Kevin Pressland: The Ramsgate old hovercraft port is a novel Ecosystem and worth protection

Hoverport image Swift Aerial Photography

Green Councillor Kevin Pressland is a passionate campaigner for nature and the natural environment.  His understanding of the threats faced by the natural world is based on expertise gained from a 40-year career in horticulture, garden design and sustainable land management:

Novel ecosystems are those fundamentally changed by human activity through industry  and are now derelict and reverting to multitudes of native and non-native plants, depending where the site is and its history.

In the case of the old hoverport, it now contains primary plant species like birch and buddleia, sea buckthorn, prostrate sedums etc. This is enabling microclimates for other species to develop and gradually leading to the existing concrete surfaces deteriorating thus opening up further soil pockets for plants.

The site also contains many fruit trees and blackberries and many people enjoy foraging there. So, this old hovercraft area is a prime example of such a novel site, home to multitudes of plant species, mammals, reptiles, birds and invertebrates.

The hoverport was stopped in 1987 and officially closed in 1993.

Cars being driven onto a Hoverlloyd SRN4 hovercraft at Pegwell Bay hoverport, ©Thanet District Council SEAS Heritage Collection.

There were various ideas to use the site for a holiday park. It was also used for a while for go karting and as a lorry park for the Sally Line until 1995. Since then, the site has gradually transitioned to a novel ecosystem as outlined above. The place is loved by many people.

The hovercraft area now acts as a buffer (although ironically) for the Pegwell salt marshes which have three designations of protection Ramsar (an international designation), Special Protection Area (of national repute) and SSSI (site of special scientific interest) and the old hoverport is therefore important both as a novel biodiverse site and a buffer protection for the Pegwell Bay National Nature Reserve.

A long-tailed tit nest at Pegwell/Hoverport Photo Keith Ross

National Grid’s proposal under consideration, to use the old hovercraft area (for construction uses) will both destroy most of this area and likely make the protected salt marsh more vulnerable to pollution from machine plant and materials used by  contractors if the proposed Minster Marshes massive connector facility – the National Grid Sea Link project – goes ahead.

Please see the video outlining what would be lost at the marshes too if the planning inspectorate and ultimately the Secretary of State approve these proposals https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tps519SR34

It’s great our council is standing firm against National Grid’s proposal to use the old hoverport site as a facility. Tell your MP how you feel about this proposal whether they are a Thanet MP or elsewhere.

The whole thing makes a mockery of protection designations for nature and the report last week by the governments own ‘Office of Environment Protection’ slams the government on its poor record of nature protection and enhancement https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/jan/13/wildlife-targets-missed-england-northern-ireland-watchdog.

https://www.theoep.org.uk/news/actions-now-will-determine-whether-key-2030-environmental-targets-are-met-says-oep-report-eip

Former Hoverport Photo Mike Goldwater

Economic interests should not be allowed to counter nature’s protection and enhancement which is in all our interests. This is not to say renewable energy infrastructure projects should not be done but a more holistic approach to achievement should be the default position.

Should the connector facility gain government consent the use of a greenfield or ideally brown field site nearer to any proposed construction work, not the old hoverport site, should take precedence over compromising Pegwell national nature reserve in any way.

Ground investigation works by National Grid Photo Get Wild

Should a greenfield site be used heavy duty metal mats that have specifications for the tonnage of machine plant to be used would minimise damage to a green field soil structure by spreading load.

Also, pollution controls and catchment systems would need to be installed to counter pollution from machinery to surrounding groundwater and soil contamination whether a brown or greenfield site.

I, and many others, believe an emphasis on local energy production through the development of community energy systems should be prioritised and this can and could have the advantage of minimising voltage drop losses, genuinely reducing people’s bills long term if consumers are stakeholders in their own local community energy systems,

For example:

https://energysavingtrust.org.uk/community-energy-delivers-affordable-power/

https://communityenergyengland.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/1591956106_CommunityEnergy2030Vision.pdf

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/134139/pdf/

Our Thanet District Council is trying to modify existing council building assets to encompass solar photovoltaics, insulation etc. Thanks for that brilliant effort but I am sure we could and should go a lot further if funding is made more available from government.

This is where councils need more support, funds and encouragement from central government not onerous red tape. Please can your MP push for this approach. Why not ask them?

To have your say about Sea Link and the hoverport use register by Monday 19th January at https://national-infrastructure-consenting.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/projects/EN020026/register/register-have-your-say

 

27 Comments

    • All nuclear reactors – whether thorium or uranium require vast supplies of water for cooling. Hence the siting of Dungeness. Given that a steady supply of reliable drinking water for Northwood is a pipe dream. A nuclear reactor at the highest point of Thanet would be wholly impractical… as would housing or agriculture for the same reason!

      • Just read a bit about them and your right, its wholly impractical, but not exactly for the reasons you mentioned.

        UK want to put multiple reactors on 1 site not just 1 single reactor, so these sites ends up needing as much water as a regular size nuclear reactor. Then there is a list reasons why Manston would be unsuitable anyway with just 1.

        But these SMR’s can be used in remote locations away from large bodies of water, and the elevation of Manston is irrelevant.

  1. Every time this gentleman is hosted by this publication what he writes is prefaced by the same C.V. Why? Does the fact that his income originates in the preservation of that about which he writes make his viewpoint impartial? When the arms manufacturer writes of the need for well armed defence forces, do we not call him out for his vested interests? What about the marsh wardens who speak of preserving the ecology of Minster marshes, even though they know that once the storage unit and cable are installed Nature will claim it’s place? Just as it has done at the hoverport. These people are disingenuous at best. Should we not call them out?
    Just build the thing!

    • The ‘preface’ is there because it is an opinion column and so that par describes who is giving the opinion

      • Which raises a whole series of other questions. Starting with: “Why are his particular opinions of so great an import?”
        “Landscape gardener”? I went to Hadlow Agricultural College 45 years ago. Amenity horticulture and landscape gardening are not a good fit with ecology. How much decking and concrete has Monsieur Pressland blighted the world with?

        • Harry
          Rather than castigate my name and challenge my credentials. Look at the issue and facts based around what we are talking about.
          As you will see within the articles I always include links to back much of what I am expressing.

          • I have read the article. Along with Elke’s and those of the marsh men.
            Firstly, let me say that I do admire what has been allowed to happen in the hoverport during the past 40 years. One of the only examples of true rewilding – allowing Nature to rule alone – that has ever happened in this country.
            I am also aware of the temporary upset to the new balance in the area that the construction may cause. However, in the middle to long term a new stasis will be established and nature will again garnish the area. As it has since the installation of the first international electric cable at the bay a decade or so ago. The same goes for the marsh area.
            The fact of the matter is, there is nowhere else around Kent where this cable can reasonably come ashore. It makes sense to also build the storage station at the point of landfall. Placing a new National Grid node with a massive input/output cannot reasonably done in any but a very few places. To do so in areas of high human settlement is asking for serious trouble technologically speaking.

      • Christine Tongue and Matthew Munson don’t have prefaces. The latter would be particularly useful (not knowing the context or circumstances, it looks to me just like a blog about someone raising a son with only the occasional passing references to Thanet, while Christine’s only “qualifications” seems to be that she’s disabled and disgruntled).

    • I do not publish a CV . The publishers signify this. I am an elected district and town councillor. if you wish to challenge what i say do it on facts please.
      My old business website was http://www.kevinpressland.com, you’re welcome to view it, However it’s not relevant to the issues being discussed.

      • Nature repopulated the former hoverport.
        Nature repopulated the former power station.
        Nature repopulated the coastal defences.
        Nature will repopulate the areas that are temporarily disturbed. As it always does.

    • Harry Webb. Your attempt to question and undermine the motives of someone who has consistently made the case for the environment over that of commercial interest says more about your attitude…..un-informed bias! Are you even aware that the National Grid is foreign owned and simply motivated by profit? Some of us actually care about the environment rather than attacking those that speak out to protect it.

      • Gary.
        I have raised four children without ever having a private motor vehicle. None of them ever owned one until they married someone who had been raised in a car owning family and could not conceive of not having one. I also owned a bicycle shop for several years. Not to mention no flying for foreign holidays. Living Green and talking Green for a living are two entirely different things!
        If you want me to explain to you the science of how sea levels are not rising, carbon dioxide is plant food, how E.V. are holistically more polluting and more commercially exploitative than those which are hydrocarbon fuelled or, how the global biome is self regulating or, how reliance upon computer models is in no wise scientific; please feel free to ask.
        As to the politics of jealousy… It’s just jealousy, not moral high ground.

  2. Many many many years ago there was talking of a sports centre going down there to include watersports, the locals stamped their feet because it’d spoil their “sea views” and now look at what they’re looking at getting!

    Enjoy your views now!!!

  3. And not at all like your hair.
    I note in another publication that the bill for Manston is now £750m and has been put back.Now that Trump has flattened RSP’s backers, might we see some shocking news for some of those who were so bullish for that enterprise.
    As I have said, minimise the land take, and build the project, for the environments sake and our own energy security.

  4. Why not just use the old ferry terminal . Nothing else will ever happen with that site .apart from bretts taking it all over . Then pegwel can be left alone .

Comments are closed.