huge gap between the legislation and reality. Not only have public policies in defence of the environment been abandoned, but the growing irresponsibility of the state, the dismantling of oversight and monitoring mechanisms, the lack of political will, and a climate of impunity favour attacks on the environment and environmental degradation."

"It is necessary to sound the alarm in the face of the constant threat to our valuable irrecoverable natural, environmental and cultural patrimony and to our landscape, which are dying because of the complicity by omission of successive governments, which has opened the door to their destruction in the name of fast and easy profits."

Doesn't some of this sound familiar to you? Read the whole story in ISP News at www.ipsnews.net:80/news.asp?idnews=33495

Further response by MARINET to AODA Scoping Report

The marine aggregate industry off the East Anglian coast has been required by government to undertake a Regional Environmental Assessment (REA) of its activities and the numerous licences which it holds in this area of the sea. The REA is required to assess the environmental impact of this block of licences and to publish a Report. At the present time the Scoping Study, which defines what the REA study should address, is currently being formulated by the consultants, Emu Ltd, who have published a final draft version of this Scoping Study.

Two further letters have been sent by MARINET dated 23rd and 25th January '09. You can read these on our 'Comments on UK Licence Application page at www.marinet.org.uk/mad/objection.html#rea

EU wants "zero waste and zero emissions" target for shipping

The European Commission has issued a plan to increase the competitiveness of the EU maritime sector and improve its environmental performance by 2018. The plan is also intended to meet objectives in other sectors such as energy and road transport.

The Commission has called for an ambitious long-term "zero-waste, zero-emission" goal for the maritime sector. It has reaffirmed its intention to table draft legislation to cut greenhouse gas emissions from ships if world governments fail to agree global reductions this year.

To achieve this long-term goal, the Commission will also propose to strengthen EU legislation on ship waste disposal at port facilities and improve its implementation. It will also make sure member states achieve "good environmental status" in marine waters under the new marine framework directive.

The Commission wants a European environmental management system to monitor improvements in the maritime sector's environmental performance. It would also implement the forthcoming international convention on ship recycling and possibly propose further action in this area.

The next ten years represent a "unique opportunity" to strengthen the shipping sector's contribution to EU goals on sustainable transport, according to the Commission. In particular, it says that promoting short sea shipping will help reduce congestion in the road transport sector. The plan (www.endseurope.com/docs/90121a.doc) was described by maritime affairs commissioner Joe Borg as a "cornerstone" of an action plan published in October 2008. The Commission says it will consult with stakeholders on how to implement actions outlined in the ten-year plan, and the Commission believes its benefits will go beyond the EU, extending to the entire maritime sector.

Source: Environmental and News Data Service (ENDS), 21st January 2009.

EU says it will protect the Arctic from increased exploitation

The EU will make sure increased fishing activities and oil exploitation in the Arctic will not lead to significant environmental damage as the melting of the polar ice sheet makes the region more accessible to international shipping, maritime affairs commissioner Joe Borg said on 19th January 2009.

Speaking at a conference on the sustainable management of Arctic resources in Norway, the EU commissioner reaffirmed plans outlined in a strategy for the region announced in November 2008. The strategy aims to reconcile two competing agendas: protecting the environment and securing a share of the Arctic's abundant resources.

The US government has recently issued a plan for the region that mirrors the objectives of the EU strategy. WWF has repeated its call for a moratorium on exploitation in the region and urged Norway to ban any new offshore projects along its coast.

Source: Environmental and News and Data Service (ENDS) 19th January 2009.

EU proposes "quotas" for sea anglers

The EU is now proposing to ration the number of fish that recreational sea anglers can catch in a further development of its quota system to protect fish stocks via the European Common Fisheries Policy.

The measures are part of a latest package of European Commission proposals under the Common Fisheries Policy aimed at protecting endangered species. Quotas setting limits on how many of certain species including cod, ling and pollack each member state can catch are currently applied only to commercial fishermen.

However now, under these new proposals, member states would have to set aside part of their quota for recreational fishermen who catch only a handful of fish.

When that quota is filled, anglers would be banned from catching any more. The proposals would also prevent them from selling on any fish they catch and would subject them to tougher regulations registering their catches. Boat skippers who take people on recreational fishing trips, a popular excursion for holidaymakers, could be made to apply for licences, giving them extra cost and bureaucracy to contend with. People also fishing from beaches, piers and kayaks face being given strict quotas of how much they can catch.

When this story appeared in the Yorkshire Press, political reaction against the proposal is recorded as being strong.

Tory MP for Scarborough and Whitby Robert Goodwill said: "The amount of fish taken by recreational anglers is minimal and many of them make a real contribution to the coastal resorts. In Whitby there are a number of boats which make their living by taking out recreational anglers, and this will be another restriction for them."

Tory MEP for Yorkshire and the Humber Edward McMillan-Scott said: "It's a ludicrous proposal. I'm very very hostile to the common fisheries policy - I think it's been a disaster in the North Sea. In my time I've seen fleets in Grimsby, Bridlington, Scarborough and Whitby decimated. We're now having fishermen scratching for a living and this is just silly. People I've spoken to in Brussels think it's crazy bureaucratic nonsense."

A Defra spokesman said: "This is one of a number of proposed changes by the European Commission which we need to examine carefully, and we are speaking to anglers."

Source: Yorkshire Post, 23rd January 2009.

MARINET member writes a history of the US Naval "ghost ships"

Hartlepool Friends of the Earth, who have been involved from the outset in contesting the decision to bring disused US naval ships across the Atlantic for breaking in Hartlepool, has written a full account of this episode from when it was first mooted in 2003 to today when the company, Able UK Ltd, now has the licences it needs and is able to proceed. This account records all the details by which the decision "evolved" and shows how the opposition to such a project, however well grounded its case may be in law and evidence, can still be lost when the authorities have a will to determine otherwise.

This account may be seen on our website at www.marinet.org.uk/regional/ghostships.html.

Responses to Harbour Dredging Regulations proposed amendments

The ongoing consultation on the proposed amendment of the Marine Works Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007 (see www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/marine-works/index.htm) has produced a number of concerned replies. One of these from a member at Felixstowe follows. Felixstowe has suffered severe erosion ever since port dredging began to deepen the navigation channels. (See the many references by performing a Search for 'Felixstowe' on this our website)

15th January 2009

Sustainable Marine Resources and Climate Impacts Team,
Defra Marine Programme,
Area 2E,
Nobel House,
17 Smith Square,
London
SW1P 3JR

Dear Madam/Sir,

Consultation response on an amendment to the Marine Works Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007

I would like to respond to the above mentioned consultation.

The main comments I wish to make are as follows:

Truly independent environmental impact assessments (IEA) are required with vigorous monitoring using appropriate field study methods, results to be available to all stake holders for comment and put in the public domain. It should be borne in mind that harbour dredging/navigation channel dredging may have impacts up stream of such activities as well as on estuaries and adjoining beaches and river banks.

Around the same time that the navigation channel into the port of Felixstowe was deepened and harbour works took place for the Trinity terminal considerable beach draw down occurred i.e. between 2002 and 2006 (see photographs) at Walton-on-the-Naze significant erosion was also noticed. The event at Felixstowe also had economic consequences particularly loss to the local tourist industry.

The use of aggregate for beach recharge may not be economically viable due to the ease that such material can be washed away soon after it has been placed on a diminishing beach. Use in the construction industry may be more appropriate. In any case this aggregate material will need testing for toxins.

I have particular concerns about the implications of self regulation and do not agree that the Port of London Authority should act as both "regulator" and "appropriate authority" such activities should be independent from each other, should be monitored, evaluated with appropriate review mechanisms put in place. Surely, if the Port of London Authority undertakes both activities there will be a conflict of interest.

If there is any adverse impact of the dredging activity appropriate mitigation measures should be put in place to be paid for by the authority undertaking the dredging works and not the local community, government or businesses affected.

I hope you will find my comments helpful,

Yours faithfully,

Encs: Photographs of Felixstowe South Sea Front
1 x 2002
2 x 2006

EU Commission supports MARINET member over polluting sewage discharges

MARINET member, Robert Latimer, who lives at Whitburn, Tyne and Wear, has secured a decision from the EU Commission to take the first step in legal proceedings against the UK Government for failing to halt sewage discharges to sea at Whitburn which are allegedly in violation of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive. Similar proceedings are also to be commenced by the Commission against the UK in respect of sewage discharges in London, Torbay and Kilbarchan.

The European Commission's decision to pursue legal action against the United Kingdom involves a breach of EU rules for the collection and treatment of urban waste water. The UK has received a final warning, before possible Court action, for a case which concerns insufficient collection and treatment facilities for four urban centres (London, Torbay, Whitburn and Kilbarchan). The case involves untreated urban waste water being discharged directly into rivers or sea, causing pollution of the environment and health hazards.

The frequency of these overflows can in certain cases exceed 80 times per year, causing millions of cubic meters of untreated waste water to be released. As a result, large scale fish kills may occur and the use of waters for recreational purposes, such as bathing or water sports, is prevented.

The Commission considers that this is in violation of the EU's Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 91/271/EEC. This Directive aims at curbing pollution caused by urban waste water (sewage). Discharges of urban waste water causes pollution and threatens the survival of fish. By introducing potentially harmful bacteria and viruses, the discharges also pose human health risks.

Legal Process

Article 226 of the Treaty gives the Commission powers to take legal action against a Member State that is not respecting its obligations.

MARINET Responds to AODA Scoping Report

On 26th September 2008 MARINET attended a presentation called by AODA, the Anglian Offshore Dredging Association to help form the requirements of the Scoping Study. For full details of that event please refer to: http://www.marinet.org.uk/mad/objection.html#rea. AODA's company members are CEMEX UK Marine Ltd, Hanson Aggregates Marine Ltd, United Marine Dredging Ltd, Sea Aggregates Ltd and Volker Dredging Ltd who act collectively within the British Marine Aggregates Producers Association (BMAPA). Also members of AODA are CEFAS (Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science), the Crown Estate, and Emu Ltd who are the consultants for the REA.

The Scoping Study is seen by the AODA presenters as a means "to inform and support the industry's applications for licence renewals or new applications ..." whereas MARINET has informed the consultants, Emu Ltd, that its purpose is to provide a fair and balanced assessment of the knowledge available, and therefore full recognition of the impact of offshore dredging.

MARINET has now responded to the draft Scoping Study document with a wide range of suggestions, comments and criticisms which might be used by our members and supporters as a basis to aid their own response supplemented by their own derived concerns.

MARINET's response can be seen by going to 'MARINET Responses to the AODA Scoping Report' on the Marine Aggregates page at http://www.marinet.org.uk/mad/objection.html#rea

The Economist magazine warns about damage to our seas

In an leading article titled "A sea of troubles", The Economist magazine has warned that man is assaulting the oceans, and that they will smite him if he does not take care.

"The worries begin at the surface" states The Economist, "where an atmosphere newly laden with man-made carbon dioxide interacts with the briny sea. The sea has thus become more acidic, making life difficult, if not impossible, for marine organisms with calcium-carbonate shells or skeletons. These are not all as familiar as shrimps and lobsters, yet species like krill, tiny shrimp-like creatures, play a crucial part in the food chain: kill them off, and you may kill off their predators, whose predators may be the ones you enjoy served fried, grilled or with sauce tartare. Worse, you may destabilise an entire ecosystem."

"Some of the worrying changes may not be entirely the work of man" observes the magazine," but one that surely has no other cause is the dearth of fish in the sea. Most of the big fish have now been hauled out, and the rest will be gone within decades if the pillage continues at current rates. Indeed, over three-quarters of all marine fish species are below, or on the brink of falling below, sustainable levels. Another change is the appearance of a mass of discarded plastic that swirls round in two clots in the Pacific, each as large as the United States."

"What can be done to put matters right?" asks the magazine. "The sea, the last part of the world where man acts as a hunter-gatherer - as well as bather, miner, dumper and general polluter - needs management, just as the land does. Economics demands it as much as environmentalism, for the world squanders money through its poor stewardship of the oceans. Bad management and overfishing waste $50 billion a year, says the World Bank. . . . But the high seas, beyond the limits of national control, present bigger problems, and many fear that the tuna, sharks and other big fish that swim in the open ocean will be wiped out. Yet international fishing agreements covering parts of the North Atlantic show that management can work even in such common waters - though the Atlantic tuna commission also shows it can fail. And where fishing cannot be managed, it must simply be stopped. Nothing did so much good for fish stocks in northern Europe in the past 150 years as the second world war: by keeping trawlers in port, it let fisheries recover. A preferable solution today would be marine reserves, the more, and the bigger, the better."

Source: For the full text of the article and additional material, see The Economist, 30th December 2008.

Iron-fertilisation experiment in the ocean "should be banned"

Germany's Environment Ministry has called for a ban on a controversial joint German-Indian experiment to seed part of the South Atlantic ocean with iron sulphate in order to stimulate phytoplankton growth (microscopic plants) and thereby absorb CO₂ from the atmosphere.

The scientists involved aim to discharge six tonnes of iron sulphate in the South Atlantic to find out how this affects microscopic marine plants on the ocean surface. Proponents believe iron nutrition will cause this phytoplankton to grow explosively and thus absorb more atmospheric carbon dioxide, the principal greenhouse gas, as a result of photosynthesis. It could become an invaluable buffer against global warming, they argue.

Opponents, on the other hand, say the consequences of wide-scale iron fertilisation could be catastrophic. They fear it could cause the sea to become more acidic or trigger algal blooms that would de-oxygenate swathes of the ocean.

German Environment Ministry spokesman, Matthias Machnig, said that the ministry had asked the German research ministry to "immediately halt" the experiment. The test runs counter to a global moratorium on ocean fertilisation established under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Machnig said. It is also reported in the German press that the Environment Minister, Sigmar Gabriel, has written to Research Minister, Annette Schavan, saying the experiment "destroys Germany's credibility and its vanguard role in protecting biodiversity". However, the research ministry has stated that it believed the German institute in question, the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI), "had prior agreement with the environment ministry" for carrying out the experiment.

The iron-sowing expedition, named LOHAFEX, comprises 48 scientists, 30 of them from India's National Institute of Oceanography (NIO), aboard the research ship Polarstern. The team set sail from Cape Town on January 7 and after two weeks will arrive in a target zone where the dissolved iron will be discharged over a patch of 300 square kilometres (115 sq. miles). The zone has not been identified. After research, the ship will dock in Punta Arenas, Chile, on March 17.

In a press statement, the Bremerhaven-based AWI said the experiment "is in accordance" with the provisions of the CBD and the London Convention on ocean fertilisation "that call for further research to enhance understanding of ocean iron fertilisation".

Planning for the experiment began in 2005, and the scheme was part of a memorandum of understanding between the AWI and NIO that the two institutes signed during a trip to New Delhi in October 2007 by Chancellor Angela Merkel, it said."The size of the fertilized patch is considerably smaller than the impact of melting icebergs that may leave a swathe of several hundred kilometres (miles) breadth of enhanced iron concentrations," AWI added. "LOHAFEX will contribute legitimate and much needed scientific research to the controversial discussions on ocean fertilization."

Once written off as irresponsible or madcap, geo-engineering schemes are getting a closer hearing in the absence of political progress to roll back the greenhouse gas problem.

Other, far less advanced, projects include sowing sulphur particles in the stratosphere to reflect solar radiation and erecting mirrors in orbit that would deflect sunrays and thus slightly cool the planet.

Green groups are concerned by these projects, and say they could cause more problems than they resolve. They also say these schemes' financial cost is unknown, but possibly far more than the bill for reducing emissions that cause the problem. "This case clearly shows why we need strong, enforceable rules to prevent rogue geo-engineers from unilaterally tinkering with the planet," said Jim Thomas of the ETC Group, an environmental watchdog based in Montreal, Canada.

Source: Agence France Presse and Yahoo News, 14th January 2009

New study claims seas are absorbing less CO₂

Recent studies have shown that the sea is absorbing elevated levels of CO₂, and thus causing the acidification of oceans. Now a new study by Kitack Lee, an associate professor at Pohang University of Science and Technology, Korea, claims that the seas in the sea of Japan are beginning to absorb less CO₂ than has believed to be the case. Once again, global warming is being cited as the cause.

The world's oceans soak up about 11bn tonnes of human carbon dioxide pollution each year, about a quarter of all produced, and even a slight weakening of this natural process would leave significantly more CO₂ in the atmosphere. That would require countries to adopt much stricter emissions targets to prevent dangerous rises in temperature. Prof. Kitack Lee who led the research, says the discovery is the "very first observation that directly relates ocean CO₂ uptake change to ocean warming".

He says the warmer conditions disrupt a process known as "ventilation". This is the way seawater flows and mixes and drags absorbed CO₂ from surface waters to the depths. He warns that the effect is probably not confined to the Sea of Japan. It could also affect CO₂ uptake in the Atlantic and Southern oceans.

"Our result in the East Sea unequivocally demonstrated that oceanic uptake of CO₂ has been directly affected by warming-induced weakening of vertical ventilation," he says. Lee adds: "In other words, the increase in atmospheric temperature due to global warming can profoundly influence the ocean ventilation, thereby decreasing the uptake rate of CO₂."

Working with Pavel Tishchenko of the Russian Pacific Oceanological Institute in Vladivostok, Lee and his colleague Geun-Ha Park used a cruise on the Professor Gagarinskiy, a Russian research vessel, last May to take seawater samples from 24 sites across the Sea of Japan. They compared the dissolved CO₂ in the seawater with similar samples collected in 1992 and 1999. The results showed the amount of CO₂ absorbed during 1999 to 2007 was half the level recorded from 1992 to 1999.

Crucially, the study revealed that ocean mixing, a process required to deposit carbon in deep water, where it is more likely to stay, appears to have significantly weakened. Announcing their results in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, the scientists say: "The striking feature is that nearly all anthropogenic CO₂ taken up in the recent period was confined to waters less than 300 metres in depth. The rapid and substantial reduction ... is surprising and is attributed to considerable weakening of overturning circulation."

Corinne Le Quéré, an expert in ocean carbon storage at the University of East Anglia, said: "We don't think the ocean is just going to completely stop taking our carbon dioxide emissions, but if the effect weakens then it has real consequences for the atmosphere."

Source: The Guardian 12th January 2009

Coastline campaigners vow to fight on

That's the title of Richard Smith's article appearing in the East Anglian Daily Times of 17th January '09, which reads:

Campaigners trying to protect a vital stretch of the Suffolk coastline warned last night they would not give up their fight despite losing an important battle. The Environment Agency has been given approval to submit a controversial draft strategy to stop maintaining the flood walls around Blythburgh, Southwold, Reydon and Walberswick. These proposals were narrowly backed by the Anglian (eastern) regional flood defence committee meeting at the Environment Agency in Ipswich yesterday.

The EA argues that it would cost £35million to do the maintenance and it is unable to find the funding. But the Blyth Estuary Group says there is a viable alternative costing £2m and the group also point to a recently published report about sedimentation in the estuary. The significance of this report, which is still the subject of debate, hinges on whether the estuary accretes sediment or loses it. If accretion takes place then the river flow will be reduced and there will less impact on the estuary walls.

Mark Johnson, the Environment Agency's area flood risk manager, admitted: "Our initial thought is that we accept that there is more sediment in the estuary than we thought." The Agency is waiting feedback from an independent analyst to assess the impact on the estuary and it was criticised for allowing the draft strategy to go the National Review Group (NRG) before the report had been fully analysed.

Andrew Blois, spokesman for the Blyth Estuary Group, said: "When the strategy for the Blyth was put forward, we suggested that the EA's assumptions did not appear correct and the sedimentation survey supports our conclusions. This means that the existing river walls are more than up to the job if the proper maintenance is carried out, and we believe the work can be done for a fraction of the costs quoted by the EA."

John Goodwin, a member of the regional flood defence committee, warned that there was an "unseemly haste" in pushing through the draft strategy to the NRG when the sedimentation study was still being assessed.

Tony Coe, chairman of the committee, warned that it was imperative that they made a submission to the NRG. "If we do not, then it may be perceived that there is some split in the views of the Environment Agency and the bodies working together. The longer we leave sending it to the NRG then the longer we leave the estuary at a greater risk of serious deterioration. If we have the misfortune to have an inappropriate surge we could suffer serious damage in the short term and there are disbenefits in not sending it to the NRG," he said.

Richard Steward, a member of the Blyth Estuary Group, said after the meeting: "We are very disappointed that they are passing this through to the NRG, a strategy which has been shown to be scientifically baseless. We think this will be rubber stamped which will lead to the eventual abandonment of the Blyth estuary."

Guy McGregor, chairman of the Blyth Strategy Group, said: "They have been determined to push this through. I'm obviously disappointed, but we're going to keep on fighting. These defences have been protecting the land for 300 years and there is still work going on, particularly work at Southwold Harbour, which has not been taken into account."

Fight is on to stop bay sand dredging plan

From "This is South Wales" Tuesday, January 13th, 2009

CAMPAIGNERS aiming to protect Gower beaches are vowing to step up their fight against a building firm's sand dredging plan. Llanelli Sand Dredging is still hoping to get permission from the Assembly to dredge material off the coast of Swansea Bay. Concerned residents and local groups, who insist the process damages the region's beaches, said they were gearing up for the release of key data on the environment.

Their cause has won the backing of Tory AM Alun Cairns, who is calling on more people in South West Wales to get on board with the campaign. He said: "I remember a meeting when some researchers claimed the levels of sand on Gower beaches was increasing. If such claims are repeated, we need to be in a position to reject them immediately. If we aren't going to scrutinise the data collected, then who is?"

Mr Cairns said: "It is up the Assembly and Swansea Council to make the information available in a readable form." In the meantime, campaigners said they would press ministers at the Senedd to change policies on dredging. Port Eynon mayor Linda Newland believed they had a strong case. She said: "If they are dredging sand from Nobel, then why do they need to do it at Helwick as well?"

A spokesman for Llanelli Sand Dredging said: "Dredging (is) restricted to two or three short periods each year, which together total no more than about eight to 10 weeks. Dredging on the licence area only takes place for about two hours in each 24 hour period."

Gower Save Our Sands http://gowersos.keyframe.net

Coast Campaigners anticipating bitter blow

Campaigners fighting to protect their land and homes from being lost to the sea could be dealt a bitter blow this week if the Environment Agency's controversial strategy to stop maintaining flood defences is given the green light at a meeting of their Eastern Regional Flood Defence Committee on Friday 16th January.

Claiming that they cannot afford the £35m needed to maintain them, the EA want to cease repairing the flood walls which protect thousands of acres of land, twenty homes and the main A12 road around Blythburgh, Southwold, Reydon and Walberswick from flooding. Members of the Blyth Estuary Group continue to campaign to protect the protective mud banks which stop thousands of acres of land, about 20 homes and the A12 trunk road from flooding.

The full story is told by Hayley Mace in 'Suffolk coast campaigners braced for flooding blow' in the pages of the Eastern Daily Press of 13th January '08.

Peter Boggis v Natural England II

Natural England have gone to appeal against the December High Court finding regarding their attempt to prevent Peter Boggis from defending his Easton Bavents property from erosion (See www.marinet.org.uk/archive/archivelatestnews2008.html#pbvn)

In the Lowestoft Journal of 9th January '08' Hayley Mace reports the detail how on 9th January '08 Natural England announced that they are appealing against the High Court judgement.

Although a one-off case, the final decision will undoubtedly have a bearing on many similar cases in the future when people's right to protect their property clash with those bodies opposed to such measures.

Erosion at Dorset's Studland Bay

Studland Bay, one of Britain's most famous beaches that forms part of of 279km (173 miles) of coastline in south-west England now rapidly eroding, co-oincidental with ongoing offshore aggregate dredging. Like similar once stable counterparts on the East Coast, the beach is disappearing, the dunes are being undermined and soon the beach huts, visitor centre, car park and restaurant will be lost.

postage stamp with image of Studland Bay

The 2002 postage stamp below shows Studland Bay as it was then

The gabions (rock filled metal grilles) earlier placed by the National Trust have been washed away, but instead of attempting sustainable beach stabilising, the NT is now abandoning the scene by accepting the dictates of 'Managed Retreat' with the obvious consequences.

There is a short BBC film clip to be seen here whilst an article by Louise Gray in The Telegraph of 26th December '09 tells to whole story under 'National Trust abandons beach to erosion'

Vital Need for Marine Reserves

A very good film on the essential need for Marine Reserves may be seen by going to the Greeepeace Website at: www.greenpeace.org.uk/oceans/solutions/marine-reserves

US vows 'huge' marine protection

The US is to establish what it calls "the largest area of protected sea in the world" around its Pacific islands.

Commercial fishing and mining will be banned in the protected zones which include the Marianas Trench, the deepest area of ocean on the planet. The area totals 500,000 sq km (190,000 sq miles) of sea and sea floor.

While welcoming the protection package, environmental activists said that without curbing climate change, the other measures would be meaningless.

Read the full article on the BBC website, 6th of January 2009

Slowdown of coral growth extremely worrying, say scientists

Scientists researching coral growth across the Great Barrier Reef, are extremely worried by the severe and sudden slowdown in growth that is unprecedented in the last four centuries. Increasing ocean acidification due to rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are being put forward as the most probable explanation.

Full article is in the Guardian Environment 1st January 2009

Turbulent times ahead predicted for Off-shore Wind

An ENDS Report (Environmental News and Data Service) has considered the prospects for off-shore wind in the light of the global financial crisis.

In January 2007 European Commission president José Manuel Barroso called for a "new industrial revolution" that would transform Europe into a low-carbon economy. The development of the EU offshore wind sector lay at the heart of this vision. Offshore wind technology can not only cut Europe's greenhouse gas emissions and its dependency on fossil fuel imports, but also create a source of economic growth and jobs.

To ensure that the vision becomes a reality, in January 2008 the Commission proposed its now famous 20:20:20 goals. Although the climate and energy package had no specific objectives for offshore wind, targets to cut EU emissions by a fifth and boost the bloc's share of renewables to 20 per cent by 2020 were thought sufficient to realise the sector's potential. But by the end of 2008, the initial zeal has been replaced by growing unease after the dramatic collapse of the world's financial markets. Firms across Europe have begun reviewing their planned renewable energy investments.

As a direct result, BP and Shell have dropped plans to invest in the UK's wind sector, while others have warned they may slow the rate of their renewables investments. "Wind farms becalmed by turmoil" ran a headline in the UK's Financial Times in November.
More information from National Wind Watch at www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/11/24/wind-farms-becalmed-by-turmoil

Today offshore wind is only a fraction of the renewable power generated each year in Europe. At about 1,500 megawatts of installed capacity in 2008, the sector is still dwarfed by its onshore equivalent with a capacity of 55,000MW. The supremacy of onshore generation in the EU will continue until well beyond 2020, according to the head of the European Wind Energy Association (Ewea), Christian Kjaer. Based on projects already planned, Ewea estimates that by 2015 offshore wind capacity will grow to 30,000MW. It predicts that at some point between 2020 and 2030, offshore wind will overtake onshore in terms of new generating capacity added each year.

This phenomenal rate of predicted growth is one reason why the offshore wind sector is so central to Europe's low-carbon transformation. Another is its long-term potential. Eddie O'Connor, the founder and former chief executive of renewable energy company Airtricity, started his latest venture, Mainstream Renewable Power, in February. "You can get to around 10 per cent of total electricity generation from onshore wind before growth grinds to a halt, as it has in Denmark and is doing in Germany. But when you move offshore, there is an infinite reserve of generating capacity between 45 and 60 degrees latitude," he explains.

But what effect, if any, has the current financial crisis had on the sector's prospects for development? "We're definitely in a worse situation than we were three months ago," says Mr Kjaer. "No industry could say otherwise, and the wind sector is certainly not immune to the current financial crisis."

One factor that renders the sector vulnerable is that building an offshore wind farm requires a huge upfront investment. "It's a very capital-intensive technology, even when compared to coal and gas fired plants," says Mr Kjaer. "Having less liquidity in the economy certainly has an impact."

It is a view backed by the offshore developers. Albert van der Hem is project director for Dutch renewables developers Evelop. The firm built one of Europe's newest offshore wind farms, the Princess Amalia in the Netherlands, using mostly leveraged bank finance. "If you go to the banks for funding now, you'll find some are 'closed' till the end of the year, but others will still provide finance," he says. "We are currently achieving financial closure for new offshore wind projects in the North Sea. We are confident we can announce those deals in the near future."

Evelop is putting together similar finance deals to the one used to build the Princess Amalia wind farm. The conditions, however, are now different as risk premiums are higher. "We were the first in the world to achieve non-recourse project finance for an offshore wind farm," explains Mr van her Hem. "What we are also doing is bringing down the capital expenditure of these projects. We have already seen the price of commodities such as oil, copper and steel go down, so we are talking to our suppliers and asking them to reduce their prices."

Interest rates have fallen sharply in recent months, making lending cheaper. Labour costs are also falling, bringing down construction and maintenance costs. "Maybe all of this will balance out in the end," suggests Mr van der Hem.

Another source of optimism is provided by what is normally seen as a brake on developing offshore wind - a bottleneck in the global supply of wind turbines. "Manufacturers' order books are already full until 2009 or 2010, which should help cushion the industry from the short-term effects of the credit crunch," explains Ewea's Mr Kjaer. "Some of these existing orders are still conditional on securing the necessary finance," he adds. "If the funding can't be secured through the banks, we may see large energy utilities with very deep pockets take the opportunity to buy up turbines from independent operators." Mr Kjaer says the prospect of more investment in offshore wind by traditional energy firms "is not necessarily a bad thing".

Some experts argue that the current financial situation will have little effect on the sector's development. Eddie O'Connor says: "Offshore wind is a long-term phenomenon. In the UK for example, under the government's current third round of offshore development, planning permission will only be granted in 2013. The financial crisis will be resolved by then."

Instead, the factor that will govern the pace of development, according to Mr O'Connor and others, is the construction of a European offshore "supergrid". This is a series of cables and interconnectors - similar to the onshore power grid - that will enable electricity generated offshore to be conducted back to land, as well as allowing electricity to be traded between European countries to exploit peaks in supply and demand. Mr Kjaer agrees that the grid is "probably the biggest stumbling block" the sector faces. "If we can get that right, then the turbines will automatically follow."

The European Commission identified the growth of an offshore grid as one of its priorities in a November policy paper on offshore wind in "2020 and beyond". It has promised to draw up a blueprint within the next two years for building it in the North Sea - the first stage in a planned European supergrid.

A European offshore grid will also require a new offshore transmission system operator (TSO), argues Mr O'Connor. "We've got to stop thinking about wind in national terms and start to see it as a continental phenomenon." He suggests creating an offshore TSO with jurisdiction over the North Sea, made up of representatives from national TSOs and the EU. "The EU has already got the message about the supergrid. Now it's about addressing the practical issues to build it by 2015: standards, location, price allocation, and who's going to pay."

Claude Turmes, the Green MEP who in December led the talks with EU governments that culminated in agreement on the renewable energy directive, says: "It's purely a question of political will. All we need is a clear decision on who will build the grid, which should be the current grid operators, and who will pay for it, which should be energy consumers. Then I think we will be surprised by the pace of development in offshore wind".

There is a chance that the development of offshore wind, and specifically the supergrid, will benefit from the current financial crisis. At the beginning of December the commission proposed a €200bn "EU economic recovery plan" calling for huge investment to modernise Europe's infrastructure. One specific element in the plan foresees several billion euros being made available over the next two years for "trans-European energy interconnections". Another would see the European investment bank increase its funding for energy security and infrastructure projects by up to €6bn a year.

For Mr Kjaer, it is essential that the financial crisis is not allowed to delay developing the supergrid. "What happens in the next two or three years will be crucial in shaping the offshore wind market even up to 2050", he says. "My fear is that a lack of coordination between member states will stifle the rapid growth of the sector now. There's no doubt that Europe will develop offshore wind in the coming 30 years or so. The question is: will it happen as fast as the climate scientists tell us it needs to."

Source: ENDS, 19th December 2008.

UK Shipowners seek global emissions trading

The UK's main organisation for shipowners has announced in a surprise break with the industry consensus that world shipping should be subject to an international emissions trading system, similar to those for other polluting industries. The call by the UK Chamber of Shipping marks the first time a shipping industry body has called for the sector's inclusion in such a scheme which could cost shipowners billions of dollars a year.

Under a scheme, a version of which operates in Europe's power industry, polluters are either given or must buy permits for their current level of emissions and must buy from other participants permits for any extra emissions. The UK Chamber of Shipping retains significant influence because of Britain's past as the world's most important maritime nation and the strong growth in UK vessel registrations after the introduction of an attractive taxation regime.

However, any change looks years away. To be effective, a scheme would need to be an international one mandated by the International Maritime Organisation. There is strong opposition there, particularly from developing countries, to a worldwide scheme. Most shipping organisations play down the significance of shipping's carbon emissions - which account for only about 3 per cent of the world total - and advocate reducing them through voluntary action to make engines more efficient and cleaner. Announcing the organisation's decision, Martin Watson, president of the Chamber of Shipping, said that his organisation had come out in favour of emissions trading, partly because of the threat that otherwise national or regional governments could formulate their own ad hoc rules to handle the issue, making policy far more confused. The Chamber stressed that it had not yet developed an exact model for a shipping trading scheme or decided how permits should be distributed. However, Rob Ashdown, the organisation's technical manager, said if the cost for emitting each tonne of carbon were €30 ($41, £27), shipping would pay about €11bn a year under a scheme.

Source; Financial Times 15 December 2008

Oil companies storing oil on ships as oil tanks

Forbes magazine is citing a Reuters report, dated 20th November 2008, that three oil companies plan to store millions of barrels of crude oil at sea as they wait for demand to pick up and prices to rise.

The Reuters report is quoting brokers who have said that oil companies have booked ships capable of holding up to 10 million barrels, more than the daily output of Saudi Arabia. Both the U.S. oil trader, Koch, and Royal Dutch Shell have confirmed bookings of additional Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCC), say brokers according to Reuters.

Brokers said the cost of hiring vessels at current depressed rates would be less than the gains from waiting for an upturn in crude prices and in refiners' profit margins. More oil and trading firms were also considering floating storage, they said. "If you're looking at it from a cost perspective, just float the oil. The way to make money is to buy long and then go short," one trader said. Some of the vessels were to load crude in the North Sea, the first time large volumes have been placed in floating storage there since the oil price crashed to below $10 a barrel in 1998. "All this oil has to go somewhere, especially if the refiners aren't running at capacity," a Singapore-based crude oil trader said.

Koch has booked VLCC the Dubai Titan, with capacity to hold over two million barrels, for storage off the U.S. Gulf Coast. They added that Koch had already taken two other VLCCs for storage in the US Gulf. Oil major Shell has booked a second supertanker to store North Sea crude, ship brokers said. They said Shell would use the Front Crown to load North Sea crude in the second week of December. The vessel will travel east to Indonesia's Karimun Islands, where oil is often transferred from supertankers to smaller vessels for delivery. Shell has also booked another supertanker to take two million barrels from the North Sea for storage in the U.S. Gulf.

For Middle Eastern exporters, responsible for the bulk of any OPEC output cut, it is still cheaper to keep the oil in the ground. "The only reason as a producer you would pay money to put crude in floating storage would be if you would otherwise struggle to get it out of the ground," said one Gulf industry source.

Source: Forbes Magazine, 20th Nov 08

EDM 337 calls for Highly Protected Marine Reserves in Marine Bill

A Parliamentary device known as an Early Day Motion is being used to call for a widespread network of highly protected marine reserves, throughout all UK seas, to be incorporated into the Marine and Coastal Access Bill in line with the recommendation by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution in their 25th Report.

This Early Day Motion, EDM 337 has been tabled by Bill Wiggin MP (Conservative, Leominster) and Katy Clark (Labour, North Ayrshire and Arran). The EDM has the support of the Conservative front bench and Labour backbench support, with Liberal front bench support being sought.

EDM 337 has been promoted by MARINET who believes that the Government is prepared to listen to arguments that the Royal Commission recommendation on highly protected marine reserves should be incorporated into the Marine Bill, and if significant Members of Parliament sign-up to this EDM it will be a clear demonstration of belief within Parliament itself and by its elected members that this amendment to the Marine Bill is both desirable and necessary.

If you would like to assist in this important campaign to secure your Member of Parliament's support for EDM 337, then please visit the lobby facility on the MARINET Marine Reserves website www.marinereserves.org.uk.

EDM 337 reads: "That this House notes the recommendation made by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution in their 25th Report in 2004 that a widespread network of highly protected marine reserves throughout all UK seas is an important marine management tool which is required in order to rebuild UK commercial fish stocks and to halt the serious damage being caused to marine ecosystems; and calls upon the Government to develop selection criteria under the Marine Bill for establishing a network of protected marine areas based around science-based decision making."

Has your MP signed EDM 337? , visit here.

Do you want to tell your MP to sign EDM 337? , visit www.marinereserves.org.uk/mp

The Co-operative Society launches campaign for "Marine Reserves Now!"

The Co-operative Society in conjunction with the Marine Conservation Society www.mcsuk.org has launched a campaign for marine reserves to play a dominant role in the Marine and Coastal Access Bill which was introduced into Parliament on 15th December 2008.

The Co-op and MCS believe that urgent action is required to save our seas, and that the Marine Bill is the opportunity to secure this action. "The oceans are losing their biodiversity at an accelerating rate", says the Co-operative Society. "In UK waters there are 22 species of wildlife considered to be facing the threat of global extinction. Once common species, such as Atlantic Cod and Halibut, are on lists of threatened or endangered species and only eight of the 47 fish stocks found around the British Isles remain in a healthy state."

"Marine habitats and fish stocks," say the Co-op"continue to be damaged by destructive fishing techniques, e.g. it has been estimated that for every 1kg of North Sea Sole caught by beam trawl, up to 14kg of other seabed animals are killed. If the marine environment is to recover from decades of overfishing and habitat destruction, scientists recommend that 30% of our seas should be fully protected."

As a result, the Co-op and the Marine Conservation Society have launched a campaign which asks members of the public to contact their Member of Parliament to call for a strong Marine Bill, and for 30% of UK waters to be designated as highly protected marine reserves. To support the Co-op and MCS campaign and to lobby your MP, visit www.co-operative.coop/en/MarineReservesNow

MARINET greatly welcomes this initiative by the Co-op and the Marine Conservation Society, and joins these two organisations in campaigning for highly protected marine reserves covering 30% of UK seas, see www.marinereserves.org.uk

Marine Bill receives its Second Reading in the House of Lords

The Marine and Coastal Access Bill has commenced its consideration by Parliament with its Second Reading in the House of Lords on 15th December 2008. It successfully passed this stage, and will now be debated by Peers in detail during the Committee Stage which will commence in early January.

A full Hansard record of the Second Reading debate may be seen, or a shortened version prepared by MARINET is available, see www.marinereserves.org.uk/2008/12/what-their-lordships-said-about-the-bill.

MARINET is campaigning for amendments to the Marine Bill which will ensure that the ecosystem-based approach to marine management becomes part of the Bill, and for the Bill to place a duty upon the Government to create an extensive network of highly protected marine conservation zones covering at least 30% of UK seas by 2015. Highly protected marine conservation zones (MCZs) are the primary management tool of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management and are regarded by the RCEP and European marine scientists as essential if we are to restore health back to the UK's seas. At present, neither the ecosystem-based approach nor highly protected MCZs are part of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill.

A number of Peers spoke in favour of MARINET's proposals and amendments during the Second Reading, and if you would like to join the MARINET campaign to secure these amendments, visit www.marinereserves.org.uk.

UK Government publishes Marine and Coastal Access Bill

At the State Opening of Parliament on 3 December 2008, HM the Queen announced in her speech that the current Parliamentary session will include a Marine and Coastal Access Bill. The Bill was introduced to the House of Lords on 4 December 2008 and had its Second Reading there on 15 December. It is due to start its Committee stages in the House of Lords in early January.

The Bill introduces a new planning system for the sea, to be implemented by a new Government Agency known as the Marine Management Organisation (MMO), see www.defra.gov.uk/marine/legislation/key-areas.htm#1. This new planning system will, in many respects, mirror the processes which are now standard on land. The Bill will also give powers to the MMO to institute a reformed licensing system for marine activities such as aggregate extraction, harbour dredging, renewable energy projects and the laying of seabed cables. However, for large energy projects over 100MW licensing will be undertaken by the new Infrastructure Planning Commission (IFC) and not the MMO, see www.defra.gov.uk/marine/pdf/legislation/marine-licensing.pdf

The Bill will introduce new public rights of access to the coast and aims to create, as far as possible, a coastal path all around the UK, see www.defra.gov.uk/marine/legislation/key-areas.htm#8, and is reforming the management of fisheries within the 12 nautical mile territorial limit, see www.defra.gov.uk/marine/legislation/key-areas.htm#5. The Bill will not however reform fisheries management beyond 12 nautical miles out to the 200 nautical mile limit of the UK Exclusive Economic Zone as this area for fisheries management is currently administered by the EU and its Common Fisheries Policy.

Importantly, the Bill is seeking to reform marine nature conservation and is creating a new type of protected area known as a Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ) with a duty upon the Secretary of State to ensure that these MCZs form a network in order to protect our seas, and an obligation to report to Parliament every six years on how the process of creating and managing this network of MCZs is progressing, see www.defra.gov.uk/marine/legislation/key-areas.htm#4

MARINET observes that the Marine and Coastal Access Bill is an important step forward in marine management policy, and is to be greatly welcomed. Never before has such legislation on UK seas been presented to Parliament, and it is very unlikely that such legislation will be repeated in the near future. The Marine Bill is thus a unique opportunity to tackle the many serious problems which currently afflict our seas, our fisheries and our marine ecosystem, see www.marinet.org.uk/marinebill/marinebillsubmission1.pdf

In MARINET's opinion, the key to the building and implementing of a new management approach to our seas lies in seeing the sea as an ecosystem whose integrity must be protected, rather than the current management view which sees the sea as a collection of resources each to be individually exploited. This new thinking is known as the "ecosystem-based approach" to marine management and is supported by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution in their 25th Report, see www.rcep.org.uk/fishreport.htm, and EU marine scientists in the York and Valencia Declarations 2008, see www.marinet.org.uk/latestnews.html#wcom. The key management tool of the ecosystem-based approach is the marine reserve and, in particular, the highly protected marine reserve which forbids all extractive and damaging activities within its boundaries. By this means, marine management is able to protect and rebuild the integrity of the marine ecosystem as a whole and thus restore, for example, our severely damaged commercial fish populations.

At the present time, the Marine Bill neither mentions the ecosystem-based approach nor gives it a legal framework, and the Bill confers no powers or duty upon the UK Government to create the ecosystem-based approach's key management tool: highly protected marine conservation zones (marine reserves). MARINET believes that the Bill will ultimately fail in its purpose if it does not contain these powers, and MARINET is therefore campaigning for this fundamental reform, see www.marinereserves.org.uk

For further information from Defra about the Marine and Coastal Access Bill, see www.defra.gov.uk/marine/legislation/index.htm

Latest News Archive 2009

December 2009

November 2009

October 2009

September 2009

August 2009

July 2009

June 2009

May 2009

April 2009

March 2009

February 2009

January 2009

Correspondence with Anne McIntosh

Threatened Coast Dweller refuses 'handout'

Starfish Deaths

Fuel from the seabed

Possible undersea coal burning scheme off Norfolk to provide synthetic gas fuel.

In order to prepare a dossier for consultation at the coming public meeting, which Pat Gowen will attend o.b.o. MARINET and the NSAG, your comments, ideas, backing or criticisms of the plan are invited. Please send by e-mail to pat@marinet.co.uk or to pat.gowen@ntlworld.com.

Sea Drop?

The full BBC report may be seen here.

Concern grows over oil storage tankers in UK coastal waters

Source: Daily Mail 20 November 2009, and Sea Rates www.searates.com/news/4885.

Comment on the Westminster Offshore Dredging Debate

Norfolk and Suffolk Local Authorities Secure nearly 50% of National Fund Allocated to Manage Coastal Erosion

Ocean acidification rates pose disaster for marine life, major study shows

IUCN urges politicians to recognise the importance of oceans in climate change

Coastal carbon sinks disappearing faster than the Amazon rainforest

Appointments made to the independent Science Advisory Panel for the selection of MCZs

The News Release from Natural England states:

The Panel members are:

Graham Stuart MP has HoC debate on off-shore dredging

Fears that new nuclear power station will destroy oyster fishery

There is concern, expressed in the Colchester Daily Gazette that a new nuclear power station at Bradwell, in the Blackwater Estuary, Essex, could destroy parts of Colchester's native oyster fishery which has been renowned since Roman times.

We reproduce the full report from the Daily Gazette below:

Highly Protected marine reserves are absent from the UK Marine Bill

Scottish Green Party contests the shooting of seals

DEFRA's Compensation to erosion impacted communities

Update on coastal protection

Gravel Seeding Sea Bed Restoration?

Dredging Areas Update

EU backs CO2 storage change to OSPAR treaty

Scientists say Arctic sea-ice melt and sea levels rises are accelerating beyond forecasts

'Cliffhanger' — the ethical and social impact of erosion

Lowestoft's disappearing beaches

Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for Norfolk?

NGOs claim marine conservation zones will protect and save Britain's marine wildlife

Hull University Report opposing Offshore Aggregate Dredging

Wish you were here?… preserving America's Beaches

New Hope for Norfolk's marine habitat?

Unmanaged Retreat

Threat of another oil spill off East Anglia

A Flood Barrier for Great Yarmouth?

Lord Smith's Olive Branch of Compensation

Research fish catch programme terminated in Lowestoft

UK South West fishermen angry over new EU fishing proposals

Legal Clout for the Environment

Escalating South West Coast Erosion

EA Announces Flood Protection Plans

Peter Boggis battles on… Pat Gowen's thoughts about the issue

Conference highlights the importance of Marine Spatial Planning

Lesley Hampshire's Report on Marine Spatial Planning Conference, 19-20 October 2009:

The vital rôle of Ocean Floor flora

Offshore Windfarms at Docking Shoal and The Race Bank

The relative documents can be seen by visiting: www.offshorewindfarms.co.uk/Pages/Search_Results/?SearchTerm=emf and www.berr.gov.uk/files/file43528.pdf

Protecting the West African Coastline from Erosion

The ongoing battle in the north-east

From Home News North East of September 13th 2009, an article by Mike Kelly:

Storm clouds over North East's dirty sea water

From Mike Kelly's report in the Sunday Sun of 13th September 2009:

What lurks in our waves?

Campaigner's bid to take polluters to court, 2nd October 2009.

Finally, an item by Tim Booler published in the Sunderland Echo on Thursday 1st October 2009:

Clean-up legal battle reaches United Nations

Activists fight to save 'people's law on the environment'

Ruling would allow NGOs and individuals to challenge environmental damage in courts without prohibitive financial risks

EC to take the UK to Court over Waste Water Directive 91/271/EEC

European Commission takes UK to European Court of Justice over waste water collection systems

Legal Process

To see the history of Britain's failure to meet the Waste Water rulings do a Google Search on the MARINET website using the key words 'Waste Water'.

EU backs CO₂ storage change to OSPAR treaty

Substantial rise in CO₂ emissions by shipping

France's maritime policy — Speech by Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the Republic
Le Havre, 16 July 2009