• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15
  16. 16

"What management is there at Freshwater Bay and how effective is it?"

Extracts from this document...


Introduction to the Investigation The purpose of this investigation is to test the following research question: "What management is there at Freshwater Bay and how effective is it?" Fundamentally this means that I am going to study the area of Freshwater Bay then test and examine what positive or negative effects the management has on the area. My research and findings are going to test the question to find an answer. In order for me to answer this question I am going to break it down into two main sections: * In what way does management of the bay change it from east to west? In this study I am going to examine how the management schemes are effecting the beach, and in what ways it its doing this. * What is the main land use behind the bay and how is management protecting it? In this study I am going to examine the land use at Freshwater Bay and see what the management is being used to protect. Location Location of the area: The Isle of Wight is and island 380km�, and is situated off the southern coast of England in the English Channel. The island itself is represented as one of the counties of England and has a population of 111,300 people. Freshwater Bay is situated on the South East coast of the Isle of Wight. The A3055 is the main road that runs along the west cliff top and down through the Freshwater area. ...read more.


> 2 stacks formed in area of bay, sign of heavy erosion in area. At low tide level a wave cut platform can be seen showing more signs of erosion. Studying this evidence it is clear that where there is management and beach security there is very little to no erosion or recession, but where there is neglect and lasse fair techniques there is heavy erosion. I had predicted on this finding, and it appears the management schemes in the area are doing their job to a high standard. Photographs - taken from a Medina Valley sub-site Figure Analysis DR5 Shows where the management area stops. Housing development shown to be very close to cliff and how cliff is slumping. Other management techniques are shown, litterbins can be seen, shows high levels of care for area. Sea wall can be seen, 1 foot above label of pavement and holds back sediment washed up by sea effectively. Second set of housing can be seen, appear very close to edge of cliff, area of very little or no management, chance of housing disappearing in near future. Photo clear in showing effectiveness of the management in the bay area. Area of bay with little management being rapidly eroded, side with management very little signs of erosion and no erosion at all. DR6 Shows eastern cliff face and lack of management. Shows where old road used to be and how much has been eroded. 2 stacks on cliff point there due to heavy erosion taking away large area of cliff. ...read more.


Null hypothesis: H� - no significant difference in beach material. Alternative- H� - slight difference in beach material. I have then put my results from my recording sheets into the table below: Site 2 Rank Site 5 Rank 72 19 49.3 10 63 16 59.6 15 37 4 45.3 9 45 8 69 18 55.3 12 34.6 2 62.3 14 52.3 11 24.6 1 40.6 5 57 13 68.6 17 43.3 6 101.6 20 34.6 2 44.6 7 Total= 95 (?R1) Total= 114 (?R2) U= test statistic N1+N2= number in each sample ?R1 and ?R2= sum of ranking in each sample Formulas: Site 2 Site 5 U1= N1N2+1/2N1(N1+1)- ?R1 U2= N1N2+1/2N1(N1+1)- ?R2 U1= 100+111 - 95 U2= 100+111 - 114 2 2 U1=60.5 U2=41.5 Looking at the Mann Whitney U tables 23 is the significance value because we have 10 values, and we have a significance value of 95%. The smallest value 41.5 is slightly larger than 23 so I am 5% sure that there is a difference between material sizes in site 2 and in site 5, this means I have to accept the null hypothesis. From my results I can see that there is a difference between the sites in term of sediment sizes. At the sites that have management there are very large sizes of sediment, which is due to the particles being trapped by the groynes and the sea wall. Whereas the nearer the sample is taken from the eastern cliff the smaller the sediment size is. This is yet another aid in showing how effective the management schemes are in the Freshwater Bay area. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Coastal Landforms section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Coastal Landforms essays

  1. How and Why is Sheringham Protected from the Sea?

    Sheringham- Wavelength= 3.13 X 7.1 X 1 = 22.223 Wave Energy= 740 X (0.3 X 0.3) X 22.223 = 1480.0518 The waves at Sheringham are very nearly destructive as the mean number of waves breaking per minute is around 8.15 which is nearer to 10.1 than 5.9.

  2. "An investigation into the methods of coastal management along Brighton's Coastline and the reasons ...

    However from then on the depth of the sand augmented rapidly, because at 25 and 30 metres the sand was 105 and 135 centimetres deep in that order. I believe that coastal protection for site 1 remains unvarying in the eastern side - the groyne seems to avert longshore drift from eroding the place.

  1. North Stradbroke Island Report

    He came within ten kilometres of Point Lookout and named it, however, he assumed it as part of the mainland (Gold Coast City Council). Conflicting sources believe that Matthew Flinders came to Moreton Bay in 1799 (Gold Coast City Council)

  2. How and Why ChristChurch Bay is Manged

    Hard engineering has had a significant impact on Christchurch bay. Why this hypothesis needs to be answered? First, to be able to answer the question, how is Christchurch bay managed, it is important to have an insight on how attempts to manage it has turned out.

  1. Hengistbury Head investigation.

    This is a graph I have drawn to show the mean volume of rocks at location 1 and I will do the same for the rocks at location 6. This is a line graph to compare the increase in Volume of the rocks at location 1 and 6 this is my data presentation for the beach work locations.

  2. Investigate the difference in density of limpets on a sheltered rocky shore and on ...

    As the fetch is also relatively small the strength of wave action must also have been less as this is what allowed more limpets to cling on to the rocks successfully and not fall off. I also observed that there was a more diverse species habitation.

  1. How and Why are Sea Defences being used in North Norfolk?

    Sheringham My beach profile and graph for Sheringham show that the beach slowly increases at an angle of 5� and then at 25 meters the angle suddenly increases at a steeper slope. The beach angle suddenly increases and there is a man made defence of pebbles and rip rap; humans deposited the material.

  2. ‘The costs of extending sea defences at Walton-on-the-Naze are too high and the benefits ...

    This is called the negative multiplier effect. This is shown in the diagram labelled 'The Negative Multiplier Effect'. The Slumping Which Will Hopefully Not Happen Anymore For Walton to be worth saving for economical reasons it has to have lots of sources of income, the most important of these is the beach.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work