A detailed report into the dangers of coastal erosion at Rye Harbour and Winchelsea Beach has been ignored by the Environment Minister and her department.
Icklesham Parish Council has yet to receive a reply to a letter and twelve page report into the management of the beach sent to Emma Hardy, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on 5 December 2025. Emails following up the letter have also been ignored.
“It isn’t just that they didn’t reply,” said Councillor Jacqui Stanford who chairs the parish council. “What makes me furious is a lot of work went into the report and they didn’t even bother to acknowledge it when it came from a parish council.”
The letter, which has been seen by Rye News, says, “Unfortunately, over the last 10 years, the beach has been allowed to disintegrate at the direction of the government quango Natural England who have instructed the Environment Agency not to intervene to repair failing groynes. This wanton destruction is due to the madness of a ’50-year coastal management plan for Rye Harbour involving a multi-faceted strategy focused on managing erosion and flood risk, protecting biodiversity, and balancing economic and community needs’”.
“The groynes must be repaired,” said Jacqui Stanford. “The shingle should be brought back and the beach rebuilt. This should be a natural beach. It has changed dramatically and we simply asked the minister to let the Environment Agency get on with its job because they can see what’s happening here but are not allowed to fix the problem. People are blaming them.”
“It breaks my heart to see this,” she said. “The plant life is disappearing and a lot of local people, especially older residents who have known the area for years, are devastated by how much it has changed and the loss of the beach at Rye Harbour.”
She fears the consequences could be severe if the erosion continues. “We haven’t wanted to frighten people, but we’re concerned we’re going to lose more land. If the sea continues to encroach we feel it could eventually flow around the back of the sea wall at Winchelsea Beach. Another important consideration we have made Natural England aware of would be the loss of the important emergency road from Rye Harbour if Harbour Road is closed. Natural England do not seem to care.”
Earlier this year volunteers placed rocks on the beach because the failed groynes were no longer effective in protecting the Mary Stanford Lifeboat House. The Grade II listed building on the beach at Rye Harbour Nature Reserve is preserved as a reminder of the 17 lifeboat crew who died storms in 1928.
Last month Jacqui Stanford explained her fears during a visit to the beach with Councillor Dan Bradley, who represents Rye and Eastern Rother on East Sussex County Council. He said he was struggling to understand why the different government agencies were failing to work together.
“It seems everyone can see how to fix this but nobody is willing to do it,” he said. “People come here to walk the marshes, visit Rye Harbour and enjoy this beautiful landscape. If that disappears, we will lose something that makes Rye and Winchelsea so special. Our job should be to preserve it for future generations.”
Dan Bradley was equally critical of the lack of response to the report from the minister. “If somebody raises a concern, even if you can’t give an answer immediately, at least reply and say you’ve received it and you’ll look into it. To receive no response at all feels like two fingers up to the people who’ve taken the time to raise genuine concerns. That really annoys me.”
He agreed to work with Icklesham Parish Council on getting a response.
Rye News has approached the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for comment.
Image Credits: James Stewart .
I presume you have pushed MP Hellena Dollimore to chase up on this as she should be pushing for this work to be carried out
The Environment Agency spent millions on the short strip fmat Strand Quay for a few boats so a few people can get off safely onto the Quay. Gate locked to anyone else.
But they won’t get involved to help the larger more important issue of our coast line.
Heidi unfortunately the EA are not allowed to intervene thanks to the madness of Natural England who are absolutely to blame. The EA in this area do great work.
Heidi, EA already spend a very large sum annually to recycle shingle to protect Pett Level, Winchelsea Beach and Rye Harbour, and it keeps the harbour open for navigation. Plus they have raised the river flood banks/walls in the estuary over the last 20+ years to give greater protection against extreme surge tides. So I think they do already get involved…
One does wonder Whether various people running the environment agency, et al. have any schooling or experience in their lives before they too on their briefs. Patently very little, heading for zero.
Such positions must not be politicised and should be on a case-to- case basis.
Barking at the moon is such rewardless fun.
It should be possible for the parish council to receive a copy of the letter and 12 page report required under the Freedom of information (FOI) process. It is not exactly the UK nuclear defence system that is the subject of the request, but possible and timing of sea defences proposals, or not. The request should cost well below the limit for DEFRA of about £450 and is being made in under a year , rules of FOI, unless the cost of photocopying or digital transmission has gone through the roof.
I spent about 40 years observing the shingle beach and the wildlife at Rye Harbour on a daily basis and I am troubled by this detailed report.
Was it a detailed report or just a long letter that was sent?
Perhaps we could all see it, just to see what has been written (I think I saw an earlier draft and I didn’t agree with all that was written).
In the last 10 years the beach has not disintegrated, the beach at Rye Harbour is very dynamic and changes on an annual, monthly and sometimes daily basis.
Where is the shingle to brought back from (it’s already recycled on an annual basis by EA)?
The plant life is not disappearing.
The lifeboat house was affected by 2 failed wooden groynes, so the emergency rock groyne should trap shingle to protect it for some years to come.
Yes, the lifeboat house will get washed away one day, as will Rye Harbour, Winchelsea Beach and Camber, as the sea level rises with a warming world. But, this should be many decades away, unless we get that rare combination of extreme high tide and storm to create a tidal surge that no current or future sea defence would keep out…
This problem is not confined to Rye Harbour, it’s a national and global problem, and one that government needs to focus on.
It might be helpful to organise some local discussion where the issue of our local sea defences could be laid out fully, so that the local community can get a better understanding.
Helena Dollimore MP might be the best placed person to help with getting a response.
She wrote two letters to the Rother CEO regarding their failure to engage with residents in Fairlight Cove over a planning issue. Refusing to acknowledge a resident report was the element of our Ombudsman Case that was upheld. As a result Rother Council have updated their Complaints Guidance. A Stage 1 Complaint now requires a 5 day response.
I appreciate you might feel it would backfire as a tactic for a Parish Council, but Natural England has a clear complaints procedure, that a local resident could use. There is a lot of love for both the Lifeboat House and Winchelsea Beach.
Barry Yates is correct in what he says about the dynamic nature of the coastal strip from Pett Level to Rye Harbour and what may well be the eventual outcome many years down the line.
Sea Levels in the region have changed a few times in the last couple of thousand years. Old Winchelsea disappeared, Camber Castle protected the Harbour of Rye and construction materials were brought in by Sea.
Before the Tides were controlled on the Rivers Rother, Tillingham and Brede these were all navigable a long way inland.
The movement of Shingle from the Harbour Mouth every winter is important to keep the river navigable and of course for drainage of all these valleys.
However the amount that needs to be moved increases every year due to the almost entire failure of all the Groynes.
Whether this is down to the EA or Natural England stopping any replacement shows a lack of understanding of the coastal erosion and the littoral drift.
Replacing a small number of Groynes along Pett Level and near to the Lifeboat House would help to reduce the speed and quantity of the shingle going from west to east. This would reduce teh massive costs of hauling shingle every winter.
Similarly the lack of maintenance of the infrastructure of the Sea defences is woeful and that is very much down to the EA.
So the EA and Natural England show ‘a lack of understanding of the coastal erosion and the littoral drift.’ according to your previous correspondent. I believe they actually have many experts on their staffs, or can call on experts, whose entire careers are dedicated to understanding these issues and how they impact on our coastlines, but perhaps with a more holistic overview in terms of how to manage them.
Some while ago, your publication printed the following from Philip Merricks, the local farmer: “The lifeboat house had been put at risk by the failure of the statutory agencies (Environment Agency, Natural England and the Marine Management Agency) to take the simple and relatively inexpensive step of maintaining the wooden groynes, which their predecessor agencies had installed in order to protect the lifeboat house. A failure which led to the foundations of the building being eroded, putting it at risk of collapse.”
It would appear that the problem of the increasing need and expense of the transportation of shingle every winter could be mitigated by replacing / reinforcing the damaged Groynes.
I wonder whether Mr Merricks and his marvellous team of volunteers who seem to get things done, would be allowed to tackle this? I’d then get them to paint double yellow lines on the South Undercliffe, and sort out the revolting, shameful loos at the station. Just saying…