| |
Spey Bay - conclusions
The work undertaken at Spey Bay suggests that sediment sources other than those
derived from the coast or nearshore area may be important (Gemmell
et al. 2001). At Spey
Bay (Annex 08) it is vital to regard the coastal and riverine sediment
processes as a dynamic continuum. Many previous ad hoc attempts to protect land
from flooding and erosion have failed because of a lack of understanding of
changes in the extent of shingle along the coast.
|
Guidance: The situation in Spey
Bay may be somewhat unusual in the British context, as there
is a relatively large volume of new material being feed to the system
from the river, unlike those on the south coast of England. However, Gemmell's
work has shown the need to conserve sediment transport and supply and
to allow minimum intervention to type of sediment and the rate at which
it is supplied to river, coast or downdrift beaches.
|
References
Gemmell, S.L.G., Hansom, J.D. & Hoey, T.B.
2001.
River-coast sediment exchanges: the Spey Bay sediment budget and management implications.
In: Ecology & Geomorphology of Coastal Shingle, eds.Packham, J.R., Randall, R.E., Barnes, R.S.K. & Neal, A.Westbury Academic and Scientific Publishing, 159-167.
|
|
