Amazing contrast

May I make it very clear that I have no objection to those schemes, but I am amazed at the contrasting situation which is being allowed to develop on the west side of the Arun mouth affecting the much-loved Climping beach.

I do not know how many local people will be aware that in December, 2010, Arun voted (see Gazette front page, December 16) to support the EA’s proposal to discontinue any future maintenance of the sea defences along the Climping beach area.

The vote was taken after acknowledging that there were still some issues which the EA had not properly addressed and on the basis that support needed to be given immediately to the strategy, because to delay it might have affected decisions on the remaining sections of the Arun to Pagham strategy.

I know that some councillors were not happy with this situation but in the event the “do nothing” strategy at Climping was supported.

Just to put some perspective on this, the main activity which is to be discontinued is the annual shifting of beach gravel from the east end to the west end (near to the Baird car park) to combat the erosion which occurs each winter.

The cost is relatively small in sea defence terms, about 10s of thousands of pounds each year.

The impact of the new “do nothing” strategy will be that sections of the beach will be lost and there will be encroachment onto existing farmland, not to mention the increased risk of flooding to the properties that are closest to Climping beach, including Bailiffscourt Hotel.

What seems to have been missing from the debate so far is the clear value that the existence of Climping beach brings not just to Climping itself, but to Littlehampton, all the neighbouring villages that use it and, indeed, to all the people who come here from a much wider area and spend their money locally in many other ways.

The time has almost arrived when the EA is about to confirm its ill-conceived plan, based on a very narrowly-focused, cost-benefit study which concentrates on the number of properties that might be affected but ignores the wider economic, social and environmental factors.

It seems to me that it is a classic example of knowing the cost of everything but the value of nothing.

It is not quite too late to redeem the situation, but ways would have to be found of obtaining some of the money required to keep the situation as it is now, rather than lose it to the sea forever.

I doubt that this will happen without some wider recognition of what they are about to lose by local people; and, of course, a re-think by both Arun and the EA.

A.J. Lovell

Waterford Gardens

Climping