W. Whitaker — Geology of Coasts of England and Wales. 117 



At and beyond Hastings the coast is more or less protected, and the 

 Pevensey Levels, like Romney Marsh, have either sea-wall or shingle- 

 bank to keep the sea from the marshes. 



To give details of the amount of waste of land along those parts of 

 the coast treated of would involve much work of compilation : the 

 facts are to be found in Geological Survey Memoirs, in British 

 Association Reports, and in other publications, which are duly noted 

 in the Bibliographic List in the Report of the Royal Commission. 



In the above notes I have simply tried to give information as to the 

 various coastal conditions, with a general account of what is happening 

 or has happened of late years. 



General Conclusions. 



As regards what can be done to decrease the waste of land along 

 our coasts, it is clear that this must vary greatly in various places. 

 I do not speak of stopping that waste, as I believe this to be impossible. 

 The actions of atmospheric weathering are always going on every- 

 where, especially perhaps along a coast, where a free margin is 

 provided for the loss of wasted material : we cannot stop them, 

 though we may greatly delay their proceedings. There are two 

 things, however, that surely could be done quickly and could not 

 fail to have effect in many places. 



Nature has so generally put a limit to her work by the piling up of 

 shingle : surely it should be an easy matter to prevent the taking 

 away of that shingle, taken as it is for the small gain of comparatively 

 few persons at the great loss of many. 



A stop should be put to the taking away of shingle from protective 

 beaches, that is, in the great majority of places. There may be tracts 

 where the taking of shingle is practically harmless, as in the inland 

 reaches. For instance, one cannot see how the loss of some of the 

 shingle of Dungeness can in any way affect the coast, of course on 

 the understanding that nothing is touched within some distance of the 

 shore. At the same time there remains the question whether, in some 

 future change in the action of coastal eroding forces, these inland 

 masses may not be attacked by the sea and their material shifted on 

 elsewliere, in which case, of course, the stronger they are the better 

 their power of resistance. 



The second point is also a very simple one. It is inadvisable that 

 land should be ploughed up almost to the edge of cliffs, as is often the 

 case. By keeping a broad border of unbroken ground, under grass or 

 other growth, along a coast, the destructive atmospheric actions may 

 be cheeked, whereas on ploughed land there is every facility for rain 

 to sink through and for cracks to occur. On poor porous land there 

 can be practically no loss in giving up such a strip. 



Another matter is the prevention of small isolated attempts at 

 protection, often badly planned and badly carried out, and which 

 commonly result in little else than waste of money, and now and then 

 in damage to neighbouring land. It is pitiful sometimes to see these 

 feeble, useless efforts, with their waste of work. Owners of land 

 along the coast and those otherwise interested in checking coastal 

 waste should be led to understand that useful protective work can 



