DEFRA Public consultation on MCZs - how to take part

oldharry said:
Going back to the anchor damage debate: yes you are quite right about the divide and conquer policy. Each MCZ has to be debated on its own merits, and a blanket policy on anchoring just would not be accepted. However we are working on ensuring the Studland result (which has been the subject of in-depth study) is applied to all the Eelgrass anchorages.
Click to expand...

I am not so much worried about eel grass anchorages or seahorses since the publicity seems to have turned them up everywhere but the other excuses that are being used like the presence of some sort of obscure worm or other marine organism.
There must be an endless list to choose from & just because they don't know much about them I don't see why we should be banned.
If I have not snuffed it by the time they get round to these arguments I can see some serious confrontations taking place.
 
Nicholas123 said:
I am not so much worried about eel grass anchorages or seahorses since the publicity seems to have turned them up everywhere but the other excuses that are being used like the presence of some sort of obscure worm or other marine organism.
There must be an endless list to choose from & just because they don't know much about them I don't see why we should be banned.
If I have not snuffed it by the time they get round to these arguments I can see some serious confrontations taking place.
Click to expand...

Spot on, except now is the time to see iof we can reduce these confrontations. As the Head of Conservation and Enforcement at MMO says, once they have become law it will be MUCH more difficult to change anything.

This will be a real issue when people start to find things have happened because they havent bothered up to now, and find themselves confronted by a court summons for anchoring in the wrong place.
 
If you can find it, you should put up a link to this thread from the old Studland Summary thread. Many people will be subscribed to that thread and get notified. I only found this thread by chance. Don't often get time to hit Scuttlebut.
 
Feedback to Pagham is that unless you have some new evidence which was not scrutinised by Balanced Seas (Finding Sanctuary etc) last year then they are not interested in going over old ground. This is unfair because we are now in a period of public consultation, and the public was not encouraged by the powers that be, to get involved with Balanced Seas.

BBC South Today covered the designation of MCZ's last Monday but made it sound a fait accompli - no mention of the consultation period. (Probably a Freudian slip?). The news item was mainly focussed on the Wildlife Trust complaining that designation of most sites had been postponed until later.
 
Elton, yes that does sound about right. Quite a number of the delayed sites mention data uncertainty, and even in the sites going forward for designation there are notes that further information is required on specific FOCI befroe they can be included in the designation.

Seems to me that NE, lacking hard facts, simply took the opinions of some of their senior science advisors, and presented it as 'best available science' - in the case of eelgrass, none of them was expert, but they knew that Seagrass generically was vulnerable to abrasion damage, and assumed Eelgrass was too. We now know that it is not, and have submitted our data and evidence to DEFRA.

The other key area that emerges from the DEFRA reports is they are taking very seriously the Socio-economic impact of designating each area, something that was largely ignored and even pooh-poohed by the conservationists. Supposing large areas of the N Isle of Wight were closed to anchoring as they want - the knock on effect on the marine leisure industry already struggling with the recession could run into millions. BORG is currently working on a more detailed analysis of this aspect as part of our submission to DEFRA. Figures will be available on our website when we have finalised them, but at first site the Solent area alone stands to lose substantially even from a 1% reduction in boat ownership as a result of reduction of facilites. Poole too stands to lose a lot of money if Studland were closed on our initial figures.

Any economists out there who might be able to help us with this anlysis?

Sea Urchin - could you not do a similar exercise on the social and economic cost of the breakdown of the Pagham sea defences for DEFRA? The original Spec for the MCZs was very specific about ensuring the social and financial implications being taken in to account in designation. I hear there is already concern at the erosion of the beach a little further east by the 'railway carriage estate', and talk of beach replenishment there.
 
They have just been on the radio again trying to reopen the debate about Studland saying it is the only known site for breeding seahorses.Maybe somebody could ask the BBC to produce a documentary showing how they commute from all round the British Isles to get their leg over?They seem to have more money than sense.
 
Nicholas123 said:
They have just been on the radio again trying to reopen the debate about Studland saying it is the only known site for breeding seahorses.Maybe somebody could ask the BBC to produce a documentary showing how they commute from all round the British Isles to get their leg over?They seem to have more money than sense.
Click to expand...

Nicholas123,

quite right, we need to put a clamp on these bu**ers breeding at all costs; if shotguns are considered naughty for some bizarre reason, let's put something in their water.

You did mean BBC funded career conservationists, right ? :D

Andy
 
oldharry said:
Sea Urchin - could you not do a similar exercise on the social and economic cost of the breakdown of the Pagham sea defences for DEFRA? The original Spec for the MCZs was very specific about ensuring the social and financial implications being taken in to account in designation. I hear there is already concern at the erosion of the beach a little further east by the 'railway carriage estate', and talk of beach replenishment there.
Click to expand...

The Parish Council did this exercise last year, but the nature of the erosion and thus, what is needed for the sea defenses is evolving all the time, along with the costs. Will suggest to them that they review this in light of latest info, and inform DEFRA of latest calculations. Thanks.
 
MMO south Marine Plan

Will the Marine Management Organisation's upcoming South plan process and area workshops have any influence over MCZ's?

see MMO website:
http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/marineplanning/evidence/index.htm
http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/marineplanning/areas/south.htm

General statement in the MMO newsletter:-
"Upcoming South plan area workshops
In the last newsletter, we provided information about the upcoming workshops in the South plan area.
The coast and seas from Folkestone to the River Dart in Devon will be the second area in England to benefit from marine planning. These workshops will take place from 28 January to 30 January 2013 in Exeter, Southampton and Brighton.
The purpose of these first workshops is to introduce the team, our timeline for planning in the South plan areas and get your input into how you can get involved in marine planning for your area.
south.jpg
 
MMO is the enforcing authority for MCZs, but the Marine Plan is a much wider project, in which Conservation is just one element. International and EU deadlines pushed conservation ahead of the rest of it as conservation has to be fully in place and working by 2018.
 
oldharry said:
MMO is the enforcing authority for MCZs, but the Marine Plan is a much wider project, in which Conservation is just one element. International and EU deadlines pushed conservation ahead of the rest of it as conservation has to be fully in place and working by 2018.
Click to expand...

I'm curious to know what the marine master plan is that you mention here Harry? I have looked on the BORG website but can't immediately see any reference to it.
 
The marine Plan is the overall Government approach to 'organising and managing' UK coasta waters. Developing it is the primary task of the MMO. They write:

About marine planning
Marine planning is a new approach to the management of our seas. The aim is to ensure a sustainable future for our coastal and offshore waters through managing and balancing the many activities, resources and assets in our marine environment.

Marine planning is following a similar approach to terrestrial planning – setting the direction for decision making at a local level to lead to efficient and sustainable use of our marine resources.

Marine planning will:

guide marine users to the most suitable locations for different activities
manage the use of marine resources to ensure sustainable levels
work with all marine users to ensure everyone has an opportunity to contribute to marine plans
take a holistic approach to decision making and consider all the benefits and impacts of all the current and future activities that occur in our marine environment.

This the introductory paragraph of their Marine Plan webpage: more (lots more!) here:

http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/marineplanning/about/index.htm

Make what you will of it, but 'following a similar approach to terrestrial planning' seems to pave the way for pretty fair 'pandoras box', particularly as elsewhere, they talk about making the sea 'safe for all users', and in an earlier leaflet now withdrawn they spoke of it affecting everyone who uses the Uks seas, from commercial operators down the lone kitesurfer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

T
Notices to Mariners - Week 52
Replies
0
Views
559
tillergirl
T
T
Notices to Mariners - Week 51
Replies
4
Views
914
Shaz77
S

Share this page

Top