Q: We need to seek outside funding, such as a tourist levy or EU grants
A: Depending on the broad option that is chosen for the future management of the estuary, there are various opportunities for external funding, such as biodiversity grants, countryside stewardship and European grants. Once a way forward is agreed, detailed options can be costed and bids to potential external funders (including the EU) can be made.
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: How much does the EA spend per annum on maintaining flood defences at Seaford beach? What would be the estimated cost of dredging the meanders per year? And by whom?
A: The Environment Agency spends around £250,000 per year on Seaford beach.
The cost of dredging the meanders is very difficult to estimate. The minimum cost would be £150,000 per year, but this could rise to up to £1.5 million, depending on the difficulty of disposal and the nature of the site. Gaining approval for this work would be very difficult, and there would be huge volumes of silt which may change the nature of the site.
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: Misinformation about the future of the estuary seems to dominate the media, the negativity of the issues are highly profiled. The Partnership needs to explain more about why the mudflats are good and why the valley will not be permanently underwater.
A: We talk regularly to the media and we feel that reporting in the local papers tends to be balanced and responsible.
We can’t tell the press what to write, but we will continue to be in regular contact with them and to do our very best to ensure that media coverage is factually correct.
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: Will the report must be made available / presented to the public in a format that is accessible by a large number of people? Effort needs to be put into drawing their attention to it so that all this effort to bring the communities of interest together isn’t lost.
A: We are committed to making sure that the report is widely available, to as many people as possible. We will publish it on the CEP website, and we will also make copies available in Council offices. We will also look into making copies available for inspection in local libraries. We will issue a press release once the report is published, to draw people’s attention to it.
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: The ‘Back to Nature CERP’ publication mentioned two features which were not mentioned in the introductory presentation at the engagement events: 1) a proposal to fill in the straight cut, and 2) to reinstate flow through the meanders.
A: The options outlined by Dr Williams in his introduction to the public engagement events should be considered as broad options rather than definitive schemes as they were general alternatives that were considered by the Environment Agency as part of the Flood Risk Management assessment.
One of the main aims of the engagement events was to explore alternative ideas for the future of the estuary. Filling of the cut and reinstatement of flow through the meanders are both still possibilities that could be explored if it was agreed that a managed approach would be the preferred way forward. The second of these two options – reinstatement of flow through the meanders – is of particular interest to the Partnership who have identified the maintenance of the meanders as a landscape feature as a priority for the future. We believe that re-establishing flow through them could be one of the best ways to achieve this, but clearly this would need to be assessed as to whether it would be technically feasible.
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: Why were people ‘allowed’ to attend more than one of these sessions? This will bias the outcome!
A: The Partnership had initially asked that people only attend one session each, to allow a range of different voices to be heard. However, some representatives of the ‘Rescue the Cuckmere Valley’ campaign felt very strongly that they should be allowed to attend all three events to ensure they had the fullest opportunity to put their point of view across.
The final report will capture all of the many different views expressed during the engagement process. However it will not come up with a “preferred option” and in that sense there is therefore no outcome to be biased.
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: Who is paying for Hopkins Van Mil? What proportion of the cost is being paid for by each agency?
A: Hopkins Van Mil have been contracted to manage the public engagement events, and are being paid for the Cuckmere Estuary Partnership.
The costs are being shared amongst the Partners in the following proportions: Wealden District Council 10%; Environment Agency 15%; Natural England 11%; East Sussex County Council 15%, Seaford Town Council 1%; South Downs Joint Committee 15% and the National Trust 26%. The South East Coastal Group has also made a contribution of 7% towards the engagement process
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: Why waste time and money on the themed workshops? What has any of them to do with controlling or managing the flooding?
A: The three main consultation events were fully open and were intended to allow a wide range of voices to be heard, on a range of subjects related to the Estuary, in a neutral and independent forum.
Following these open meetings, we held themed workshops in order to focus on a range of particular topics all directly related to the future of the Cuckmere. These were intended to ensure that the consultation process captured the views of those with a very specific interest in the Estuary, in more detail than might have been possible at the general public events.
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: Climate change is real. We need to plan for long-term sustainable solutions.
A: Based on the best available evidence, the Cuckmere Estuary Partnership believes that climate change is a reality.
We share the view that any options for the future of the Estuary should take a long term view. This is particularly important to allow the estuary to adapt to the likely impacts of climate change and if we want to be able to continue to enjoy the area into the future, without tying future generations into increasingly expensive options. Government policy is also to think and act long-term.
Comments Off Posted by admin / News
Q: Have you surveyed visitors to Seven Sisters Country Park/Cuckmere Haven area to find out if tourism will be affected by creation of a natural estuary?
A: We would very much like to carry out such a survey, both at SSCP and in the wider area, to establish the effects of any potential change of management on the lower Cuckmere estuary on tourism. However, such surveys must be carried out professionally to ensure they are effective, and this is very costly. At present, the SDJC has reduced funding in the run up to the NP and simply does not have the resources to undertake such work. Nonetheless, we will look at potential external/ partnership funding, possibly with local business and tourism providers, or student dissertations which may be used to produce such a survey
Comments Off Posted by admin / News