e-mail enquiries to: info@coastalresearch.co.uk

or write to:

This page was updated on 22nd March 2026.

This page digresses a little from the scientific and historical analysis of Slapton and Torcross problems. And apologies in advance, there are no pictures on this page!

Man has been living on coastlines for millions of years. He and she have been adjusting to changing sea levels and weather patterns throughout. Gathering food and other resources, together with transport opportunities has been the incentive. They worked in harmony with nature. Modifications to the environment were slow and well considered. Pollution was minimal and methods of change were almost entirely pick axe, shovel and wheel-barrow. As society became more densely populated, in some areas, and power systems led to bigger and bigger machinery, the rate of change by human interference led to errors which damaged the natural environment. Natural processes which were self-regulating became ineffective. Unfortunately, too many of the nation's public servants are sitting in front of computer screens looking at software they haven't written and displaying screens of information on subjects for which they have no education or experience.

Two things happened in the 20th Century which have influenced government responses. The 1953 North Sea Floods occurred on 31st January. An area of intense Low Barometric Pressure in the North Sea, generating strong Northerly winds, coincided with High Spring Tides. That caused inundation by the sea, overwhelming sea defences on low-lying coastlines. The storm surge reached a height of 5.6 metres above Mean Sea Level. Lives lost: England 307, Scotland 19, Netherlands 1836, Belgium 28. The British government response was to increase the height of coastline dykes and construction of the Thames Flood Barrier. Most of the money went on the Barrier which was primarily a defence for London and the lower Thames valley. Note that storm surges are significantly greater than annual global rises in sea level, and by over three orders of magnitude.

The other event was the steady progression of legislation to protect nature. The Huxley brothers, Julian and Aldous (1920s-1950s), were at the forefront of this movement. In many ways it received public support. Designation of nature reserves and sites of special scientific interest were the principal legal manifestations of the movement. National Parks, specific landscape designations are further outcomes.

The two events inspired a country-wide acceptance that Britain needed to have a higher regard for environmental concerns. Higher Education since the 1960s has seen an increase in courses for Biological Sciences and ecology themed subjects. The latter fitted well with the growth in eco-politics. The graduate output led to more and more people looking for careers in environmental issues, associated charities, local authorities and government departments. Wildlife groups have predominated in environment politics. Botanical, geological, hydrological, and oceanographic specialisms have focused more on their disciplines than eco-politics. This is noticeable at government and local authority levels. Environmental physics and chemistry feature much less, possibly due to the decrease in student places in those departments.

It is not surprising that the managed retreat, managed realignment, hold the line, strategies have been dominated by the assertive groups. Wetland creation by removal of coastal defences has been seen as an irrational response by many. Suggestions that it is an appropriate way of "coping" with sea level rise have been met with surprise by communities living near the coastline.

Elected politicians in Parliament our rarely involved. The rise of the PPE at Oxford culture has reinforced the avoidance of scientific assessments of national and international problems. In practice the actual management of the environment tends to be left to sections of the public services. Assertive cultures within sections of government have resulted in many projects around Britain which evade critical analysis by politicians. Scientific assessments are thin, and often not assessed by wider scientific disciplines. Unfortunately, acknowledgement of loss of other species seems to be ignored when selective ecology strategies are advocated. The side-lining of fundamental physics in projects is frequent, and deferment to engineering companies with big machinery is common.

At Torcross, and the length of the shingle ridge, the errors are clearly visible. Even visiting school children can determine that something isn't working. "How come waves can rip out and bend steel piling?"

That introduces the matter of education. Slapton and Torcross have been visited by tens of thousands of local children over the years. Even during the aftermath of the 3rd February 2026 breach of the shingle ridge, parents were bringing their children to inspect the damage. We all learn from mistakes, at least some people do. The purpose of the Slapton Ley Field Studies Centre has been education. As a South Devon institution it needs to be sustained. To diminish the infrastructure of the Slapton area would be a great loss to the economy of the area and its unique character. The area should be recognised as a valuable asset to the nation. Since February many people from Europe have also visited. They've seen the images on the internet. Overseas visitors do mean money for the Chancellor!

How does all this affect the ongoing Slapton and Torcross problems? First of all, it is to do with money. Governments never like economic surprises. The "do nothing" response when events occur outside London is increasingly common. Occasionally vested interests intervene and things get fixed. Those interests can be just government, although other, influential, groups appear to also achieve their aims. Government priorities can be effected quite quickly. The damage to the railway line at Dawlish in 2014 received a weak response initially. After all, transport by road was now quite good between Plymouth and Exeter. Then the realisation that important items from the Naval Dockyard at Plymouth needed to be transported by rail up into Central England. The line was repaired in eight weeks at a cost of about £35 million. So, the money was found!

Compare eight weeks to the situation at Torcross. Cumulative road closure duration for the A379 is now up to nearly two years, and it is likely to increase. Recent (February 2026) meetings by government officials with local groups have announced that it could be 12 to 18 months before the "road problem" is resolved.

Needless to say that many residents are distinctly unimpressed. They have been led along a path of "holding the line", possibly until 2055, by assertive members of committees. They are looking for results, and honest answers to questions. The principal concern is for the road. Second, what will happen to the buildings, about 50, built on shingle? Many of those are not occupied year round. Who would install an elderly relative in one through the winter? The local council should be able to determine ownership and type of use. The popular thatched public house needs to have a preferential site allocated, on nearby solid ground.

Broadcast on local television, Thursday 19th March 2026, a government spokesman announced that "rock armour" (boulders) was being considered to be placed on the beach below the steel piling at Torcross. Rock armour, on a dynamic sedimentary system? Have they not studied what has been happening to boulders being thrown onto the beach over the last 25 years.

It is interesting to note that a BBC web page dated 24th October 2002 is still extant. This was after the January 2001 road breach.

"3,000 tonnes of boulders were put alongside the damaged road to help protect it.
They were later removed because of fears they were causing damage to the Site of Special Scientific Interest."
Sounds like one government department calling out another government department.
Do any government departments really understand the dynamics of coastal shingle ridges?
Many articles in the media are using headings "Not Fit For Purpose" in connection with departments responsible for sewage entering the sea.
Is Slapton Shingle Ridge and Torcross becoming a comedy in the style of "Yes Minister"? How would Sir Humphrey handle it?
It certainly appears to be a comedy of errors.
So far, twenty-five years of procrastination. Torcross is an embarrassment.
Where in the world is anyone advocating the use of dynamic coastal sedimentary systems as sites for transport routes or buildings?

Is the government up to speed on the issue? Comparative studies of The Netherlands reveal that its government agency, the Rijkswaterstaat, has many differences to Britain. Its activities are much more based on hard science, led by highly qualified scientists. There are also efficient methods of compensation for parties affected by flooding and property damage. The Netherlands was severely affected by the 1953 North Sea Storm Surge. Since then, to their credit, they have had an internationally recognised strategy to safeguard their nation's people and land.

The local MP, Caroline Voaden, raised the whole matter at Prime Minister's Questions on 11th February 2026. Her choice of words "the myriad of government agencies and departments" touches on one of the difficulties. The absence of appropriately qualified scientists in the role of decision making. Public servants might claim they are getting expert opinion from large engineering organisations. The use of the term "expert" is an unfortunate feature of legal procedures. Most scientists prefer to be labelled specialists rather than experts. Decision controllers at the finger tips of the British government are rarely scientists in the disciplines for which they are responsible.

There are many conservation minded officers in the environmental sections of the public services. In some ways that might appear to be a benefit. They gravitate to projects where there is a perceived conservation theme, but is their interest, and activity, based upon scientific analysis, or personal allegiances? The problem at the Slapton Shingle Ridge is due to man's misguided interference with a dynamic system. Fundamental physics, not opinions, should prevail.

Selective ecology pervades so many of the government's departments.

Top of Page