What a negative opinion about L'Ancresse wall

'One of the key questions opponents of plans to remove the eastern end of L'Ancresse wall have to consider at next week's public meeting is what will happen if they succeed.'

A full programme of proper repair and maintenance should start.

'If, after September's debate, Environment & Infrastructure is told by deputies that the anti-tank wall must be retained come hell or high water what happens next?'

E&I do what they should have been doing for years, start maintaining it and get construction engineers to work out a programme for a long-term fix, apparently they have over £1,000,000 to play with.

'The wall is still gradually falling over, no one seems to doubt that. It is the historical reasons for that collapse and the amount of effort and expense needed to keep it upright that are in dispute.'

The wall is not falling over, a couple of panels have moved slightly and the recent crack was through lack of maintenance, most of it is as straight as a die.

Your statement is in dispute.

'Some people, it seems, favour the ''do nothing'' approach. Just let the wall fall and see what happens.'

I do not know anyone who favours the do nothing approach.

'As engineers Royal Haskoning point out in their 174-page coastal defence report, that's not a sensible option. One concrete panel is bound to fail ?rst and storm waves would pour through a narrow gap to devastating effect.'

That is rubbish and no different to breaches that have occurred around the coast to other areas, Cobo for instance.

When the tide recedes effective temporary repairs are carried out. It is unlikely that a panel would fail totally during one tide.

'So the ambition has to be to keep the wall intact.

'Again Royal Haskoning are insistent that the minor repairs that have been a feature of the past few decades are simply not stopping the wall from toppling over.'

The minor repairs have been pitiful and the cost less than the overall costs of the consultants since they first came in during 1999.

E&I have allowed it to deteriorate. (Publish all the figures from 1999.)

'That, it seems, means major work, at unknown expense.

'In the meantime the beach will become a no-go area until the work is complete. And as the same forces that are undermining it now will continue the process will have to be repeated over time.'

The beach will not become a no-go area any more than when work has been carried out on other coastal breaches.

The undermining of the wall which is a slow process can be stopped

with steel piles as at the West end of the bay.

Well worth the initial outlay.

'lt could even mean a band of rock armour along the whole eastern length of the wall, forcing beach-goers well below the high water mark and hiding the cause of all the fuss.'

Deputy Brehaut's favourite scare tactic, rock armour over the length of the wall.

No need if the job was done properly.

'Those who question Environment's decision to demolish the 190m length of wall tend to look back at missed opportunities to have kept up the repairs.'

That's a rubbish statement.

E&I have failed to carry out proper maintenance and that must change.

'Perhaps they are right. But if the wall is to stay intact it is the future that counts, not the past.'

It is the future that counts, the future of the kiosk, the future of the toilets, the future of the common, the future of the golf course and the future of our heritage and history. E&I are throwing away £1,000,000 on a negative.

'A series of expensive and extensive repairs disrupting the use of the beach and ultimately leading to an intrusive barrier of rock armour seems a poor alternative to the sandy dunes supported by two rock groynes that Environment and its engineers are convinced will be created once the wall has fallen.'

How long do you think the beach will be disrupted with their project? Eighteen weeks minimum, then years before the sea pushes inland to form their bay, not guaranteed.

Two huge rock armour groynes extending 35 metres down the beach at wall height.

Even Royal Haskoning admitted their photos are only predictions.

GARY BLANCHFORD,

gblanchford@cwgsy.net