I must dispute flood figures

Have your say

EDITOR – I must take the figures that Mr Gregory quoted for the sea level (Leader April 13) as incorrect. This seems to be the regularly quoted ones by the Environmental Agency on their sites etc. This is a figure that I dispute with them.

If the sea level worldwide has risen by this amount it would be seen on the ground in higher tides and higher low water level. In other words the depth of water is greater improving maritime navigation.

This would mean that an object which was at low water mark would now be under water.

There is a wreck at low water at Saltfleet with the stern just in the tide which one has always been able to walk around in 40s, 50s and 60s and one can still do this as I have done throughout this period. The experts?? state it’s been moved.

Anyone who has tried to move anything embedded in the sand is not easy especially something some 60ft long. It is these assumptions and misinformation that causes us the problems.

As regards the vagaries of planning for houses, that is another interesting thing. When we see the flood maps for the coast which are used to object to building you will find these words along with the key if it has been put on: ‘Flooding from rivers or sea without defences’.

So, do the refusals mean that the defences are no longer going to be maintained? If so, think of the millions we could save getting rid of another ivory tower.

The type of building projects that are being passed are for the disabled, elderly and shared ownership.

As businesses and private houses are not being passed, is this a selected form of government euthanasia?

The 1953 flood certainly did not flood into six mile nor in many of the areas now classed as flood risk.

C Higgins

Mill Lane,