An important daytime recreational site and a sanctuary for wildlife
Introduction
1) On 8 May 2025, for two hours, the clubs at Bewl Water were invited to view some proposals put forward by Salomons UK, the company which manages Bewl Water. On 9 May 2025, for five hours and 10 May 2025, for three hours, close residents were invited to view the exhibition. Lamberhurst Parish Council, Wadhurst Parish Council, Ticehurst Parish Council and Goudhurst Parish Councils did not receive a letter asking them to attend. Wadhurst Parish Council received an oral invitation when members met the managers’ agent at another event.
2) Overall, very few people were asked to attend and at the event there was no literature available about the proposals. There were some confusing statements on boards which were on display. No details of the responses that were taken at or after the event have
been released to the public as far as the Friends of Bewl Water are aware. However, in a submission to Wealden District Council for the conversion of the clubhouse into eleven holiday lets, it was claimed that their proposals had been ‘well received’.
3) The members of Wadhurst Parish Council have been concerned for many years about inappropriate development at Bewl Water. They did not believe the proposals had been well received, as the views of the few people who had attended indicated the opposite. It was known that all but one of the clubs at Bewl Water were hostile to the proposals and the other club had reservations about the proposals. The members of Wadhurst Parish Council considered it significant that if the proposals had been well received why no details of this claimed consultation exercise have ever been revealed. This had been promised. The Council decided to consult the public themselves. They instructed Survey
Mechanics, a market research company, accredited by the Market Research Society, to organise a survey for them. Survey Mechanics did not charge for their services. Later Ticehurst Parish Council helpfully agreed to share the costs of the survey with Wadhurst Parish Council. The survey was advertised on the Internet, through social media and there were stands at eight local events. The survey ran from 22 October to 4 December 2025. 1,065 people took part. The overwhelming majority of the respondents answered all the questions. Others answered only some of the questions.
4) The managers of Bewl Water were invited to take part in the exercise. This would have enabled them to have sought to amend questions or add questions. The managers declined to take part in any way, at any time.
5) Costs of the survey were as follows. Leaflets and distribution £985. Literature £212. Hall/event charges £332.40. These costs have been divided between the two parish councils.
6) The company who assessed the results was able to use control groups, which they knew had not been interfered with, to see if someone had tried to interfere with the results by making multiple responses. The actual results on the control group results were near identical to the overall results, which indicates no party appears to have tried to interfere with the results. The results report takes the 896 people who completed the survey fully and using industry formulae calculates the margin of error is 3.12% at a 95% confidence level. 90.2% of those who responded lived within 10 miles of Bewl Water. 66.6% lived in a nearby parish. As a result, the Friends of Bewl Water believe the survey
gives an accurate assessment of the views of the local population.
7) Wadhurst Parish Council and Ticehurst Parish Council have remained neutral during the consultation period. This results summary has been drafted by the Friends of Bewl Water from the information that has been made publicly available.
The full survey
8) A copy of the formal report about the Survey results can be found on Wadhurst Parish Council website, Ticehurst Parish Council website and the Friends of Bewl Water website. 2026 (01) Bewl Water 2025 survey final results
The findings
9) The key findings were:
10) Question 1 was about awareness of the previous consultation
• 83% were unaware of the Markerstudy Masterplan Consultation exercise
• 94.2% did not attend the event
• 5.1% attended the event
11) Question 2 was about how often the person visited Bewl Water.
• 27.1% visited at least once a week
• 21.5% visited less than once a week but at least once a month
• 43.2% visited less than once a month but at least once a year
12) Question 3 Why do you not visit Bewl Water more often? (the question was asked for those who visited the site less than once a month.)
• 40.1% Parking charges
• 14.3% Poor facilities ((This figure adds together those who selected the ‘Poor facilities’ option and those who mentioned poor facilities
in their comment.)
• 9.1% Concerned about water quality (blue-green algae etc.)
13) Question 4 Is the top priority for Bewl Water to preserve it as a nature reserve?
• 88.7% Agree
• 11.3% Disagree
14) Question 5 The clubs should be prioritised over providing tourists with overnight accommodation.
• 87.7% Agree
• 12.2% Disagree
15) Question 6 Whilst daytime tourist facilities should be improved, there should be no more overnight tourist accommodation created.
• 75.9% Agree
• 24.1% Disagree
16) Question 7 Providing overnight tourist accommodation is more important than preserving the area for wildlife.
• 92.4% Disagree
• 7.6% Agree
17) Question 8 Providing training opportunities for sailing, rowing, canoeing etc. is very important.
• 81.2% Agree
• 18.7% Disagree
18) Question 9 Bewl Water’s dark skies should be protected from light pollution.
• 89.7% Agree
• 10.3% Disagree
19) Question 10 Bewl Water’s tranquillity should be protected from noise pollution.
• 90.9% Agree
• 9.2% Disagree
20) Question 11 What activities do you take part in at Bewl Water?
• 87.3% Walking
• 47.7% Dog walking
• 34.1% Cycling
• 33.0% Birdwatching
• 12.6% Sailing
• 9.0% Fishing
• 6.5% Canoeing
• 6.1% Horse riding
• 4.4% Rowing
• 13% Something else
21) Question 13 If the facilities were improved, would you take advantage of any of the following?
• 79.6% Café/restaurant
• 29.0% Sailing
• 24.3% Canoeing
• 16.4% Rowing
22) Question 14 Which is more important, tranquillity or accommodation?
• 88.9% Tranquillity
• 11.1% Accommodation
23) Question 15 Should the Outdoor Centre at Bewl Water continue as an educational centre for disadvantaged young people or be converted to a hotel?
• 90.1% Continue as an educational centre
• 1.3% Converted to a hotel
24) Question 16 Should the former Sailing and Water Sports clubhouse be converted into 11 holiday lets?
• 81.4% No
• 7.7% Yes
• 10.9% Not sure
There is just over a page of comments, see page 68 of the report.
25) Question 18 Do you approve the actions of Wealden District Council planning officials in recommending the granting of planning permission for [accommodation] at Bewl Water.
• 75.8% Disapprove
• 24.4% Approve
26) Question 19 Should Bewl Water have its own Planning policy?
• 53.8% Yes
• 14.6% No
• 31.6% Not sure
27) Question 20 Do you have any other comments regarding planning at Bewl Water?
There are then 17 pages of comments, which are available to view.
28) Question 21 Do you think the parking charges are:
• 59.4% Expensive
• 31.4% About right
• 1.3% Cheap
• 7.9% Not sure
29) Question 22 If the parking charges were reduced, would you visit Bewl Water more often?
• 58.2% Yes
• 41.8% No
30) Question 23 Where do you live?
• 66.6% Locally (nearby parishes)
• 23.6% Within 10 miles
• 6.3% Between 10 and 20 miles away
31) Question 24-26 were questions about age etc.
32) Question 27 asked for other comments
There are then 16 pages of comments, which are available to view.
33) Question 28 asked whether the respondent had a connection with the company that manages Bewl Water leisure facilities or with companies associated with the it.
• 908 people had no connection
• One person worked at Bewl Water
• No one had any connection with One Warwick Park Hotel, Salomon’s Estate or the Markerstudy group.
• Eight had a friend or relative at one of the above
• Six pressed/wrote in the comment box. Three left it blank, one said they worked at the dam and two made general comments about Bewl Water.
Perhaps the most interesting figure was the 22 people who declined to answer the question. The question is posed why would someone who had no connection with Bewl Water decline to answer the question. The 22 people indicates that it is not possible to
say how many people had a connection with Bewl Water or associated companies.
The comments
34) There were a number of places in the survey where comments could be made. Over 1,520 comments were made. They make very interesting reading. Many stand out like the two below.
‘I no longer work at BEWL but did for many years. This reservoir was created for water supply but full consideration was given to Conservation, Access and Recreation interests – under previous acts and as later embodied in the Environment Act 1995 and the Water
Industry Act 1991, and the Code of Practice for Conservation, Access and Recreation (CAR) both during development and subsequent management by Southern Water up until the 2007 lease transferred the management of these interests to the tenants. It was accepted that the creation of reservoirs can have a major disruption on the flooded valley and surrounding land and local aero and it was deemed essential that the organisations responsible for this disruption gave back to the community the assurance and proof that these interests were not only safeguarded, but also managed in a manner that allowed all to flourish despite the conflicts that could exist between them. Whilst desirable to cover its own costs, the running of the BEWL Estate was not regarded as a money making venture. The balance of the CAR interests was a
demanding exercise requiring an understanding of all interests and a willingness to engage with all who represented any of the CAR interests as well as local residents, communities and adjoining landowners. Representative group meetings took place routinely providing a forum where both existing interests and the relationship between them, as well as new proposals could be reviewed or discussed , and such meetings played an important part in the decision making process. Mistakes were made from time to time but the process of trialling new proposals with a willingness to discontinue the trial if they proved detrimental to the existing CAR interests was essential.
Leasing the estate and interests out in 2007 introduced the profit making element which so evidently has had such a detrimental effect on many of the existing access and recreational (including educational) interests and continually challenges the conservation/environmental interests with the threat of irreversible damage ever present. The loss of the sports council funded water users clubhouse and the lottery
funded outdoor centre, both created to enhance ‘access and recreation/education’ would be lamentable and damage to ‘conservation’ including biodiversity, landscape, and night skies would not be acceptable.’
‘Bewl Water is a beautiful, picturesque location. I love the tranquillity when walking here. It’s wonderful seeing the wildlife living freely here. When friends and family visit us, we take them down to Bewl for a walk and they all love the place. It’s a very special, unique spot. The wildlife and countryside should not be disrupted. It should be protected as a Nature Reserve. Building anything here is going to disrupt not only the
atmosphere, but also the vegetation, all wildlife and will pollute the area. Not good for the environment either.’
35) The Friends of Bewl Water hope to collate the comments into groups so that the various comments on an issue can be seen together.
The future
36) The Friends of Bewl Water aim to build on the information gained from the survey and look forward to:
Distributing the results of this survey to the general public and the authorities both locally and nationally.
Maintaining their excellent relations with South-East Water and seeking improve their relations with Southern Water.
Taking all steps they can to improve the management at Bewl Water.
Safeguarding the wildlife at Bewl Water, particularly the at risk birds.
Protecting and improving the landscape and water at the site.
Working through the Friends of Bewl Water User group to foster and improve the recreational clubs at Bewl Water.
Educating as many as people as possible about the importance of Bewl Water.
Educating the significant minority who believe that the ecologically fragile site at Bewl Water can safely accommodate overnight visitors.
The full aims of the Friends of Bewl Water can be found on their website.
Thanks
37) It is clear that the local community should be very grateful to Peter Martin of Survey Mechanics for doing all this work without charge. Friends of Bewl Water express their thanks to him and all those who attended the events, worked to make the events successful and completed the survey.
For a PDF copy of this leaflet click here – 2026 (01) Consultation results Friends Leaflet Final
