OK, I got to take in the sign in more detail this morning. I've posted up the full text over here. It seems that something of a clearance is planned - trees, bushes and brambles - to try and keep the sea wall structurally sound.

Is this a regular thing? I appreciate that the long term structure is all important, but the natural vegetation really is rather wonderful out there.

Well, it was a bit of a shocker when I came upon this clearance lark walking the dog this morning. Talk about stripping vegetation...
You know the chewed appearance hedges have when they've been chomped by a side-ways strimmer-on-a-tractor; that's how the sides of the path look now. Sad, torn and mangled stems lying horizontal, bleeding their rising sap into the mud, roots exposed and flayed.

The roots are still in the ground so it will grow back in due course but the men working on it told me that "they will be keeping on top of it now" so don't expect it will ever look the same again.
Boy, am I glad I've got some goood pictures of the 'before' because the 'after' is far from photogenic.

Agreed. In my very short time here, I have witnessed the late, late summer glory of the Trail, to the current state that it is in. Of course it's not all to do with the Environment Agency - a particularly harsh winter, combined with general dumping, has led the Trail to looking a little worse for wear right now.

I wonder if the Environment Agency can tackle the mess I've managed to make of my back garden?

Haven't been on the Trail yet but could see they were working there, too. No, I meant the sea wall.

Hope the Environmental Agency knows what it's doing ...
The clearance work is denuding the landward side of the sea wall up to 4m (12 ft).

User, um, Anna has just returned from a cycle ride along the Trail to the Hythe. In the girl's own words:

"It's a right ****** mess."

Oh dear. I accept that this work needs doing. I just hope that the long term beauty of the area can be restored.

OK - an update. This really isn't that bad. I cycled along the Trail this weekend and was pleasantly surprised. The main work is by the University path, where most of the trees have been cleared. It's all still rather muddy, but I'm led to believe that the job isn't finished yet. A layer of rubble is expected to still be put in place.

Heartbreaking to discover on the ride today that someone has emptied a tin of blue paint along the Trail. It's around halfway between Wivenhoe and the Hythe. Not a slight drop, but a complete spillage of a tin of bright blue. Now that this is being trodden in and ridden across, the mess is spreading.

Let's hope it was emulsion paint ...

Another update: the work along the Ferry Marsh path appears to be still ongoing. A digger was out there this morning, covering the path with what looks like the re-cycled wood chippings.

I have today written to the Environment Agency to formally object to the destructive work taking place along the sea wall from Wivenhoe Sailing Club to Alresford Creek. I suppose it's probably too late to do anything about it but feel I must object to the lack of local consultation and publicity about the scale and extent of these works. I will keep you posted if/when i get a response. I have spoken to Wivenhoe Town Council who received a letter from the Environment Agency in August 2010.  I've seen nothing locally about these works. For reference, the job is referenced by the Environment Agency as "2194-Wivenhoe - Living on the Edge". 

Hi Fiona

Many thanks for the update. I confess to not having headed out the other way towards the Creek since the new year. I cycle out in the opposite direction along the Trail. I had no idea a similar project was taking place past the Sailing Club! It was only through spotting the signs a day or so before the diggers moved in that I realised that work was being undertaken along the Trail.

If we're being honest, the old railway line out towards the Creek is a place of far greater beauty when compared to heading down towards the Hythe. I'm rather alarmed from your observations. I too share the lack of consultation or awareness.

The Trail itself is starting to improve, but it will take a good summer or two for everything to grow back. Which by then, the diggers will probably be moving in again...

Thanks for joining the forum :)

What I find most distressing is the potential loss of the woodland from the old railway line to the creek. This is an area of very old woodland including oak and other native species which sadly will take a generation or two to replace. Whilst I accept that climate change and rising sea levels will mean that the shoreline won't remain the same forever, it is the lack of consultation about this work that I object to. 

I should also add that what i am seeking from the Environment Agency is clarification about the extent of the works.

If you are logged into Facebook, you can see the extent of the damage out towards the Creek, via these photos from Nancy Taplin:

An explanation of why this work is being done by the Environment Agency has been posted on the Wivenhoe website.

Whilst I am relieved that the works will not extend to the woodland area I remain very concerned about the lack of consultation on these works. The blackthorn, blackberry and dog roses were vital nesting habitats and food sources for birds and small mammals.  Importantly they were also a much loved feature of the natural landscape enjoyed by many and which have now gone for good.

I have passed your comment to the Town Council.

Thank you.

As an aside - the next WTC meeting takes place on Monday 21st February, 7pm at the Town Council offices. In the recent WTC newsletter, Cllr Needham encouraged locals to attend, to observe how the Town Council manages local issues.

Thanks Jason. It sounds like a good opportunity to raise concerns about the lack of communication in this particular case.

The details posted on the council pages state that the wooded area leading to whitehouse beach and Arlesford creek will be untouched but the notice that is displayed on the trail implies this might be otherwise.  It's quite distressing that this sort of apparently needless habitat destruction should be taking place on a much loved and much used area.  It's also sad that more warning hasn't been given to the residents of Wivenhoe.  The trail is home to many species of wildlife lots of which I have never seen until being a Wivenhoe resident, grass-snakes and glow worms to mention but two. It needs clarification as to where the 'long established wooded area' is.  There are also numerous wooded areas between where the current work has occurred and the station.

I finally managed to get down out towards the Saling Club earlier today to have a look for myself. It's brutal! The diggers have systematically cleared the entire vegetation from the Sailing Club, all the way out towards the start of the wood. As Fiona has mentioned above - clarification is needed as to how far this act of vandalism on the local landscape is going to progress.

I've posted a few images over here.

Also had a look this afternoon and met a number of likewise agitated citizens. Quite possibly there will be further joinings of the Forum and informed comments.

We may have been taken unawares this time but, as I reported above, the EA expects to 'keep on top of things' regarding regrowth from the remaining roots and boy, will we be ready for them next time round!

One thing that particularly winds me up is that it keeps being referred to as a 'Sea Wall'. It's a RIVER! At a reasonably low-ish tide you can walk across: I've seen people do this at Rowhedge. I'd really like to know if anyone from Natural England has actually been out walking and seen this particular area - I suspect they support the policy because it's a good one for genuine seawalls. Loads of Wivenhoe folk, including myself, use these walks as an opportunity for pleasure, a chance to clear the mind in beautiful surroundings. Now, walking here is largely about fuming, grumbling with other walkers, and mourning.

Seawall maintenance work planned for Suffolk seems to have been extended to this part of Essex though there is no indication on the EA web site that Essex was intended to get the same treatment - unless someone can find the reference to Essex on the site?

When I tried 'maintenance river flood banks Essex', all I got was a defunct reference to something in Staffordshire.

Word is spreading around the town about this brutal act of vandalism. The good folk of the QRRA have blogged about the sudden destruction of our natural area of beauty.

Given that there is so little information about the advantages and disadvantages of removing vegetation from sea walls I looked for an international perspective and I quote.

"Natural systems have been stabilizing steep slopes for millennia. However, humans seem to have an uncontrollable tendency to remove the plants from the slope. That is exactly the wrong thing to do. Retaining existing vegetation and adding new native plants can greatly increase slope stability".

http://www.lakecountyohio.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=MGTdTd%2Fwd0s%3D&tabid=1266&mid=2891

I guess we'll be told the Essex Coast is different

A few more before and after photographs.

There are not many good things that can be said about the EA’s clearing the sea wall, it is horrific.

However you can now see the cyclists, and the new flasher miles away.

The river views are more majestic, if you keep looking into the distance.

There can now be no doubt who is responsible for the sea wall maintenance and we should now ensure that they do their job properly, so when we see issues in need of attention we should make sure the EA are informed and monitored.

The sea wall that runs parallel to the river has been there for many years and was certainly there before the barrier was built, I have seen a picture of the ‘sea wall’ with steam yachts moored to it, in those days it seems to have been known as the ‘towpath’. Interesting the ‘wall’ looks a very similar height to now and had NO SHRUBBERY on it!

We Wivenhoe residents must also take some responsibility for the inaction on our part. The TC had been advised, this was not picked up by the ‘watchers’ eg Wivsoc, and QQRA, at least Onionbag picked it up for the west side, what has happened to the ‘Community’ a few years ago everyone knew everything that was going on, we had a ‘village atmosphere and community’. At least we were told of the waste pits being used in Rowhedge, by someone in Rowhedge.

The Sailing Club knew what was happening with the imminent ‘grubbing’ as they removed their trailers, etc from the sea wall, a week or so prior to the action.  Did they pass this information on, it seems not.

Jason is to be applauded for his blog and the Wivenhoe Forum; it is probably no coincidence that the Encyclopaedia is at last being updated. Yet with all these information outlets things still catch us by surprise!  Do we need to rationalize? We have the Encyclopaedia, Wivenhoe First, Wivenhoe Forum plus QRRA which normally restricts itself to ‘its own backyard’ and Onionbag which is Jason’s personal blog. The first three all trying to supply the same information and at least QRRA tells you some Victorian history of Queens Road and its environs with an interesting feature on the Wivenhoe (Alresford) Mill and ‘The Brook’ aka The Town Drain.

Onionbag is a good source of information and points of view. It is one of the few places where you can find out what’s ‘coming soon’.

The EA says that the ‘grubbing out’ is necessary because rabbits and badgers burrow through and weaken the sea wall (no mention of the cattle and horses then). Marsh land and salting are not the natural habitat for rabbits or badgers. As another blogger has pointed out, planting strengthens slopping land and prevents erosion. Erosion is not just caused by river or tidal action, as the EA suggest, but also by wind, rain, and thawing ice, let’s hope for all our sakes that the wall will not be weakened by the EA’s own action.  I notice that the removal of the bushes etc was done a few days before a full moon with its full effects on tide levels, just when the EA ‘bared’ the earth rampart, no need to worry, the experts are in charge.

Should anyone see these web footed rabbits or badgers, tell the world! We may at least then be able to stop phase 3 of Cooks Shipyard development.

@Dazzer: that's a very interesting article you linked to and it puts a big question mark over the EA's take on what's needed to maintain sloping banks, especially where there is no evidence of burrowing.

Maybe we should help EA educate itself a bit about these things.
Just a reminder:  the contact 'phone number is 01473 706 100, the person to contact by email is

karl.watson@environment-agency.gov.uk

Just the thing for an idle half hour ... I see in my diary I've got one tomorrow.

Incidentally, I saw (but forget where) something about 'guerilla planting'; anybody remember?

Marika - guerilla planting was mentioned in a personal capacity at the WivSoc committee meeting (not by me) on Wednesday evening. I fully endorse this action ;)

I sent an email to Karl Watson. Terribly measured (I thought), no point going ballistic first time. This was it:

Dear Mr Watson,

Along with many other Wivenhoe residents I am dismayed at the scale of the clearance works the Environment Agency has carried out along the Colne river bank up and down stream from Wivenhoe.

I know there has been consultation (though I have been unable to locate the final SMP on the EA website) and it is not my intention to argue the case or protest ex post facto.

However, I agree with those who express the view that the work was unnecessary if it was meant to deprive rabbits and badgers of the security of cover since neither animal seemed to have burrowed into the river bank before the clearance - salt marshes generally being inimical to both species, one would hardly have expected it.

The view the EA takes of the need to clear vegetation is not one that is shared by everyone.
You might be interested in reading a government publication from the State of Ohio on this point:
http://www.lakecountyohio.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=MGTdTd%2Fwd0s%3D&tabid=1266&mid=2891 which supports the view that the presence of small shrubs and trees is beneficial in the fight against erosion.

Bearing in mind the above, I hope there will be a re-evaluation of the need for further maintenance work of the kind I have heard about: twice-yearly strimming of all re-growth from the remaining roots.
Compacting the soil by the use of heavy machinery will also create its own problems.

This work has created a great deal of local agitation; carrying on regardless, without addressing the specific concerns expressed, is not the way forward.

Your sincerely,

I just received this reply:

Thank you for your email of the 25th February regarding our work on the flood defence embankments at Wivenhoe.

This work forms part of an Essex wide project to clear scrub/woody vegetation from tidal defences. The woody vegetation on the defence embankments require removal as it can cause the following issues:In
the event of a surge tide the bare earth beneath the vegetation is washed away reducing the structural strength of the defence increasing the risk of failure.

The vegetation cover can encourage tunnelling from rabbits and badgers compromising the integrity of defence. Although there are no signs of this on the section of defence in the Wivenhoe area, this kind of damage has occurred else where in Essex and not only has it put the people and property behind the defence and greater risk of flooding it is very costly for us to repair.

The surge tides against which the defence protects are generated by strong winds, therefore these strong winds can uproot larger bushes/trees in the defence. The hole this would leave in the defence embankment compromises the structural strength of the embankment.

In addition the removal of the scrub will increase the effectiveness of our routine condition assessments and maintenance works.

To ensure the environmental impact is kept to a minimum the works have been carried out with the approval of Natural England and our own conservationists. In order to prevent the scrub growth from reoccurring our engineers and conservationists are working alongside Natural England to develop a routine vegetation maintenance plan for our tidal defences in Essex which will ensure we have the right balance between providing the best maintenance regime to keep the wall at the optimum condition to protect against flooding whilst being considerate to the unique habitat the embankment provides to wildlife.

We understand fully the amenity value that the coast of Essex provides and have worked hard with our contractors to ensure that this is maintained as far as possible whilst the works are taking place. We have been in discussion with local landowners and councils to identify areas close to the tidal estuaries and coast where new planting can be undertaken to replace that removed. On completion of the project in April this year we anticipate that we will have planted in excess of 5000 new trees & bushes.

With regard to the rubbish, our contractors are obliged to pick up all the litter exposed when the vegetation has been cleared. I understand that this work has now been completed and my local team will be walking the wall to ensure that this has been carried out to our required standard.

I trust this has answered the matters raised to your satisfaction.

The last line just made me laugh! I wonder what other people think about the justification offered?

"We have been in discussion with local landowners and councils to identify areas close to the tidal estuaries and coast where new planting can be undertaken to replace that removed."

Absolute twaddle.

As was plainly clear to those who attended the WTC meeting last week, all that our local Cllr's received was a letter last August telling that about the planned work, but with absolutely no details of the date. The brutal vandalism caught WTC on the hop, as much as it did local residents.

No conversation, dialogue or consultation took place.

Bearing in mind that all I asked him to answer was whether there would be : "a re-evaluation of the need for further maintenance work of the kind I have heard about: twice-yearly strimming of all re-growth from the remaining roots."

It appears to me that he has signally failed to deal with that one salient point, instead regaling me with needless verbiage, forwarded ON HIS BEHALF, i.e.add secretarial costs.

Great use of taxpayers money ... not!

Oh, and Jason, there was a public consultation (the usual 3-months period) but it is a fair point to make that those localities most affected by proposed works shouldn't have to find out for themselves that such consultations are taking place.

Rather ominously, a digger has surfaced once again along the Trail. It's currently at the far Hythe end, close to the University accommodation. The path that was just starting to settle, had now been churned up again.

Marika, the reply you had was a 'stock' one, as i received an identical one to yours, which ignored at least five of the points i made, so I wrote again and got answers to two more points, but the overall impression was ominously that of a politician refusing to answer some of the key questions. I'm going to try the phone next, as a 'last hurrah'.

I hear that a growing band of folk are interested in finding out more about the Colne Barrier (yeah, right...) during the Open Day this Tuesday with the EA. The any other questions should be lively...

I had the dog with me so couldn't go inside at the Colne Barrier open day. But an obliging EA person came outside and we had a chat.

Of course the barrier people have nothing to do with the clearance work that has been going but we talked about it anyway.

As is now known, the EA intends to grass the cleared areas, the grass supposedly being better at holding the walls together than tree and shrub roots would be when water washes up against the wall.

The EA chap seemed genuinely surprised that it had been thought necessary to extend the clearance and grass treatment to Ferry marsh and agreed with me that water hadn't been up that wall since the barrier had been in operation.

An interesting thought was born out of this converstation: grassing over that part of the wall seems to imply that the barrier isn't capable of doing the job it was designed to do. The EA cannot have it both ways and an explanation of their tinking would be welcome.

I now think that there has been a huge cock-up; that that part of the wall never needed this work doing; that it was done by accident/oversight; and that the EA is too embarrassed to admit it.

This is third hand from someone in the Wivenhoe Woods group, but:

This path was always wild and a great place to to walk peacfully. Now we have a footpath devoid of any trees or shrubs, just a narrow path. It won't be long before it will be concreted over!

BTCV have put in many benches along the trail and in the woods and they all got vandalised and covered in rubbish.

This path was one place you could get away from the 'maddening crowd' please don't turn it into a 'park'. Lots of people use it but benches and bikes add more traffic. There are some wonderful birds on the river even a seal at times. Lets keep this walk wild.

An interesting debate, certainly at present it does look very bare and bleak, however I also remember the path being very boggy, overgrown and at points impassable, I also saw the wheelchair user the other day and felt very pleased that this route has been opened up for those with a disability.

To balance, in a years time the path would have softened and mellowed (if that is a correct expression to use for a path) but also it will (hopefully) remove the high speed cyclists from the pathways in front of the houses which overlook the marsh.

Yes, there is certainly more to this debate than I first thought. Although Ferry Marsh currently looks rather bleak, I didn't think of how it is now opened up for potential new users. I tried to take a run down there just before Christmas and came a cropper in the mud and the brambles. Silly boy.

If wheelchair users can have access to the wildlife, then all the better. As has been mentioned, the downside is that cyclists may use this route. Is this allowed? I know it is encouraged along the Trail, but there are no signs around Ferry Marsh (which for the record, I've only cycled once, and then as part of a stupid puncture testing exercise...)

erm ... use by cyclists along the Trail is not so much 'encouraged' as 'permitted'.
Most cyclists do understand the wording on the board at its start that use by cyclists is 'permissive' and give walkers the priority that was intended.

I'm glad you mentioned that, Marika, walkers do have priority.

Which is why I always ring my bell to alert walkers that I am approaching. Still get a stern look most times, even though I'm passing at barely walking pace.

Most cyclists are pretty good that way, giving a modest alert and slowing right down, and that's really appreciated.

Back to the broken glass (or whatever it may be) along Ferry Marsh - even with the dodgy picture, it really isn't all that bad...