Managed realignment In the United Kingdom  the main reason for implementation of managed realignment is generally to improve coastal stability, essentially replacing artificial ‘hard’ coastal defences with natural ‘soft’ coastal landforms (Pethick 2002). According to  University of Southampton researchers Matthew M. Linham and Robert J. Nicholls "one of the biggest drawbacks of managed realignment is that the option requires land to be yielded to the sea . "  One of the benefits, however, is that the process can help protect areas of land further inland by creating natural spaces that act as buffers to absorb water or dampen the force of waves. Managed realignment has also been used to mitigate for loss of intertidal habitat. Although land reclamation has been an important factor for salt marsh loss in the UK in the past (Allen 1992) the majority of current salt marsh loss in the UK is believed to be due to erosion. This erosion may involve coastal squeeze , where protective sea walls prevent the landward migration of salt marsh in response to sea level rise when sediment supply is limited. Salt marshes are protected under the EU Habitats Directive as well as providing habitat for a number of species protected by the Birds Directive (see Natura 2000). Following this guidance, the UK’s biodiversity action plan aims to prevent net losses to the area of salt marsh present in 1992. It is, therefore, a legal requirement that all losses in marsh area must be compensated by replacement habitat with equivalent biological characteristics.Crooks et al. 2001 This equates to the need to restore approximately 1.4 km² of salt marsh habitat per year in the UK. One of the major reasons cited for the slow pace of current salt marsh restoration in the UK is the uncertainty associated with the practice (Foresight).
Managed realignment In the United Kingdom , the main reason for implementation of managed realignment is generally to improve coastal stability, essentially replacing artificial ‘hard’ coastal defences with natural ‘soft’ coastal landforms (Pethick 2002). According to the University of Southampton researchers Matthew M. Linham and Robert J. Nicholls "one of the biggest drawbacks of managed realignment is that the option requires land to be yielded to the sea " . One of the benefits, however, is that the process can help protect areas of land further inland by creating natural spaces that act as buffers to absorb water or dampen the force of waves. Managed realignment has also been used to mitigate for loss of intertidal habitat. Although land reclamation has been an important factor for salt marsh loss in the UK in the past (Allen 1992) nost current salt marsh loss in the UK is believed to be due to erosion. The erosion may involve coastal squeeze in which protective sea walls prevent the landward migration of salt marsh in response to sea level rise when sediment supply is limited. Salt marshes are protected under the EU Habitats Directive as well as providing habitat for a number of species protected by the Birds Directive (see Natura 2000). Following that guidance, the British biodiversity action plan aims to prevent net losses to the area of salt marsh present in 1992. It is, therefore, a legal requirement for all losses in marsh area to be compensated by replacement habitat with equivalent biological characteristics.Crooks et al. 2001 That equates to the need to restore approximately 1.4 km² of salt marsh habitat per year in the UK. One of the major reasons cited for the slow pace of current salt marsh restoration in the UK is the uncertainty associated with the practice (Foresight).
A
,
A
the
D
.
A
.
R
the majority of
nost
R
This
The
R
, where
in which
R
this
that
R
UK’s
British
R
that
for
R
must
to
R
This
That