Unstable Boundaries on a Cliffed Coast: Geomorphology and British Laws

Abstract Coastal erosion is a problem around much of the coast of Great Britain. This paper uses the example of Birling Gap in East Sussex to highlight a variety of problems associated with property boundaries on eroding cliffed coasts. The legal foreshore definitions (generally owned by the Crown) from English and Scots laws are compared with the use of tidal data from the nearest reliable tide gauge at Newhaven. With a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet model and shore profiling, these data are used to identify the extent of private property in the coastal environment at Birling Gap under both Scots and English law. The paper highlights that under both definitions, a small parcel of “land” exists at the base of the cliffs that is owned by the adjacent cliff top landowner. Therefore, the foreshores as defined in (Scots and English) law on the mainland of Great Britain do not fully enclose the envelope of coastal processes. Under Scots and English law, the foreshore is defined on the basis of tidal heights, irrespective of the mobility of the substrate that the foreshore boundary is drawn on. The cliff morphology at Birling Gap strongly suggests control by marine erosion; however, the tidal data from Newhaven suggest otherwise when compared with the shore profiles. A number of reasons are identified to explain a substantial difference in the height of the beach at Birling Gap and the observed tidal heights at Newhaven, including the distance from the tide gauge, the damping effects of tide gauges, and the morphology of the beach. We conclude that, under British property laws, a small area of the upper beach (which regularly changes in shape and size) is owned by the adjacent landowner and is technically under their control despite being regularly inundated by the tides.

[1]  John Tabak,et al.  Wind and Water , 2009 .

[2]  D. Mcglashan,et al.  The foreshore: geographical implications of the three legal systems in Great Britain , 2004 .

[3]  A. Genter,et al.  Coastal cliff geohazards in weak rock: the UK Chalk cliffs of Sussex , 2004, Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications.

[4]  D. Mcglashan.  Managed relocation: an assessment of its feasibility as a coastal management option , 2003 .

[5]  James D. Hansom,et al.  Coastal Geomorphology of Great Britain , 2003 .

[6]  I. Shennan,et al.  Holocene land‐ and sea‐level changes in Great Britain , 2002 .

[7]  David Wilkinson,et al.  Environment and Law , 2002 .

[8]  R. Moore.  The geology and geomorphology at Birling Gap, East Sussex: the scientific case for geo-conservation. , 2001 .

[9]  A. Jones.  Practical Skills in Environmental Science , 1999 .

[10]  C. Reid.  Nature Conservation Law , 1994 .

[11]  C. Ballantyne,et al.  The Periglaciation of Great Britain , 1994 .

[12]  J. Motyka,et al.  Coastal management: Mapping of littoral cells , 1993 .

[13]  T. Sunamura,et al.  Geomorphology of rocky coasts , 1992 .

[14]  H. Lamb,et al.  Historic Storms of the North Sea, British Isles and Northwest Europe , 1991 .

[15]  W. Gordon,et al.  Scottish Land Law , 1989 .

[16]  S. Jennings,et al.  Coastal sedimentation in East Sussex during the Holocene , 1987 .

[17]  D. Robinson,et al.  Frost and salt weathering of chalk shore platforms near Brighton, Sussex, U. K. , 1987 .

[18]  Mungo E. Deans.  The Crown Estate Commissioners: Their Role and Responsibilities in Respect of the Foreshore and Seabed around Scotland , 1986 .

[19]  Kenneth O. Emery,et al.  Sea cliffs: Their processes, profiles, and classification , 1982 .

[20]  R. Devoy,et al.  Flandrian sea level changes and vegetational history of the lower Thames estuary , 1979 .

[21]  Paul D. Komar,et al.  Beach Processes and Sedimentation , 1976 .

[22]  V. May.  The Retreat of Chalk Cliffs , 1971 .