62
P.A.G. Watts
On reflection this is perhaps a trite example, but it does illustrate the dynamic
nature of our landscape, and the extent to which man has influenced it, particularly in
the past couple of centuries. Our attempts to change and control the natural processes of
coastal erosion, inundation and deposition are now being re-evaluated There is a
growing need to manage “hard cash” investments in “hard landscapes” with much
greater sensitivity and with increased regard for the environmental, economic and sociocultural impacts of these activities. Nevertheless, whatever the regime employed,
whether managed retreat, natural accretion or “hard engineering”, the need for reliable
up-to-date topographical information is a vital component of the decision informing,
decision-making and decision-taking processes that are at the heart of properly managed
Coastal Zone activity. This is a sphere where Ordnance Survey has over 200 years of
experience, and where, in today’s Information Technology-led environment there is
scope for OS to make a significant contribution to best practice.
A Map-Oriented Appraisal for the Coastal Zone
From a surveying and mapping perspective the Coastal Zone represents a critical
interface between the technological (and user) facets of the topographic map and those
of the nautical chart. Inevitably then, one of the problems facing those who operate in
the Coastal Zone is that of managing the disparity between these two, often overlapping,
information sources. The map is principally land based and topography-oriented. It is
underpinned by surveys such as those undertaken by OS, that extend typically down to
mean low water, and tend to reflect the sea as a limit to the land.
By contrast, the charting of the seaward dimension, ostensibly from above high
water out to whatever offshore limits are defined for a particular Coastal Zone, treats the
land as “bounding” the sea. In Great Britain the recording of this marine “landscape” is
primarily the domain of the Hydrographic Office, supported according to local
circumstance by port, harbour and other inshore management agencies.
The Coastal Zone is, of course, also the interface where land-based activities
deliver their impact to the sea, and where in-shore activities and coastal hydro-dynamics
contribute an influence on the coastal landscape and what happens on and near to it.
This zone is therefore, by definition, one of intense activity and sustained pressure for
change. In the contemporary environment the growing threat of global warming is
pointing to a considerable likelihood of rising sea levels. Allied changes to climatic
conditions may also be leading to alterations in marine currents and flows, and to the
increased incidence of storm and severe storm conditions. All of these circumstances
pose threats to the stability or predictability of coastal geography and its evolution.
Simultaneously there are continued and growing pressures for man-made
development and more intensive use of near-coast land. Demands for reclamation,
development exploitation and new uses for land at the coastal margins and for the
construction of “land protection” engineering to safeguard these developments are
constant issues and concerns for those involved in the management of the coastal zone.
Conversely there is also a growing awareness of the sensitivity of the coastal
environment. This viewpoint is backed by lobbying that now influences the highest
levels of organised society. It demands a more sympathetic, “natural-process-tolerant”
approach to managing what are frequently fragile coastlines. Often these “green”
P.A.G. Watts
On reflection this is perhaps a trite example, but it does illustrate the dynamic
nature of our landscape, and the extent to which man has influenced it, particularly in
the past couple of centuries. Our attempts to change and control the natural processes of
coastal erosion, inundation and deposition are now being re-evaluated There is a
growing need to manage “hard cash” investments in “hard landscapes” with much
greater sensitivity and with increased regard for the environmental, economic and sociocultural impacts of these activities. Nevertheless, whatever the regime employed,
whether managed retreat, natural accretion or “hard engineering”, the need for reliable
up-to-date topographical information is a vital component of the decision informing,
decision-making and decision-taking processes that are at the heart of properly managed
Coastal Zone activity. This is a sphere where Ordnance Survey has over 200 years of
experience, and where, in today’s Information Technology-led environment there is
scope for OS to make a significant contribution to best practice.
A Map-Oriented Appraisal for the Coastal Zone
From a surveying and mapping perspective the Coastal Zone represents a critical
interface between the technological (and user) facets of the topographic map and those
of the nautical chart. Inevitably then, one of the problems facing those who operate in
the Coastal Zone is that of managing the disparity between these two, often overlapping,
information sources. The map is principally land based and topography-oriented. It is
underpinned by surveys such as those undertaken by OS, that extend typically down to
mean low water, and tend to reflect the sea as a limit to the land.
By contrast, the charting of the seaward dimension, ostensibly from above high
water out to whatever offshore limits are defined for a particular Coastal Zone, treats the
land as “bounding” the sea. In Great Britain the recording of this marine “landscape” is
primarily the domain of the Hydrographic Office, supported according to local
circumstance by port, harbour and other inshore management agencies.
The Coastal Zone is, of course, also the interface where land-based activities
deliver their impact to the sea, and where in-shore activities and coastal hydro-dynamics
contribute an influence on the coastal landscape and what happens on and near to it.
This zone is therefore, by definition, one of intense activity and sustained pressure for
change. In the contemporary environment the growing threat of global warming is
pointing to a considerable likelihood of rising sea levels. Allied changes to climatic
conditions may also be leading to alterations in marine currents and flows, and to the
increased incidence of storm and severe storm conditions. All of these circumstances
pose threats to the stability or predictability of coastal geography and its evolution.
Simultaneously there are continued and growing pressures for man-made
development and more intensive use of near-coast land. Demands for reclamation,
development exploitation and new uses for land at the coastal margins and for the
construction of “land protection” engineering to safeguard these developments are
constant issues and concerns for those involved in the management of the coastal zone.
Conversely there is also a growing awareness of the sensitivity of the coastal
environment. This viewpoint is backed by lobbying that now influences the highest
levels of organised society. It demands a more sympathetic, “natural-process-tolerant”
approach to managing what are frequently fragile coastlines. Often these “green”