Annex 05: Dungeness

Location Description Evolution Vegetation Invertebrates Site Issues Sea defence works Changes of shingle volume ChaMP Grazing Vegetation Restoration Visitor Management Other issues Bird Protection Lessons References
	Caption: Dungeness looking north showing the orientation of the recurved ridges from the lighthouse

back to the top

Site Name: - Dungeness

Location

back to the top

Site Description

Dungeness consists of a complex of shingle and marsh situated along a 38-km stretch of coastline in Kent and East Sussex containing a classic sequence of shingle beaches. There are over 2000 ha of exposed shingle making this site the best example of a cuspate foreland in the British Isles (Steers 1964). The geomorphologic formation of Dungeness has been described in detail by Lewis (1932) and Lewis & Balchin (1940) and is illustrated in Figure Dungeness 01 below. [Link to the Executive Summary of the Dungeness to Pett Levels CHaMP].

Figure Dungeness 01 Main features, including the shingle recycling locations. The location of the shingle excavation site (see cover picture on the main report) is indicated by a star

back to the top

Evolution

The present structures are the result of geomorphologic processes that have progressed over a period of 4,000 years or more, since sea level stabilised at about its present position. The sequence of development of the cuspate foreland over the last 2000 years or so to the present day is shown in four cycles in the Figure above. The shingle resulted mostly from glacial erosion of the chalk. As the English Channel formed, this debris was rolled up by the sea and swept eastwards by longshore drift. A large quantity of flint was also derived from The Downs further to the west. Erosion of the extreme western edge, which is continuing today ensures the continuing movement of the structure (or would do if it weren't for the presence of the nuclear power station and the recycling of beach material from east to west). Figure 02 is redrawn from Doody 2001.

The shingle consists of a mixture of flint (98%), together with pebbles of cherty sandstone from the Hastings Beds, red and grey quartzites, dark quartz-tourmaline grit and liver-coloured quartzites. It has a matrix of interstitial sand at a depth of 1.0-1.7 m below the surface (Hey 1967) and the shingle extends in depth to up to 11.6 m below the nuclear power station. The beach acts as a vast reservoir of fresh water underlying the surface at a depth of over 3 m.

Figure Dungeness 02 Four stages in the evolution of Dungeness.. Erosion of the extreme western edge, which is continuing today ensures the continuing movement of the structure (or would do if it wasn't for the presence of the nuclear power station and the recycling of beach material from east to west. The Figure is redrawn from Doody (2001).

The Ness naturally extends in an easterly direction at a rate of some 0.9- 2.6 m per annum in a direction shown in Figure Dungeness 02, but currently this is influenced by human activity.

Shingle Recycling

Longshore drift is from west to east and the tip of the Ness if left to its own devices would continue to move eastwards as it has done for the last 2000 years or so. The short-term consequence of this movement is that there is a deficit of material immediately in front of the nuclear power stations. Clearly this situation is unsustainable and as a result beach nourishment is carried out to build up the shore and protect the buildings from being undermined and possibly falling into the sea. This is undertaken by collecting material at the east of the site and moving it to the west. Some is actually stockpiled in front of the power stations, whilst other material is fed onto the beach further west. Longshore drift ensures the material is carried to the shoreline in front of the station and eventually back to where it was originally collected in the east. From here it is scooped up again and carried back to the west (Figure Dungeness 01 above); a never-ending cycle of recharge.

Human Disturbance

There is both extensive and intensive human activity affecting the surface shingle. Losses of the surface sediment through gravel extraction are considerable with up to 20% destruction. Disturbance including building of infrastructure (including the Nuclear power stations) has caused major disruption to the surface ridge structure and its vegetation amounting to a further 50% loss. Today only approximately 30% of the surface retains the original ridge structure, a small proportion of which retains intact vegetation. Despite the adverse treatment it has received it remains one of the most important shingle sites in Europe and has been declared a National Nature Reserve.

back to the top

The Vegetation

Many authors have detailed the vegetation of the Dungeness shingle over the last 50 years. Rose (1953) highlighted the ecological zonation of the flora, Scott (1960, 1965) described plant succession and cycles of growth and Hubbard (1970) updated these ideas. Ferry & Waters (1985) edited a symposium volume on Dungeness ecology and conservation, while Ferry, Lodge and Waters (1990) published a detailed vegetation survey using NVC methods. Ferry (2001) examined the biodiversity of the vegetation of this huge site, which includes a range from coastal pioneer communities to inland terrestrial acid heathland and wetlands. One of the most famous species is prostrate broom Cytisus scoparius ssp. maritimus which is an important initial coloniser of bare shingle and was the basis of Scott's (1965) ‘broom cycle’. Scott noted that as broom opened up with ageing, so other species such as Anthoxanthum odoratum, Teucrium scorodonia, and Rumex acetosa colonise and a 'thin heath' develops. Another important aspect of the vegetation is the range of blackthorn Prunus spinosa that occurs along the shingle-marshland boundary. The plants vary from 2 m high shrubs to prostrate forms in very close proximity, suggesting a genetic basis for the variation. These blackthorns have a very rich epiphytic lichen flora dominated by Usnea spp., Evernia prunastri, or Hypogymnia physodes. This lichen community is unique to shingle and has its best representation at Dungeness. Ferry and Lodge (1991) document the blackthorns and their lichens.

Dungeness is also a top national site for slime moulds. These are frequently found in the lichen heath and under willows in infilled pits. This is particularly a complication when it comes to deciding how much scrub to clear.

Soils

Burnham & Cook (2001) have studied Dungeness soils. They are described as protorankers with silicate moder humus. The breakdown of humus is surprisingly rapid for acid soils and results in a thin layer of blackish, well -decomposed material from the vegetation including well-humified droppings derived from invertebrates such as mites and collembolla. It is thought that the biology of humus formation on Dungeness is incompletely understood and would be a rewarding subject for future work.

back to the top

Invertebrates

Dungeness holds a special place in the conservation of invertebrates (Philp & McLean 1985). Detailed studies reveal its importance for bumble bees (Williams 1989) and Hirudo medicinalis (Wilkin 1989). Some of the principal invertebrate species of special conservation value at Dungeness are shown in the table below:

back to the top

Site Issues

back to the top

Sea defence works Littlestone-on-Sea to St Mary's Bay

The Environment Agency has begun work on a £9.4 million scheme to improve the sea defences along the coastline between Littlestone-on-Sea and St Mary’s Bay. About 3,000 homes and businesses on the Kent coast will be better protected from tidal flooding following Government approval of the scheme, for which the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) is giving £6.1 million in grant aid. The first phase of the project to be undertaken during summer 2002 will involve strengthening the existing seawall and increasing the shingle beach to provide extra storm protection. Further improvements to the beach protection and work to raise the seawall will be undertaken in the second phase commencing in summer 2003. The beach will be maintained annually by recycling shingle along the frontage as required. The scheme is part of the Folkestone to Rye Strategy for flood and coastal defence, a joint initiative by the Environment Agency (Southern) and Shepway District Council. For Public safety reasons the beach will need to be closed since work will be taking place at various points during the period; dependent on tidal and weather conditions. To maximise flood protection to local residents and businesses the Environment Agency’s team is aiming to complete all work before the winter months each year.

Comment by Kent Flood Defence Manager, Andy Pearce,

" This is great news for everyone living and working along this stretch of the Kent coastline. The existing sea defence structures, including concrete seawalls and banks, are simply not robust enough and need to be replaced and reinforced to withstand any further attacks by coastal storms. About 3000 homes and businesses, including recreational and tourist amenities are currently at high risk from tidal flooding in Littlestone-on-Sea, so I am very pleased that the scheme has received the essential DEFRA funding to enable the Environment Agency to start work. The Littlestone-on-Sea frontage is important because it includes a number of significant environmentally sensitive areas, and is of particular environmental interest for its flora on the shingle ridges and associated fauna. With this in mind, the works have been designed with the existing amenity value of the beach and the environmental interests at heart. We will be working in close co-operation with the RNLI, whose slipway is close-by, to ensure that their operations are not disturbed by the project ."

This development is to the north east of Dungeness and should not, therefore, impose on the shingle beach - other than to create new areas of shingle. The longshore drift is from Dungeness to this area. The contractors are using marine-derived aggregate from a licenced site.

back to the top

Changes of shingle volume

Beach Erosion in the Rives Manche (BERM) is an Interreg II project which aims in part to monitor long term beach volume changes. While the input of shingle into the East Sussex coastal area is approached by calculating cliff retreat and estimating the flint content of the Chalk, the output needs to be assessed with regard to:

• long shore movement;
• offshore movement;
• flint attrition.

All three processes may result in changes of the beach volume.

The general long shore movement of the East Sussex coast is towards the east. The longshore transport of flint may be detected by for example a build up of flint to the west of features inhibiting this transport (such as the Seaford breakwater) or the decrease of flint east of such features.

A general decrease of flint volume along the East Sussex coast may indicate loss to the offshore zone either in the form of pebbles or their attrition products. Because the amount of loss due to attrition may be estimated from the attrition experiments an estimation of ‘whole pebble’ loss to the offshore zone may be possible from comparing the total loss with the attrition loss.

Changes of beach volume can be estimated from shore profile data provided by the Environmental Agency. Nearly 300 beach profiles along the East Sussex coast have been surveyed annually since 1973. Whilst being informative some difficulties have been encountered in interpreting the data. The photogrammetric survey has changed format over the year so that the profile data is of different quality. From 1975 to 1976 height measurements where recorded at equal distances of 5m. This changed to variable distances in 1977 and since 1990 a description of the shore surface is also provided, allowing for the identification of the beach and its composition.

Other difficulties with the data involve the lateral displacement of the profiles, their vertical accuracy and the displacement of profile starting point. Initial analysis of the profiles has given results somewhat at odds with natural processes. These difficulties are currently being addressed in consultation with the Environment Agency. At the present time it appears that this work does not provide the key information - how much material is delivered to the system and is it enough to replenish the beaches without beach nourishment. This is discussed in Chapter 04 in relation to sea defence issues.  

back to the top

Dungeness to Pett Level Coastal Habitat Management Plan (CHaMP)

The executive summary to the Dungeness CHaMP is attached as an Appendix. In this document four future management options are reviewed and their likely environmental results discussed. They are:

1. do nothing,
2. hold the present line,
3. allow managed retreat by removing the terminal groyne at Rye Harbour or
4. allow managed retreat to the 1800 AD coastline only.

Each of these scenaria would result in certain losses and in two cases gains to the shingle but future policy must be viewed within the context of sustainability and forcing mechanisms such as climatic change. In nearly all cases there would be legally required mitigatory measures to offset losses of designated habitat. Dungeness also has the unique situation of maintaining safety of the Nuclear Power Station. Ecological function is better served by allowing nature to take its course and for dynamic processes to operate unhindered. For management this represents a sustainable approach in the long term, but would require drastic and unpopular shot-term management. Doing nothing or allowing retreat would result in large-scale coastal changes. From a coastal defence and ecological perspectives these options are beneficial but they would have major socio-economic implications. Nevertheless, all these factors will have to be taken into account in the Shoreline Management Planning process.

back to the top

Grazing

Hubbard (1970) gives details of grazing by hares, rabbits and domestic stock. At times in the past rabbit and hare grazing could have had a severe impact on the cover and composition of the flora. Cattle, goats and sheep have traditionally long used the shingle. It has been suggested that the gradation from zero cover of vegetation near Romney Marsh to higher cover near The Ness is partly explained by historic use of the shingle as a refuge from the grazing marshes during times of high tides.

A more recent study by Ferry and Beck was carried out by sending a questionnaire to local residents to discuss changes in land management at Dungeness, and relating this to changes in vegetation cover. Old photographs were collected to indicate changes in vegetation. The reason from this work was that the stinking hawksbeard, Crepis foetida, a Red Data Book 1 plant, now extinct, formerly occurred on Dungeness Point. Attempts to introduce it have resulted in only short term success, and experience on the continent suggested it required fairly open swards. The results of this work were that prior to 1960 Dungeness Point was much more open. As well as local residents keeping stock such as goats, a flock of c3000 sheep were driven down to the southern part of Dungeness Beach (Walkers Outland) and allowed to graze the area between there and Greatstone.

In the recent past, there was evidence of a considerable increase in vegetation cover on Dungeness. This was linked partly to changes in grazing pressure, but also to other changes in land use: also previously the beach around properties was kept clear of vegetation.

The formal creation of a tarmac road onto Dungeness stopped the general use of vehicles over the shingle, thus reducing disturbance.  

back to the top

Vegetation Restoration

Shingle Revegetation Experiment.

An experiment in restoration of broom was initiated in April 2001. The site is shown in Figure Dungeness 03.  

Figure Dungeness 03 Broom restoration using seed sown from locally sources.

The aim was to use local broom Cytisus scoparius seed to restore vegetation on an area that has been bare since wartime damage. The idea is to establish a network of broom plants that will produce a lot of seed and driving further colonisation by broom, generate humus, and result in colonisation by later successional species. Broom at Dungeness has an important role in the early succession of vegetated shingle. Locally collected broom seed was sown in sharp sand in cardboard tubes (used for growing sweet peas) placed into shingle and covered by a rabbit-proof cage. Three seeds were added in each tube. It is felt that this will be less expensive than growing up seedlings and planting these into the shingle and relying on them surviving.

650 tubes were planted in April 2001. By July 2001 32% of the tubes contained seedlings. By April 2002 this had fallen to 16%. Losses were due to dry conditions in late summer 2001 but the remaining seedlings appear to have put on good growth since then. Unidentified animals removed some of the cages and the sand-filled tubes were pulled out of the shingle. It is suspected that Corvids may be the culprits.

Consequently fresh seed was collected in 2002 and any damaged tubes were replaced, and all the unsuccessful tubes had fresh seed added. The Revegetation Plot and a control area have been monitored to assess the initial vegetation cover - 30 random quadrats in each block. These monitoring plots will be resurveyed as the vegetation develops, at 5, 10, 15 and 20-year intervals.

English Nature has monitored survival of young broom plants in the shingle revegetation project during December 2002. 16% of the tubes contained young seedlings. When the tubes were last monitored in the spring also 16% of them were found to contain seedlings, so survival had been good over the summer.

Figure Dungeness 04 Regrowth of Broom following seeding only one year after treatment. Seedlings are circled.

Pipe line Laying

Dungeness has several pipelines/ wayleaves needing irregular maintenance. As damage is long lasting (permanent in the case of geomorphology) it is important to avoid. Contractors are directed along previously damaged corridors, and English Nature have found that marking these with posts (stood in a moveable concrete base) and joined by tape is a helpful way to minimise the sort of damage that could result from even one accidental drive off line (Figure Dungeness 05).

Figure Dungeness 05 Pipeline laying at Dungeness.

back to the top

Visitor Management

Dungeness is visited by several million visitors annually. The intensity of recreational pressures and their overall effect on the flora and fauna are difficult to quantify. Thousands of sightseers come by the narrow gauge railway to Dungeness and are concentrated around the station area. Trampling has no doubt affected the ridges and their vegetation almost since the day they were deposited. Pressure from anglers and other visitors to the beach has added to that from professional fishermen whose boats are drawn up on the eastern shore. Errant motor cyclists, dune buggies and all-terrain vehicles cause significant damage where they manage to get on to the shingle and as ever the best form of management is education of the ecological value of the site.

Boardwalks

One of the best forms of visitor control on shingle (or dunes) is the construction of boardwalks over sensitive areas of vegetation (Figure Dungeness 06). This has been done at Walmer and between the road and the harbour en route to Portland from Weymouth. In both locations visitors make use of the easier access and the vegetation flourishes. English Nature has plans to install boardwalks on the southern shore of Dungeness in similar locations to preserve the pioneer vegetation. However, at Dungeness it is planned to have boardwalks without rails as it is thought that people will walk on the boards rather than tread on the more tiring shingle substrate.

Dungeness 06 A Board walk in Portugal, in this case over sand dunes.

back to the top

Other issues

Parking

One of the attractions that still brings visitors to Dungeness is the garden of Prospect Cottage made famous by Derek Jarman (Jarman 1995). At this and many other locations off-road parking is practised along many of the roadsides of Dungeness to the detriment of the local vegetation. This is made worse when the cars get stuck in more mobile shingle and have to be forcibly removed. Such disturbance can benefit rare species such as red hemp nettle (Galeopsis angustifolia), but is damaging to the vegetation of more stable shingle such as Silene nutans (Nottingham catchfly).

Nuclear Power Generation

Following the 1958 Public Enquiry, CEGB established a 108 ha compound at the southern tip of Dungeness. This included an important location for Lathyrus japonicus and was a significant site for geomorphic interest, which was destroyed during construction (Figure Dungeness 07).  

Dungeness 07 Building the nuclear power station. Note the destruction of the vegetated shingle ridges.

Location of the power station on an eroding shoreline against the advice of geomorphologists at the Public Enquiry has resulted in a large and continuing demand for beach feeding (Figure Dungeness 02 above) of around 30000 cubic metres of shingle each year. A similar quantity is taken by the EA for sea defences, which over time is resulting in direct losses of the more stable parts of the site.

Housing Encroachment and Exotics

Housing development started on Dungeness in the late 1920s. The number of houses fringing the eastern shoreline has increased steadily since the Second World War such that the area damaged directly or indirectly by building was by 1984, twice that of 1946 (Fuller 1985). Because the distribution of housing has been very scattered and most houses have developed gardens on the shingle, a considerable spread of exotic species has occurred on this part of the Ness. Few alien species however, have spread far beyond this part of the site. The most invasive species are red valerian and 'snow in summer - a Cerastium sp., Crepis foetida, Ophris spegoda, Thelypteris palustris and many scarce species as detailed in the SSSI citation for Dungeness.

Rare Species

Dungeness has three species of vascular plant, three lichens and one moss that occur in less than 150 10 x10 km squares nationally. The flowering plants are Vicia lutea, Lathyrus japonicus and Silene nutans. The lichens are Cladonia mitis, C. bacillaris and C. ciliata var.ciliata (Figure Dungeness 08). There are also two other RDB lichens including Usnea glabrata and two RDB mosses: Bryum warneum and B. dunense. The latter moss occurs adjacent to sandy gravel workings.

Dungeness 08 Lichen heath on shingle. Note the damage caused by vehicle wheels as a result of one visit by a Land Rover. Repeated visits can be devastating.

These lichens grow on dead wood and stable shingle of the intact ridges. The moss Antitrichia curtipendula is a robust species that forms mats over the undisturbed shingle and occurs mainly in western Britain. All these species rely on lack of disturbance for their survival. However, it must be noted that various areas of historically disturbed shingle also support a great diversity of species including a number that are very uncommon elsewhere.

Gravel Extraction

Dungeness is considered to be a strategically important source of sand and gravel and has one of the most extensive reserves in south-east England. It contributes over 25% of the sand and gravel production for Kent and East Sussex. Gravel extraction began with the South East Railway Company in 1883, but open water was not created till the 1920s when the Long Pits excavation commenced. As well as the current areas of extraction, there are further consents and areas that have been extracted in the past but not below the water table. It is worth remembering that although geomorphologic and vegetation damage is total, some of the disused gravel workings become important sites for birds.

Lake Regrading

Several of the gravel extraction pits have been regraded around their edges to give a shallow gradient more suitable for other vegetation communities to develop. A problem with this policy is often that the sediment available for infill is dissimilar to the original shingle and matrix. This results, at least in the early years, in different vegetation developing such as large spreads of Gnaphalium spp.and Bryum warneum, interesting in their own right but atypical of the area (Figure Dungeness 09). However, these sorts of pits are ecologically better than a 6 m deep gravel pit and are home to rare invertebrates such as the beetle Omophron limbatum.

Dungeness 09 Lake regrading on Dungeness

Water Abstraction

The shingle aquifer was first used to supply water to Littlestone-on-Sea at the end of the nineteenth century. Abstraction rates have increased substantially in the last 50 years. The Dungeness aquifer is particularly important because of the high quality of its water. However there are almost no untapped resources left and there have been steady declines in the level of the aquifer over the last 50 years. Associated with this decline has been a rise in salinity levels of the aquifer and local saline incursions. Burnham and Cook (2001) document these conditions. Suggestions have also been put forward for use of parts of the aquifer as a reservoir in the future.

Military Training

The Lydd Ranges form part of the Cinque Ports Training Area, on parts of Dungeness owned or leased by the Ministry of Defence. First references date back to 1798 but intensive military use began in 1881, at first as an artillery range, then for tank training and more recently also for small-arms practice.

Substantial parts of the existing Ranges have suffered degradation through military training, resulting in loss of vegetation, removal of shingle ridges, drying out of wetlands and general disturbance. A particular problem has been the use of Holmstone Wood for tank training. Although this area is now known not to be natural (Hubbard 1970), it is an extremely old woodland and worthy of conservation. Currently its military use does not allow for any regeneration (Figure Dungeness 10). Pockmarking of the area with mine and bomb craters has also significantly affected the vegetation.

Dungeness 10 The holly ‘wood’.

During the 1970s, a conservation group was set up between the Military and conservation bodies to provide a forum for comment on the potential effects of proposed uses of the Ranges. Although this forum allows for discussion, many of the aspirations of EN and RSPB are not fulfilled.

Wetland Management

Dungeness is important for natural freshwater and wetland habitats on the Denge Beach area. These natural depressions are commonly called ‘Open Pits’. Their vegetation was described by Henderson (1983) and Waters (1985). It is thought that they were formed some 700-1200 years ago. Until 50 years ago they contained a vegetation sequence from open water, through sedge-fen to reedswamp and sallow carr. However, there has been a fall of over 1 m in average water level since the 1960s with a major loss of sedge fen and increase in wet woodland. Over 20 species of vascular plants have disappeared since 1953. These areas have great ecological value and much of the current management is involved in carr removal and a return to more open vegetation (Figures Dungeness 11 & 12). A resurvey of wetlands by English Nature in 2002 has shown that current management has resulted in the recovery from the seed bank of a range of locally scarce species including Anagallis tenella, Carex rostrata, Potamogeton polygonifolius, Veronica scutellata and Epilobium palustre.

	Figure Dungeness 11 Recently cleared scrub.
	Figure Dungeness 12 Regenerating vegetation.

back to the top

Bird Protection

The first RSPB bird watcher was appointed in 1907. As a result of the housing developments that were occurring at the time, land was purchased in 1931 by RSPB and other conservationists to protect nesting sites of rare bird species. In 1952 the Dungeness Bird Observatory was formed and the RSPB reserve was re-opened after wartime closure. In 1970 Burrowes Pit was landscaped and developed for bird use within the reserve and in the early 1980s RSPB concluded arrangement to ensure control of additional land beyond the confines of the reserve.

Historically, one of the major species of concern was the Kentish Plover, which suffered drastic declines early in the nineteenth century from shooting and egg collection and suffered a final blow from the bungalow development of the 1930s.

An important success story within the confines of the RSPB reserve has been that of the Common Tern. This species died out in its traditional nesting site on Denge Beach in the 1960s and moved to various gravel pits where it survived for a few years before declining. It was established at Burrowes Pit in the mid 1970s and has continued to do extremely well as a result of having:

• secure nesting sites unreachable by ground predators;
• colony size large enough to deter avian predators;
• gull population controlled to give adequate nesting space for terns;
• surface of nesting islands artificially maintained in good condition.

The growth in open water bodies elsewhere on Dungeness as a result of gravel extraction has made the foreland one of the major winter wildfowl locations in Britain and particularly a key site for smew. Protection within the nuclear power station compound has also been significant for one species: the black redstart, which has nested regularly there since the mid 1960s.

Vehicular Access on Shingle

Vehicle damage has been particularly significant at Dungeness (see Figure Dungeness 08 above). The tracks of the old horse-drawn wagons that plied between Lydd and the old lighthouse still exist. Damage done by military vehicles during and immediately after the Second World War over much of Dungeness is still visible in the dissected patterns of the vegetation. More recently vehicles have continued to do untold damage even in the best areas. Some are associated with gravel extraction, some with electricity work on overhead lines and others with borehole monitoring. Even conservation activities may cause damage as occurred when well-meaning volunteers from the power station installed a series of vertical railway sleepers as host locations for rare invertebrates.

Damaged shingle ridges and their vegetation have very limited capacity for recovery. This may well reflect a change in the structure of the substrate and the availability of seed. More experimental work is needed on this aspect.

Mitigation Techniques

One successful technique employed at Dungeness has been to lay temporary trackways across the shingle for use by vehicles needing to access power lines etc (Dungeness Figure 13).  

Figure Dungeness 13 Mattresses over shingle

This spreads the weight of the vehicle and does not cause indentations in the shingle ridges. So long as the trackways are not left in place for too long, the vegetation seems to recover quite quickly (Dungeness Figure 14).

Dungeness 14 Regeneration of vegetation in area shown in figure 13 above

back to the top

Summary lessons from Dungeness

• At Dungeness there are major coast protection issues around the nuclear power stations and shingle recycling plays a vital role within this. A salutary lesson has been learned about the need to understand geomorphic processes on shingle before long term works are carried out
• The current programme of 'broom' restoration may have important lessons that can be used elsewhere where damage has been caused by human misuse of the shingle.
• Rare species conservation has been shown to be affected by such factors as the reduction in grazing or off-road car parking as well as more positive actions such as scrub clearance or visitor management
• Gravel pits may result in loss of plant habitat and geomorphic interest but will almost certainly improve the value of a site for birdlife. Regraded pits with shallow edge gradients will give additional habitats often declining elsewhere, important both for flora and microfauna.
• Dungeness management has developed important mitigation techniques for vehicular access onto shingle and for disturbance of shingle for underground works. Such techniques could be used with value at many other sites.
• Dungeness highlights many of the problems associated with military activity on shingle structures. Dungeness has shown that despite willingness to discuss conservation measures this is an area where general management issues may well need to be formulated at a higher level.

back to the top

References

Burnham C P & Cook H F 2001 Hydrology and Soils of coastal shingle with specific reference to Dungeness. . In: Ecology & Geomorphology of Coastal Shingle, Eds. J.R. Packham, R.E. Randall, R.S.K. Barnes & A. Neal. Westbury Academic & Scientific Publishing, Otley, West Yorkshire, 107-131.

Doody J P 2001 Perspective: the importance of conserving coastal shingle in Europe. . In: Ecology & Geomorphology of Coastal Shingle, Eds. J.R. Packham, R.E. Randall, R.S.K. Barnes & A. Neal. Westbury Academic & Scientific Publishing, Otley, West Yorkshire.

Ferry, B 2001 Vegetation of the Dungeness shingle. In: Ecology & Geomorphology of Coastal Shingle, Eds. J.R. Packham, R.E. Randall, R.S.K. Barnes & A. Neal. Westbury Academic & Scientific Publishing, Otley, West Yorkshire, 224-241.

Ferry B. & Lodge N. 1991 A survey of the lichens associated with the blackthorns at Dungeness. English Nature, Unpublished Report.

Ferry, B., Lodge, N & Waters S J P 1990 Dungeness: a vegetation survey of a shingle beach. Research and Survey in Nature Conservation, 26, 1-96, Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough.

Fuller R M 1985 An assessment of damage to the shingle beaches and their vegetation. In: Dungeness ecology and Conservation, Ferry B W, Waters S. (Eds.) Nature Conservancy Council and Royal Holloway and Bedford New College, 25-41.

Henderson, A.C.B. 1983 Vegetation survey of natural and artificial pits, Dungeness. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Unpublished Report.

Hey R W 1967 Sections in the beach-plain deposits of Dungeness, Kent. Geology Magazine, 104, 361-370

Hubbard, J C E 1970 The shingle vegetation of southern England: a general survey of Dungeness, Kent and Sussex. Journal of Ecology, 58, 713-722.

Jarman D 1995 Derek Jarman's garden. Thames and Hudson, London, UK.

Lewis W V 1932 The formation of Dungeness Foreland. Geographical Journal, 80, 309-324.

Lewis W V & Balchin W G V 1940 Past sea-levels at Dungeness. Geographical Journal, 96, 258-285.

Philp E G & McLean I G F 1985 The invertebrate fauna of Dungeness. . In: Dungeness ecology and conservation, Eds. Brian Ferry & Stephen Waters. Focus on Nature Conservation. No. 12. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, 94-112.

Scott G A M 1960 The biology of shingle beach plants, with special reference to the ecology of selected species. Unpublished PhD thesis, University College of North Wales, Bangor.

Scott G A M 1965 The shingle succession at Dungeness. . Journal of Ecology, 52, 21-31

Steers, A J 1964 The Coastline of England and Wales. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Waters S 1985. Vegetation of natural wetlands. In: Dungeness ecology and conservation, Eds. Brian Ferry & Stephen Waters. Focus on Nature Conservation. No. 12. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, 52-63.

Wilkin P J 1989 Why are there so many bumblebees at Dungeness? Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 101, 31-44.

Williams P J 1989 The medicinal leech, Hirundo medicinalis (L.) ( Hirundinea: Gnathobdellae), at Dungeness, Kent. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 101, 44-49.