Critics claim Environment Agency land purchase at Keyhaven is ‘waste of taxpayers money’

THE Environment Agency has been accused of “wasting taxpayers’ money” over its purchase of nearly 400 acres of agricultural land at Keyhaven.

As reported, the EA confirmed last month it had bought land around Aubrey Farm, Vidle Vans Farm, and parts of the Avon Waters, in an effort to meet legal obligations to provide compensatory habitat in the Solent.

An EA letter sent to Keyhaven residents stated: “The Environment Agency bought the land because it is a key location for the creation of new coastal habitats and grazing marshes.

“Being able to create new habitats is an important part of the Environment Agency being able to gain permission to build and maintain flood defences that are needed to better protect people’s homes and businesses.”

However, critics fear the acquisition will pave the way for controversial plans which could see the sea wall at Lymington rolled back to create new salt marshes and coastal habitats in response to climate change.

A campaign group comprising representatives from sailing clubs, maritime businesses and the RNLI hit out at what they described as “misguided” and “ridiculous” plans for the future of coastal defences between Hurst Spit at Keyhaven and Lymington.

The proposed realignment of coastal defences in Pennington has prompted major concerns from the group, which fears that, combined with a strategy to stop maintaining Hurst Spit, Lymington River could become unnavigable for sailors.

It is also feared the protection offered by an area called Jetty-Butts and Oxey Pennington, which protrudes into the Solent, will be lost if plans for managed realignment of the coastal defences together with salt marsh creation goes ahead.

Describing EA’s land acquisition as a “very questionable use of public money”, Lymington Yacht Haven director Rupert Wagstaff told the A&T: “The Environment Agency has spent many millions of pounds of public money buying grade one and two farmland that will be used as compensatory habitat for a scheme we feel is misguided and very questionable.”

Mr Wagstaff added: “We are being told there is no money to maintain Hurst Spit – which I believe costs around £50,000 a year – and yet the Environment Agency has found the funding to buy this farmland for upwards of £5m. That money would have maintained the spit for the next century.”

Describing the purchase as a “strong sign” the Environment Agency had already made up its mind, Mr Wagstaff said many critics were opposed to the draft proposals for the managed realignment of the sea wall, instead suggesting the current coastal defences be maintained and enhanced as necessary in the face of sea level rise and climate change.

He said: “The cost of managed realignment is huge when compared to maintaining the current defences – but the EA seems set on realigning the sea wall and changing the coastal habitat into salt marshes.”

“The coastal habitat is in a very precious SSSI area anyway – so it’s not clear why it has to become salt marsh.”

However, the Environment Agency says the purchase does not “pre-judge” the outcome of the Hurst to Lymington Coastal Strategy, which is currently in a draft development stage. But the agency has revealed that across Hampshire and Sussex it will need to create more than 200 hectares of new salt marsh habitat to mitigate anticipated loss.

The EA letter sets out that any significant changes to land it has bought will be subject to “all the necessary permissions and consultations through the local planning authorities” before work goes ahead.

It continues: “Our intention, whilst addressing flood risk challenges, is to help create a special environment that will be of great benefit to local people and wildlife. What exactly this will look like is not yet known, but we will engage with local people and stakeholders at every step of the process.”

The EA has also stated the land is likely to remain in agricultural use for at least the next five years. The letter added: “You may see some activities on site as we assess and seek to make aspects of it safe and secure, and make sure we comply with the various covenants that stipulate that certain conditions are met.

“You may also witness other activities as we survey and monitor the site in order to better plan for the future.

“These activities may include bird surveys, drone surveys, water sampling and borehole monitoring. The parts of the site that are designated as SSSI will be managed accordingly, and we are likely to go into partnership with a third party to help with this.”