Relatives' Anguish Over Shoreline Degradation Threatening Norfolk Burial Sites
Families of people laid to rest in graves at risk from coastal erosion argue that a lack of decision on how best to address the problem is causing them unnecessary distress concerning the eternal homes of their loved ones.
A Looming Threat to Ancient Churchyards
Local authorities have identified three church graveyards in the communities of Happisburgh, Mundesley, and Trimingham as being at risk of being consumed by the sea in the coming decades.
A recent report on the situation details a series of possible actions, from taking no action to exhuming remains and reburying them in safer locations. Authorities maintain it is for the community to determine how to proceed.
“Right now we’re in limbo. It upsets me. My parents intended this to be their last home, but it isn’t going to be because of the encroaching sea.”
Projections suggest at least a portion of one churchyard could be claimed by the sea in the next 80 years, but some locals fear it will happen much sooner. “I think it’s got less than 20 years, if you look at what’s occurred in the last 30 years,” one said.
Haunted by the Ghosts of Eccles
One resident recalled a school trip to the neighbouring settlement of Eccles, which has almost entirely disappeared into the sea, including its place of worship and burial ground.
“It was possible to see human remains,” she said. “Certain people hold this romantic idea that the deceased will just get carried away to the ocean. That is not the case. Individuals will take bones as mementos and go grave robbing looking for treasures. It’s completely disrespectful.”
“I’m worried that the identical fate that befell at Eccles will occur at Happisburgh and there’ll be bones on the beach. I would feel disgusted by that.”
A Soldier's Grave in Jeopardy
Further up the shoreline is situated the burial plot of a ex-soldier killed while serving overseas. His mother expressed she lost sleep after learning her son’s grave might one day be moved.
“It truly trouble me to think this may not remain his lasting resting place,” she said. “For us it’s an significant site to visit.”
In her view, new interments should stop but says it is too soon to disturb existing graves. “My preference for now is to take no action and closely monitor, but an timely resolution needs to be made when a critical moment has been attained.”
Searching for Answers and Clarity
An absence of agreement over the timing and method to tackle the problem has resulted in grieving relatives feeling exasperated and anxious.
Some are calling for additional coastal protections to slow the inevitable erosion and to allow burials to continue for now. Others argue the time for moving graves is approaching.
“It is very emotive,” said one relative. “The official study was thorough, but now there’s confusion about how it is implemented. And all parties is avoiding responsibility over who is responsible.”
A coastal manager said the burial sites were owned and managed of the local diocese. “Ultimately it is up to them to decide the direction to take. Our role is here to assist them through that process with communities.”
It was also stated there was ample time to weigh all the choices. “We are talking decades before it starts to be lost.”
“There is no unified opinion on what should happen yet. It requires productive local conversations to find the appropriate solutions for each village.”
The possibility of losing the churches and graveyards was labeled one of “immense sorrow for the area,” but faith leaders also referenced a doctrine in life after death, offering a theological perspective on the temporal loss of sacred ground.