Latest News


January 10 2014.

May I thank Bob Brown for his excellent analysis of the current condition of Seaford Beach.

In particular I thank him for his very accurate assessment of the condition and consistency of the shingle that is currently being heaped back up by the EA digger.

As Bob Brown describes it, and I have to say that he is quite correct, the consistency of this shingle is now little better than that of SAND!

As Bob points out, this very sandy shingle will be washed away again by the first large and vigorous tide to hit the beach.

Thus, by Bob's own analysis, and given that the original concept of this shingle on Seaford Beach was given a life expectancy of about 25 years, the shingle on Seaford Beach has reached the end of its useful life.

So as I wrote the other day, it is time that a new plan was put in place, something that might last another 25 years.

After all, as someone once said, if you always do what you always did then you will always get what you always got!

Mr Grumpy


I have been following the discussion about Seaford beach.

I would like to pose this question: Is this beach now merely a sea defence, or, is it a public amenity?

When the shingle is all banked up it seems too dangerous and hazardous for people to attempt to gain access to the sea.

Veronica Drake


I get worried when correspondents use such terms as "Seaford Beach, as a robust flood defence, has now effectively failed" (Jim Skinner), and "catastrophic loss of material" (Bob Brown). The situation as I see it is that the beach has done the job for which it was originally designed - it has withstood the combination of high spring tides; gales force winds; low pressure and severe wave conditions, and for that we should be pleased. The use of emotive language adds nothing to our understanding of the situation.

I visited the beach regularly over most of the worst of the recent weather and was impressed by the active watching brief maintained by Environment Agency staff (and the police) to ensure our town and our people stayed safe, and there is nothing I have seen which leads me to conclude that the EA will now abandon the work it has undertaken over the past decades to ensure our beach continues to provide an effective sea defence.

It's easy to take dramatic looking photos, I've taken some myself in the past, but what they provide is nothing more than a snapshot of conditions on the day - they do not provide a reliable indicator of what might happen in the future!

Of course the EA will need to review the state of the beach, and we may be getting close to the point where there will need to be additional shingle imported, but that was always part of the 1986/87 planning. In the meantime, let's celebrate that Seaford was not flooded!

(Perhaps I should add that I have no direct or indirect connections with the EA or any of its staff!)

David Swaysland