Growth through small projects

If a need for growth is accepted, one way of achieving this would be to allow small expansions of existing facilities. In the case of marinas this will inevitably involve a minor land take of saltmarsh or intertidal area. It just is not possible (in most cases) for the owner to provide proper compensation if the area is designated. Moreover, it is improbable that small, piecemeal compensations are ecologically effective. So far there is little sign of any collaborative schemes to provide proper compensation (although this may turn out to be one attribute of the Hamble project). If the area were being properly managed, there would be a number of schemes, probably publicly funded that would be aimed specifically at habitat creation or remediation in order to compensate for the inevitable ecological erosion of habitat caused by small projects. What a great use of the Lottery funds! Or EU grants?

Where a small project is going to take intertidal area that is not designated, there is a real puzzle. In an area where most of the foreshore is designated, surely a project that does not take designated land should be given preference? Furthermore, if the developer is able to offer some form of compensation, then there really should be no difficulty. However, so fearful are the conservation agencies of the salami effect and the gradual loss of intertidal areas that they are very reluctant to accede to such projects. If this is the attitude, then perhaps the Conservation Agencies should face the consequences of announcing that they are against any reduction of intertidal area, and will object to all such projects. Alternatively, perhaps they should force the Relevant Authorities to consider a development strategy based on the needs and capacity of the area.