Return to
Main Menu

Photographs by Peter Dalrymple

The Threat That Mercifully Passed Us By....

Whitstable breathed a sigh of relief on Friday 9 November 2007, when a predicted North Sea tidal surge hit the North Kent coast but failed to breach the town's sea defences. It was a close call and, for older readers, it will have brought back memories of the dramatic flood of 1953 when a similar surge submerged vast areas of central Whitstable.

Thanks to photos kindly supplied by Peter Dalrymple, we can now relive the moments of 9 November and assess just how close we came to another disaster.

The Neptune Beach on 9th November 2007

But, first, it might be useful to consider a few technical matters.....

What is a Storm Surge?.....

Storm surges are caused when a deep depression passes over a large body of water such as the North Sea. At the centre of the depression, air rises sharply creating low atmospheric pressure and generating strong winds that swirl around the eye of the storm. These effects cause the sea to rise beneath the depression and the wind may then drive the surge of water towards nearby coastlines. The surge hits different coastlines at different times. In the case of a depression over the North Sea, the surge can sweep southward down the east coast affecting the North of England, East Anglia and Kent in turn. As one of the last ports of call, Whitstable is likely to get an increasingly accurate assessment of the situation as events unfold.  

Of course, if there is no land in the way, a surge can peter out without too much consternation. However, the North Sea is a relatively small body of water and a severe surge can collide with the coastlines of Britain and continental Europe within a relatively short space of time. It's impact can be more severe in areas like the Thames estuary which have 'shallow water' coastlines. In such cases, there is no buffer until the water hits the sea defences.  The situation can also be accentuated if the surge is funneled through a narrow waterway and, as we know, the North Sea does taper towards the English Channel.

Timing is all important. If the worst of the surge hits the coast at low tide, there is less chance of a disaster. However, if it all occurs at high tide, the danger is vastly increased. Normal tides vary in height throughout the year and the worst case scenario crops up when a surge coincides with an exceptionally high tide.

Well planned and maintained sea defences should cope with the rise in sea water. However, there is also another factor to consider..... ie wave action. This can cause the sea to top the defences even though the height of sea walls is sufficient to cope with the general surge of water. It can also damage defences and open a path for more general flooding.    

Wave action is generated by wind operating on the surface of the sea. By their very nature, storm surges are invariably accompanied by high winds as air swirls around the depression. Wave action is at its worst when the wind is able to sweep unhindered across the sea for a very long distance before reaching the coastline. The most 'open' path is known as the line of maximum fetch. The most dangerous wind direction for Whitstable (ie our own line of maximum fetch)  is North/North Easterly. This angle enables the wind to sweep across open sea for many miles before hitting our beaches.

So, it's all down to a combination of factors.... the severity of the depression, the height of the resulting surge of water, the timing of high tide, the height of the normal tide, the strength of the wind and the wind direction. In 1953, the Gods contrived to produce the worst combination.... and, on Friday  9 November 2007, we all held our breath as meteorologists warned of a broadly similar set of circumstances.

Now, using Peter Dalrymple's photos, let's take a look at what actually happened....

The Rise in Sea Level....

Peter's shot below captures the scene at the harbour with the water edging towards the rim of the South Quay. The storm surge had combined with an above average high tide to produce scenes that many of our younger readers may never have witnessed before ....

   
Water approaches the harbour rim

 
Warnings from the Met Office enabled local fishermen to prepare

A number of vessels were also moored slightly away form the quay wall.... particularly on the more vulnerable south quay. Even so, it was an anxious time for fishermen as boats were tossed by wind and waves..... 

It was all a little different from the story that John Harman related to me about the the harbour of 1953! John's brother, (George Harman) received  a belated warning of the danger and, fearful that his new fishing boat (Mon Rêve) might be damaged against the harbour wall or thrown onto the quayside, he boarded the vessel and rode out the storm in the centre of the harbour basin!   

The Beach and the Storm.....

The high sea level, gale force winds and wave action provided a severe test of our current day sea defences.  Since 1953, the shingle beaches of Central Whitstable have been raised and widened. These enhancements proved adequate to repel the storm surge of a week ago..... 

Whitstable beach ravaged by wind and waves but the high shingle levels kept the sea at bay

Of course, some local residents simply had to go about their normal daily business....

Thanks Stef. Once again I have replicated both your message and my reply in the Visitors Book as I think it raises interesting discussion points and gives us some ideas for a future article.

I take your point and agree that it would be nice to look back and compare the sea defences with 1953. However, as an amateur web site, it is quite difficult to muster the resources to handle that kind of research at short notice when we cover such a wide spectrum of other issues. 

Initially, the article was intended as a pictorial to show the surge to Whitstable Natives around the globe. However, as I had some spare moments, I decided to add a few explanations. This included the three key changes since 1953 - an enhanced wall, higher shingle beach and heavy wooden groynes. To go further than that would have required a lot of extra work and that was simply beyond me in a short space of time. Storm Surges simply aren't scheduled like Oyster Festivals and such articles have a limited shelf life before they are removed from the site.

Maybe, we could do a permanent article on the web site which builds on Brian Smith's 'History of the Shoreline Article' and discusses sea defence in general. However, it would take time. To investigate '1953' from a deeper technical perspective, we would need maps, design diagrams and photos etc. We would also need to study the idiosyncrasies of individual sections of the coast and get expert comment. 

On top of all that, we would also need to bear in mind that the sea defences are constantly under review and  consider the future. That brings a lot of controversial issues into question and it really is vital that what we say is accurate. For example, there are unofficial ideas for a yacht marina at Long Beach which would provide a form of sea defence for a section of coastline.

I also have some personal observations that might also prove controversial!  With global warming, rising sea levels, sinking land and escalating costs, I think we may be heading towards a different approach to sea defence issues. In fact, for some localities, I wonder whether we might end up with 'sea precautions' rather than sea defence.

The reason I mention this is that risks seem to be assessed using terms such as a 'one in 10 year occurrence' and a 'one in a 100 year occurrence' etc. This allows finance departments to compare the cost of providing sea defences with the cost of allowing a flood. In other words a bean counter could argue that the cost of building and maintaining a massive sea wall for 100 years exceeds the cost of recovering from one flood in areas with small populations (provided that there are efficient warning systems to prevent loss of life). Thus, sea defence work could become selective.

I am sure some people will say that I am talking nonsense here. However, I have a feeling that this type of a approach is applied to some rivers around the world. Rather than constantly heighten and strengthen river banks, some authorities actually allow rivers to flood into designated areas as a safety valve. Obviously, those areas become no-go localities for building and anything that IS built there must provide its own flood precautions.

If you apply those musings to Whitstable, you could pick out some developments and ask... 'Why was anything built there'! The end result could be some very unhappy people.

All this has massive impacts on the way life might be in the future and such discussions are really too much for a short article on the 2007 surge.