Annex 06: Orfordness 

Location Description cSAC Geomorphology North Weir Point Site issues EU Life funding Relevance Restoring vegetated shingle Recolonisation Conclusions The impact of gulls Conclusions Disturbance and Lathyrus japonicus New Lagoons Protection Monitoring References
	The National Trust site from Aldeburgh looking south

Site Name: - Orfordness, Suffolk

back to the top

Location

back to the top

Description (SSSI)

Orfordness is one of four major shingle landforms in Britain, (the others are Dungeness, Kent, a cuspate foreland; Chesil Beach, Dorset a bar and Culbin Shingle, Highland/Grampian Regions, an offshore barrier island, see maps) and important on a world scale as an example of a shingle spit and foreland ness. The site is within the Suffolk Coast and Estuaries CHaMP and includes the Orfordness to Shingle Street candidate Special Areas of Conservation and lies alongside the Alde-Ore Special Protection Area and the Alde-Ore & Butley candidate Special Areas of Conservation. As well as being a cSAC, this site is also a Special Protection Area (SPA) and is designated a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The locations of the main areas mentioned in the text are shown in the Figure Orfordness 01.

Figure Orfordness 01: The approximate area of the candidate Special Area of Conservation in relation to the main habitat types.

back to the top

The candidate Special Areas of Conservation

The shingle and associated habitats has been identified as a candidate Special Areas of Conservation for the following reasons:

"1150 Coastal lagoons

Orfordness – Shingle Street encompasses a series of percolation lagoons on the east coast of England, and, together with Benacre to Easton Bavents and The Wash and North Norfolk Coast, forms a significant part of the percolation lagoon resource concentrated in this part of the UK. The lagoons at this site have developed in the shingle bank adjacent to the shore at the mouth of the Ore estuary. The salinity of the lagoons is maintained by percolation through the shingle, although at high tides sea water can overtop the shingle bank. The fauna of these lagoons includes typical lagoon species, such as the cockle Cerastoderma glaucum, the ostracod Cyprideis torosa and the gastropods Littorina saxatilis tenebrosa and Hydrobia ventrosa. The nationally rare starlet sea anemone Nematostella vectensis is also found at the site.

1210 Annual vegetation of drift lines

Orfordness is an extensive shingle spit some 15km in length and is one of two sites representing Annual vegetation of drift lines on the east coast of England. In contrast to Minsmere to Walberswick Heaths and Marshes, drift-line vegetation occurs on the sheltered, western side of the spit, at the transition from shingle to saltmarsh, as well as on the exposed eastern coast. The drift-line community is widespread on the site and comprises sea beet Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima and orache Atriplex spp. in a strip 2-5m wide.

1220 Perennial vegetation of stony banks

Orfordness is an extensive shingle structure on the east coast of England and consists of a foreland, a 15km-long spit and a series of recurves running from north to south on the Suffolk coast. This spit has been selected as it supports some of the largest and most natural sequences in the UK of shingle vegetation affected by salt spray. The southern end of the spit has a particularly fine series of undisturbed ridges, with zonation of communities determined by the ridge pattern. Pioneer communities with sea pea Lathyrus japonicus and false oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius grassland occur. Locally these are nutrient-enriched by the presence of a gull colony; elsewhere they support rich lichen communities. The northern part of Orfordness has suffered considerable damage from defence-related activities but a restoration programme for the shingle vegetation is underway."

Taken from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee web site @ www.jncc.gov.uk .

back to the top

Geomorphology

Orfordness is an essential dynamic feature, which has developed in a dynamic environment. The forces of the sea have moved deposits of material (pebbles in a size range 2-200 mm) along the coast though the action of tides, waves and storms. Beaches have been built up against each other to form a ness with a sequence of ‘ridges’ and ‘lows’ (valleys), which have over several centuries moved along the coast to the south west. At the same time the elongated spit has grown and receded (Figure Orfordness 02).

Figure Orfordness 02. Diagrammatic representation of the evolution of the ness and spit of Orfordness. The position of the Ness is derived from maps presented to Alfred Steers (Anon 1966) and the end of the spit, North Weir Point from Carr (1969).

Despite recent major ground disturbance and damage it still provides a significant example of a highly dynamic landform. Today, whilst the ness and spit continues to respond naturally to the effects of sea level change, tides, waves and storms, the narrow beach south of the town of Aldeburgh is the subject of coastal protection measures. These are designed to prevent a breach at Slaughden Beach, the narrowest part of the structure.

In the vicinity of the lighthouse there is evidence to suggest that the beach is undergoing a cycle of erosion (Figure Orfordness 03).

Figure Orfordness 03. Erosion above the beach near the lighthouse.

back to the top

North Weir Point

This is the most dynamic part of the site. As Figure Orfordness 02 above indicates this has gone through several cycles of erosion and accretion. Some of these reflect the gradual build up of beach material others will have been more dramatic as storms forced the shingle to move landwards some of it being deposited on the opposite side of the river at Shingle Street.

The above represents a very brief summary of the evolution of the site as a whole, which has been the subject of many publications. The most recent is that of Randall & Fuller (2001).

Comment: The continuation of these natural processes to allow change and evolution of the landscape is extremely important to the value of the site as a whole. However, this may be unacceptable where there are threats to property and land from flooding should a breach occur at Slaughden. The future of the lighthouse may also be threatened if the erosion seen on the site in 2002 continues. These are key issues for the Shoreline Management Plan and are dealt with in more detail below.

back to the top

Site issues affecting coastal shingle at Orfordness

The ness of Orfordness has a number of key issues which are considered below. These include:

• shingle extraction for beach recharge.
• managed realignment* Lantern Marsh;
• military use including atomic weapons research, testing ordnance and building the ‘Cobra mist’;
• presence of a large gull colony on the shingle towards the south of the site.

The locations of these are shown in the Figure Orfordness 04 below.

Orfordness, Beach recharge

There is a constant threat of breaching at Slaughden, at the northern end of the spit, due to coastal and estuarine pressures. At the narrowest point the shingle bar is only some 30 metres wide (see Figures Orfordness 05a and b below).

	Figure Orfordness 05a: Slaughden shingle bank: Top picture west from the bank overlooking the River Alde
	Figure Orfordness 05b: Bottom picture east showing the area of wooden groins and beach recharge.

Concrete and rock armour, together with wooden groynes, are used as protection as well as an artificially created and maintained shingle sea wall. This shingle wall is itself subject to major erosion each year, particularly when strong north easterly gales coincide with storm surges. It can be reduced significantly in a very short period of time, sometimes even overnight. In the winter of 1997 it was eroded from its normal 13 metres width down to only 1.5 metres.

In order to maintain the wall at the required width, the EA has in the past removed shingle from the foreshore adjacent to the southern end of Lantern Marsh (Figure Orfordness 06) and hauled it northwards for use as beach replenishment at the Slaughden sea defences. This practice is under review. An Environmental Impact Assessment is underway because of the concern that the process may be damaging and disturbing to the site, coastal processes and wildlife. [It is discussed in more detail in relation to questions concerning coastal defence below.].

Figure Orfordness 06: Shingle extraction point. Note the damage to the shingle, which results from the passage of vehicles to and from the beach.

Military activity

"A large part of the Ness was acquired by the War Department in 1913. Between August 1913 and the summer of 1915 this site was drained and levelled to form airfields to the left and right of the road. There followed perhaps the most significant turning point in the history of the Ness with the arrival of part of the Central Flying School's Experimental Flying Section from Upavon in Wiltshire. This event ushered in a 70 year period of intense military experimentation, which as well as leaving a variety of physical traces, has given the place what has been described as the mystique of secrecy" Taken from the National Trust web site http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/orfordness/main/contents/contents.htm where further information is available.

At the beginning of the 1950s the exploitation of new post-war technologies, such as nuclear power was being developed and the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment (AWRE) tested the components of nuclear weapons. Two of the test labs, - the so-called ‘Pagodas’ (Figure Orfordness 07) are well-known landmarks. The AWRE finally ceased work on the site in 1971.

Figure, Orfordness 07. Disturbed surface shingle and military ‘laboratories’, the ‘Pagodas’, Orfordness, October 2002

‘Cobra Mist’ Site

"In 1968 work started on the top secret Anglo-American System 441A ‘over-the-horizon’ (OTH) backscatter radar project, finally code-named ‘Cobra Mist’. The Anglo-American project, whose main contractor was the Radio Corporation of America, was set up to carry out several ‘missions’, including detection and tracking of aircraft, detection of missile and satellite vehicle launchings, fulfilling intelligence requirements and providing a research and development test-bed." Taken from the National Trust web site for Orfordness.

The surface of the shingle was damaged over a large area by the installation of 18 ‘strings’ of antennae in the shape of a large open fan. A large aluminium ‘ground net’ covered some 80 acres of Lantern Marsh to the north of the site. Figure Orfordness 08 shows a picture of the site today.

Figure Orfordness 08. The site of the ‘Cobra Mist’ installation. Note ‘newly’ disturbed shingle vegetation in the foreground and the grey buildings in the background, which are now used by the BBC Wold Service.

Orfordness Gull colonies - effects on vegetation

The first written record of lesser black-backed gulls (Larus fuscus) breeding on Orford Ness was 1968 with one hundred pairs recorded within the then military enclosure. The first records of herring Gull were of 2-3 breeding pairs in 1963. Since these early records the colonies have increased to 23,000 pairs of Lesser Black-backed gulls together with 6,500 pairs of Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus) within the same colony by the year 2000 (See Figure Orfordness 09 below). The effect of the presence of this number of birds was considered to be a possible threat to the shingle vegetation.

Figure Orfordness 09. Growth of Orfordness gull colonies, taken from the National Trust web site.

Numbers dropped considerably in 2001 and 2002; apparently the result of fox predation, which were not controlled in these two years. The numbers are shown in the table below.

The colony has now largely moved to Lantern Marsh and their effect on the bulk of the vegetated shingle has reduced.

back to the top

EU Life funding for management and conservation

These issues and others led to applications for European funding for rehabilitation work. To date there have been two LIFE projects on Orford Ness. In 1994, two years after the Trust purchased the site from the Ministry of Defence; the first project began. A successful follow up application was made in 1997 which ran until March 2000. The projects are part of a five-year restoration programme, which has three principle aims:

1. to restore this extensive but damaged coastal site and to conserve its outstanding physiographic interest;
2. to increase the nature conservation value of its habitats;
3. to encourage the breeding of a large number of wild birds (including EU Birds Directive Annex 1 species).

The first two have involved the management and restoration of shingle surfaces and vegetation.

LIFE 1 - The conservation of Orford Ness (LIFE94 NAT/UK/000850)

Project work included the re-creation and restoration of habitats by using livestock grazing as a management tool; improving water control on the marshes and controlling damaging activities such as illegal access and shooting. It also involved providing winter flooding of the grazing marshes for wildfowl and summer nesting and feeding areas for waders and other ground nesting birds. Another key element was preparing the site for public access after it having been a closed ‘secret site’ for eighty years.

LIFE 2 - Wild Ness: the conservation of Orford Ness, Phase 2 (LIFE97 NAT/UK/004245)

Following the LIFE 1 programme initiated in 1994, a second LIFE project started in 1997 and ran until March 2000. The aim of this project was to build on the work achieved in LIFE 1 and to improve the conservation status of EU Birds Directive Annex 1 species and other vulnerable breeding, over-wintering and migratory species. It also aimed to improve the status of habitats for which the site has been included as a candidate in the Special Area for Conservation (SAC) designation.

Key projects relating to Shingle management and restoration are:

• experimental restoration of an area of degraded shingle (Life 2);
• studies of effects of gull guano on the development of the rare shingle flora (Life 2);
• restriction of access and the rehabilitation of Lathyrus japonicus;
• review of beach recharge.

Other restoration activities taking place at Orfordness are dealt with in the "GOOD PRACTICE GUIDE for habitat restoration, re-creation and creation on the coast". These include:

• re-creation of saltmarsh through managed realignment (north Lantern Marsh);
• restoration of coastal grazing marsh including some river walls (Life 1 and 2);
• creation of a 2 ha brackish water coastal lagoon with islands for breeding, feeding and over-wintering waders and wildfowl and as increased habitat for the specialist lagoonal fauna found on the site (Life 2).

back to the top

Relevance to shingle restoration/recreation

Orfordness provides a number of important examples of restoration work. These are derived from the site issues and relate to five issues:

1. restoration of damaged or disturbed shingle vegetation;
2. influence of gull nesting on vegetation;
3. lagoon restoration;
4. controlling access, rehabilitation rare plant communities;
5. shingle recycling;

In addition to work specifically associated with restoring shingle habitats it also has examples of saltmarsh re-creation through managed realignment, lagoon restoration and creation and coastal grazing marsh restoration. Information on these last three habitats can also be found in the "GOOD PRACTICE GUIDE for habitat restoration, re-creation and creation on the coast" part of the LIFE funded ‘Living with the Seas’ project.

back to the top

1. Restoring vegetated shingle

The damage to the shingle at Orfordness has been considerable. Although excavation has been relatively restricted loss and damage of the surface has been extensive at the northern (ness) end of the structure. This has destroyed the vegetation and severely degraded the morphology, such that natural regeneration of the vegetation is very slow or non-existent. [A requirement for the development of vegetation on the extremely porous shingle surface lies in the presence of fine fractions between the pebbles, which allow the retention of moisture and facilitates plant seed germination. This fraction is lost with the surface disturbance of the shingle.]

The National Trust undertook to test, experimentally, whether it was possible to regenerate shingle flora on some of the worst degraded and damaged sites. The project was carried out in 2000 as part of the European Union LIFE-Nature project ‘WILD NESS - The Conservation of Orford Ness, Phase 2’. The chosen site was selected in an area substantially degraded by military use. Initial work on the ridge to be restored involved the scraping off of the surface shingle to a depth of approximately 18-20cms (below the depth to which germinating seeds will reach).

"The shingle was graded, using an adapted small commercial screener, into four nominal sizes <5mm, 5-15mm, 15-25mm and >25mm. These measurements are representative of the natural sizing recorded on adjacent ridges. This material was then manually and mechanically replaced onto the scraped area in order to reproduce the height, width, spread and size ratios of a section undamaged ridge adjoining the test area." Five treatments were tried, see Table Orfordness 01 below:

Table Orfordness 01. Five experimental treatments to restore shingle vegetation.

back to the top

Recolonisation

The work is being monitored using presence or absence linear transects and fixed point photography. There was no evidence of recolonisation by October 2002 when the photograph opposite was taken (see Figure Orfordness 10).

Figure Orfordness 10. Site of experimental shingle restoration. The location of the restored ridge is indicated in the picture.

Part of the LIFE Nature funded project: "Wild Ness: the conservation of Orford Ness, Phase 2 (LIFE97 NAT/UK/004245)".

back to the top

Conclusions

This experiment appears so far not to have increased the rate of colonisation of plants on the bare shingle. Although the grading of the shingle has produced a structure similar to that found in close proximity to the reconstructed ridge there could be a lack of interstitial material in the shingle. This is known to be an important prerequisite for seed germination and plant growth. It could be some time before conditions are conducive to colonisation. As ever on shingle, time is probably the most important factor in re-creating vegetated shingle.

Comment: According to the property Manager this was a time consuming experiment. Given the relatively small scale of the experiment this approach is unlikely to be attempted again (Pers. Comm. 2002). It would appear that the natural forces of tides and waves are much more efficient tools for sorting coastal shingle than anything human restoration can achieve.

back to the top

2. Research into the impact of gulls on shingle vegetation

As a result of the massive increase in gull numbers research was initiated to test the hypothesis was that ‘Gulls may potentially affect the vegetation around their nesting colonies through nutrient enrichment and disturbance. In nutrient-poor shingle habitats such processes would be likely to be detrimental to plant biodiversity. Local and less competitive species may suffer due to dominance by more nutrient demanding species.’ The aim of the research was to investigate whether nesting gulls might affect the vegetation surrounding their nests, through the processes of:

• nutrient enrichment through the deposition of food scraps and guano;
• disturbance through territorial disputes such as boundary clashes;
• the large input of organic nesting material onto the shingle ridges;
• the removal of material from the lichen heath to use as a nest lining.

back to the top

Conclusions from the study (Evans 2000)

It is the conclusion of this study that nesting gulls do not cause a change in the vegetation at Orford Ness at their present density, and so it appears that the gulls and plants can coexist without extensive alteration to the shingle ecosystem (Evans 2000). In particular:

• nesting gulls do cause eutrophication of the shingle habitat.
• nutrient concentrations are significantly reduced over winter.
• vegetation appears uniform between abandoned nest & non-nest sites.
• increases in available nutrients will be utilised by the shingle plants.
• Arrhenatherum elatius is not competitively dominant on site.
• vegetation disturbance by the gulls on the shingle is minimal.

A further study showed there were no significant differences between the % cover for key species for nest sites and non-nest vegetated control sites. Highly significant differences were found for organic material present both between nest and non-nest vegetated sites and non-vegetated "bare shingle" samples.

The potentially most significant influence of the gull behaviour on vegetation is the use of lichen (Cladonia ssp) as a nest lining. The findings of the second study indicated that gulls will use lichen if relatively near to the nest site and this may have adverse implications for this rich and rare vegetation. In time gull population control, particularly on the lichen-rich ridges in the current National Nature Reserve, may be required but this needs a longer term study (Cutting 2000).

Comment: The results of this work suggest that large gull colonies may not be a significant threat to shingle vegetation. However, other sites with large gull population do show impoverishment of the vegetation as at South Walney, Cumbria where Europe's largest colony of herring and lesser black-backed gulls occurs with around 30,000 pairs breeding on the 130 ha. The gulls nest mostly on sand dunes, which are enriched by their droppings resulting in ragwort, thistles and nettles becoming dominant. At Ravenglass dunes further north some 15-20,000 black-headed gulls also influenced the vegetation. [This is the site where Tinbergen undertook his classical studies of gull behaviour. The gull colony disappeared some time ago.]

back to the top

3. Disturbance and Lathyrus japonicus

The nationally scarce sea pea Lathyrus japonicus was said by John Clare to be abundant in 1555, when it was harvested by the people of Aldeburgh as food in a time of famine. The plant had largely disappeared from the site by 1993 due to damage and disturbance caused by illegal access by vehicles and pedestrians. Since taking over the site the National Trust has restricted access and a biennial survey of drift line vegetation has been conducted since 1996.

The survey gives a simple, basic record of increase or decrease in plant presence over the area of the site. Continued presence and/or re-establishment are used as a measure of success of the exclusion of Four Wheel Drive vehicles and control of pedestrians. Indications show that there is a general trend for an increase in presence and abundance of Lathyrus japonicus over almost the whole length of the strand line (Figure Orfordness 11). This suggests reduction in disturbance and the absence of physical damage generated by vehicular or pedestrian pressure on the plants can lead to a relatively rapid restoration of the plant communities, at least in so far as Lathyrus japonicus is concerned.

Figure Orfordness 11: Seaward ridge with over- wintering Lathyrus japonicus. Despite some continuing disturbance from fishermen and walkers the colonies have responded well to restrictions on access.

back to the top

4. ‘New’ Lagoons

As the shingle beach ‘rolls-over’ inland the loss of brackish water coastal lagoon habitat will be lost. As a priority habitat under Annex 1 of the European Union Habitats Directive there is a requirement under the Directive to ensure its maintenance in a Favourable Conservation Status. The picture below shows one of the natural lagoons on Orfordness, which will disappear as the beach responds to the natural forces driving change (Figure Orfordness 12, below).

Figure Orfordness 12: Seaward ridge and coastal saline lagoon. Note the ‘fans’ of shingle which have been washed over the ridge and encroach on the open water of the lagoon. Picture taken in October 2002.

Two new lagoons (Figure Orfordness 13, below) have been created as replacement habitats, of approximately one hectare each, in Kings Marsh during 1998. The work was undertaken as part of a LIFE Nature project and also contributed to the Suffolk Biodiversity Action Plan, which aims to increase the area of lagoons in the county. These new lagoons will compliment the existing ones and help to ensure the continuation of this important habitat and the species, such as the starlet sea anemone (Nematostella vectensis), that inhabit it. They are also important for aquatic invertebrates, breeding avocet (Recurvirostra avosetta), redshank (Tringa totanus), oystercatcher (Haematopus ostralegus) and migratory waders.

Figure Orfordness 13: New lagoons with islands constructed on King’s Marsh.

back to the top

5. A question of ‘protection’ - Orfordness and sea defence

The Orfordness shingles are a classic case of the role that can or should be assigned to shingle structures in providing flood and coastal defence. It is clear from the evolution of the structure that the natural dynamic forces will continue to cause it to move in a south westerly direction. It is unlikely that any action will be taken to ‘protect’ the southern part of the site from erosion. By contrast, efforts to prevent a breach to the north along the Slaughden sea defence have been carried out for many years. Because of the impact of the extraction point for material to be transported and used to ‘nourish’ the beach further north at Aldeburgh on the structure and function of the beach and its conservation value this process is being reassessed. The discussion which follows attempts to look at the key issues in considered whether such a dynamic structure should be protected at all!

The following text is taken from a paper which looked at the cost-benefit analysis which took place in the early 1990s (Doody 1992).

"Because of the threat of flooding to properties in Aldeburgh and the agricultural land lying below the 5 metre contour in the valley of the Rive Alde, a cost benefit analysis was carried out for the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (the grant-aiding body), by the University of East Anglia (Turner et al. 1990). The analysis resulted in the conclusion that the benefits associated with the avoidance of agricultural loss, property and environmental damage, and heritage/recreational losses were in excess of the costs of a full sea defence scheme.

However, in reaching this conclusion the conservation value of the area was based on advice which assumed that the existing interest was such that it should be protected. No doubt this view was based, not only on the nature conservation value of Orfordness (NNR, SSSI, RSPB reserve) but also the high landscape quality (AONB, Heritage Coast). The evolution of the structure of Orfordness has been described in a number of papers, (Steers 1926; Anon 1966, Carr 1970 and Fuller & Randall 1988) and its dynamic nature stressed. Despite this, its natural evolution was not included in the costed options associated with defining the sea defence strategies.

It is perhaps understandable, given the historical perspective referred to above, that this should be the position adopted by those advising on the environmental considerations. Not only does it confirm the value attached to the existing habitats and landscape but also, given the uncertainties of the results of a major breach, it has a reasonably predictable outcome. In taking this line it also reinforces the traditional engineering view, associated with maintaining the existing line of defence. However, looked at from a different perspective, which accepts change as a natural and perhaps healing force in coastal situations, the cost-benefit ratio might have been different."

Comment: The general issues raised here are dealt with in more detail in Chapter (All the above pictures taken during a visit by JP Doody, October 2002 in the company of the Property Manager Grant Lohoar).

back to the top

Monitoring

Monitoring has been undertaken at this site for many years. During the 25 years to 1989, Randall and Fuller visited the site annually, often several times per year covering all seasons. In 1969 a vegetation map was prepared from 1964 aerial photographs at 1:5500 scale. In the summer of 1981, 10 vegetation transects were positioned to include all 5 of the intact shingle plant communities shown on an earlier map. Then 45 (10 m²) quadrats were recorded at the middle point of each vegetation zone. Presence/absence and species’ percentage cover were recorded, along with pebble size, litter type and disturbance. Ridges and lows were treated separately.

Subsequently a continuous ribbon of (2 m²) quadrats was run along a transect line placed across the widest part of the Orfordness spit. The percentage vegetation cover was estimated within each quadrat and the percentage of fine shingle was visually assessed. The beach profile along the transect was recorded, using a self-reducing tachometer to measure distance and level. From the centre of each quadrat which spanned the crest of a ridge or the trough of a hollow, a shingle sample was taken for sieve analysis. In all, 93 quadrats were recorded from between the riverside strandline and the seaward storm crest, and 21 shingle samples were taken (see Figure Orfordness 14 for the location of the transects).

Figure Orfordness 14 Location of transects recorded for their vegetation

In the following decade 1990-1999, visits by the research workers were less frequent. Since the NT acquired Orfordness records of the management and ecology, especially the fauna and most particularly the birds have been kept, supplemented by the LIFE project studies identified above. Return visits to the site in 1998 augmented the earlier work and the results have been synthesised to give a picture of the evolving management of the site (Randall & Fuller 2001).

The issues posed by this site, not least in relation to the need to consider a less interventionist approach to sea defence may have important lessons for other areas. Details are given in the separate Annexes for the other casework studies. In addition the managed realignment is also being monitored for mudflat accretion, vegetation establishment, invertebrate colonisation and bird usage. This is covered in the Guide ‘Coastal Habitat Restoration, towards good practice’.

back to the top

References:

Anon, 1966. Orford Ness, A selection of maps mainly by John Norden, Presented to J.A. Steers, Heffer & Sons, Cambridge.

Carr, A.P. 1970. The evolution of Orfordness, Suffolk, before 1600 AD: geomorphological evidence. Zeitschrift fur Geomorphologie, New Series, 14, 289-300.

Carr, A.P., 1969. The growth of Orford spit: cartographical and historical evidence from the sixteenth century. Geographical Journal, 135: 28-39.

Cutting, P. 2000. A Report on the Influence of Nesting Gulls on the Shingle Ridges and Vegetation, Orfordness, Suffolk. Easton College, Norwich. [Report available from the National Trust Orfordness web site @ http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/orfordness ].

Doody, J.P. 1992. Sea defence and nature conservation: threat or opportunity. Journal of Aquatic Conservation, 2, 275-283

Evans, P. (Undated Report). The Effects of Nesting Gulls on the Shingle Vegetation at Orford Ness, Suffolk. School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich. [Report available from the National Trust Orfordness web site @ http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/orfordness ].

Fuller, R.M. & Randall, R.E. 1988 The Orford Shingles, Suffolk, UK - Classic Conflicts in Coastline Management. Biological Conservation 46, 95-114.

Randall, R.E. & Fuller, R.M., 2001. The Orford shingles, Suffolk, UK: evolving solutions in coastline management. 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, 242-260.

Steers, J.A. 1926. Orford Ness: a study in coastal physiography. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, 37B, 306-325.

Turner, R.K., Bateman, I. & Brooke, J.S. 1990. Valuing the benefits of coastal defence: A case study of the Aldeburgh sea defence scheme. In: Ecological Evaluation and Economic Evaluation. Eds. A. Coker & C. Richards, Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex Polytechnic, 55-81.