Meanwhile (this doesn't look good for boaters):
...... He fully understands and is supportive of making Studland an MCZ as the most imnportant site for Spiny Seahorses and seagrass in the UK .....
The numbers of seahorses seen recently in Studland Bay are 2014, one; 2015, two; 2016, zero; 2017, one. Perhaps it’s pushing it a bit to call it the most important seahorse site in the UK?
Actually Studland Bay does host one of the largest (I think) eelgrass beds in the UK – and the beds are still expanding. Strange how it is also one of the busiest coastal anchorages as well. That does rather suggest that claims that anchoring destroys the eelgrass are a load of BS.
It is good news that the Osborne to Ryde MCZ is not being designated, although I’ve found no commentary about that. When, like Studland Bay, it was not put forward in the second tranche, Defra gave this explanation:
This site would affect a range of sectors if designated. The greatest costs would be to
recreational boating (anchoring) with approximately 36 yachting, sailing clubs and
recreational organisations using the site. This sector has raised concerns regarding safety
issues over potential anchorage restrictions in the sheltered bay which is one of few places
around the island offering protection from the strong tidal currents.
This site also includes the passenger ferry terminal which overlaps with the sheltered
muddy gravel and is immediately adjacent to the seagrass beds…….
……… We consider that further work is needed to explore the scope for developing local solutions
on this site before it can be proposed for designation.
Perhaps good sense has prevailed.
Good sense has also been applied to the Yarmouth to Cowes site: the boundaries were changed to exclude Yarmouth Harbour and the coast to the west of it, where there are eelgrass beds. This means that there should be no anchoring restrictions in the whole of the Solent proper, which is a good outcome for common sense.
So it seems that socio-economic costs are being considered, and it might be that there is all to play for in the Public Consultation over Studland Bay, and perhaps the eelgrass beds in Priory Bay. All contributions to the Public Consultation must be in by 20th July!
I was referring to safe havens, if you are seeking refuge in a gale, stipulating anchorages only, immediately leaves you open to all sorts of questions and diversions, which is the last thing you want if you are trying making an argument.Nortada,
would you care to suggest another safe anchorage protected from the prevailing SW gales between the Solent and Brixham ?
Think you and I are in different debates. I am offering thoughts on making a strong, water-tight argument.I didn't' think a ' safe haven ' term required any arguing about for a soaked, tired skipper - rather a job for an insurance accountantant safely tucked in ashore
:encouragement: Too many seem to think that they really don't have to persuade anyone and that the world will come round to see it all from their point of view as if by magic.Think you and I are in different debates. I am offering thoughts on making a strong, water-tight argument.
You are just trying to score points.
My tactic if my brief was to challenge an argument.
My only ' tactic ' here is to show the SHT for the misleading selfish shambles that it is - BORG are offering the ' watertight argument ' without any help from me !Think you and I are in different debates. I am offering thoughts on making a strong, water-tight argument.
You are just trying to score points.
My tactic if my brief was to challenge an argument.
Great initiative; thank you.
Can you please be clearer about what action can be taken? Is an email sufficient? - you say to email and complete the consultation. Yet the consultation appears to be for industrial interested parties only. BTW, your link doesn't work.
As the old saying goes ‘United we stand, divided we fall’ if all boaters fail to stand up to this the authorities will accomplish what they are pursuing, the driving of boaters from free anchorages into pay as you park areas like we have for cars. Then it’s tax payable again and again ......Why is this a sticky - ‘Cos it’s only 20 miles from the Solent?
Possibly http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?501847-New-environmental-rules-in-the-Blackwatershould become a sticky in the East Coast Forum?
Possibly The South Coast or Just The Solent should have their own sub Forums and leave Scuttlebutt for topics of greater universal interest?
Problem is too meany stickies clutter up a forum. A regular cull of dormant stickies can help.
I can add Porth Dinllaen on the Lleyn Peninsular, vital holding point for essential weather and tidal windows to traverse the tortuous and dangerous Caernarfon Bar at the West end of Menai Straights. Ive used it many times myself for just this. There is also eelgrass in the Medway, though apparently not in areas we use at present. At present, non seagrass MCZs do not directly affect us, but its too easy to add features to an existing MCZ without consultation, and for MMO to create new rules, limitations and bylaws out of the blue if somone decides we are damaging their favourite lugworms or whatever. Studland tops the list because Seahorses are more interesting than Lugworms, sea slugs or whatever. But it only takes some enthusiast like NGM to decide that boats are disturbing something to make a case for imposing further bans and limits, and there will be little opportunity for us to object."Why is this a sticky - ‘Cos it’s only 20 miles from the Solent?"
Many MCZ's have already been designated, some contain seagrass (eelgrass), and bye-laws to "manage" anchoring could be passed in the future, although I'm not aware of any yet. The Studland arguments might be a more generally applicable test case which could influence existing MCZ's. Designated MCZ's with seagrass beds include
Isles of Scilly
Whitsand & Looe Bay (Cornwall)
Mounts Bay (Cornwall)
Skomer (Wales, near Milford Haven))
Waterfoot (Northern Ireland)
- and there are probably several more. It's not a Solent-only issue.
If you are on your way into Poole from the CI or Cherbourg and find you can't get through the entrance for any reason (which isn't that uncommon for a small boat) then you are faced with either Christchurch (and good luck trying to get in there if you can't make it into Poole) or Weymouth/Portland - a 25 mile slog mostly along a lee shore in the prevailing wind and quite possibly a close fetch for some of it - St Aldhem's isn't to be trifled with when it's in a bad mood either. Alternatively you can run/reach for the Solent and maybe get some shelter in Lymington (not too bad) or perhaps Beaulieu (not an easy entrance if you don't know it and it's late and you're tired). Either that or keep going for something inside the Solent proper.I have used Weymouth and Poole on a number of occasions, they have always provided a safe haven.
I never challenge the experiences of others but during my time with Joint Services, I frequently used Gosport out round the island and direct Dartmouth as a Yachmaster qualifying leg.
As most of my passages were between October and March (hate The Solent in the summer), I had my share of adverse weather so with a doubtful forecast, Gosport - Dartmouth at night, provided a number of safe havens so was a better option then Gosport - Cherbourg another Yachmaster qualifying leg.
This is why I offer that, to claim Studland as the only safe haven in the area, could be refuted so is not a good argument to counter a ban on anchoring and possibly other sanctions.
In another life part of my job was to look for weaknesses in argument and it is from this background I offer this advice.
Oh yes, a Plymouth man, my father knew HMS Exeter well but I don’t think he ever anchored in Studland Bay.
Far too many ifs and buts.If you are on your way into Poole from the CI or Cherbourg and find you can't get through the entrance for any reason (which isn't that uncommon for a small boat) then you are faced with either Christchurch (and good luck trying to get in there if you can't make it into Poole) or Weymouth/Portland - a 25 mile slog mostly along a lee shore in the prevailing wind and quite possibly a close fetch for some of it - St Aldhem's isn't to be trifled with when it's in a bad mood either. Alternatively you can run/reach for the Solent and maybe get some shelter in Lymington (not too bad) or perhaps Beaulieu (not an easy entrance if you don't know it and it's late and you're tired). Either that or keep going for something inside the Solent proper.
And you're doing that after at least 10 hours sailing, possibly more like 18 hours...
Far too many ifs and buts.
For one, Poole was regular stop off and have never been barred from entering in a south westerly, often in a 27footer.
In a thread trying to retain anchoring rights in Studland Bay, this debate is a red-herring, which rather makes the case for not using the ‘safe haven’ argument - far too much room for diversions from the main thrust.
Answer- don’t attempt to enter against the ebb. Called SeamanshipGales are usually from the south west, and the ebb at Poole entrance is very strong, as a youngster I've been at a standstill there dodging the ferry when I mistimed the tide and should have anchored at Studland, fortunately in good weather; there are NO other handy diversions so I'd say the ' safe haven ' argument is very pertinent.
I've had several occasions sheltering anchored at Studland when there was a line of white water not far offshore by Poole entrance channel, once we saw a chap drifting helplessly that way after his tender outboard failed and though ' Oh ********* we're going to have to go and get him ' and were pulling up the anchor when thankfully a big mobo grabbed him.
A boat with a tired soaked crew, may well be a husband with seasick children and inexperienced wife ( not being sexist that's just how it often is ) could well have their lives saved by anchoring for a sheltered rest at Studland - Fatigue Is The Killer.
In your remarkably spelled opinion only, not the real world - nobody thinks Lulworth Cove is a safe refuge as you've previously suggested - I will not bother replying to your strange posts any more.Answer- don’t attempt to enter against the ebb.
Plan ahead to use that that large window of the flood.
If the original plan goes to rats. Change the plan early and with it the planned land fall.
These 3 lines completely refute any suggestion that Studland Bay should be treated as a haven of last resort and this line of argument weakens the whole argument for continuing to permit anchoring in Studland.
A much stronger argument is to refute the statement that current usage of Studland has a major impact on the environment and demonstrate that there are many other sites around the UK that have the same environment as Studland so no natural life is facing extinction as a result of anchoring in a Studland.
In a stroke this turns the debate from the defencive to the offencive and places the opposition on the back foot.