Seahorses on Radio 4

[Duffer]

40 seahorses down to 11?
Ahem, loads more than that, I've got about 50 in holding tanks right now, they're selling like hot cakes now that they're famous!!!!!!

Many thanks to Old Harry, Glashen and others for their sensible comments. Are you breeding seahorses in captivity, Barefoot?

Does EFM stand for elastic fixed mooring? The cost seems high and much too high for any local sailing club to bear - but if you average it out over every viewer of Autumnwatch it is a matter of pennies. I.e. the cost of administering the MCZ should come from central funds.

They should consider putting a couple of these eelgrass-friendly moorings (perhaps that is what EFM stands for?) in the Helford west of Durgan for visitors. I anchored outside the area and was embarrassed to bring up a clump of eelgrass on my anchor.

Potentially more boats can raft up on VMs than can anchor in the same area leaving adequate swinging room between them.

One point I would make is that change should be introduced gradually in case a sudden change like an anchor ban has drastic and unforeseen consequences for the eelgrass habitat and/or the seahorses. It may be that they benefit in some unexpected way from some disturbance from boats or their anchors.

 

[VicMallows]

Potentially more boats can raft up on VMs than can anchor in the same area leaving adequate swinging room between them.

Rafting up alongside in a marina is bad enough. Rafting up on a mooring is just about the worst possible scenario in my opinion. In an open bay like Studland it's also quite likely to become untenable quite quickly. Then what do you do.

Vic

 

[oldharry]

Robin you hit the nail on the head in this debate. Its all very well saying we must have EFMs but there are major practical considerations. Not least in answer to VicS's question - who takes it on? A summer-long commitment for some organisation with very uncertain returns....

Funding? Yes possibly: lottery, europe, Nat England (dont forget their £86m wages bill - this would be petty cash), Local Authority/ County Council? WHo knows. Classic conservation 'wooly thinking'

EFM = Environmentally Friendly Moorings or Eco Friendly Moorings

Typical example here: http://www.boatmoorings.com/eco-mooring.php

 

[Robin]

Rafting up alongside in a marina is bad enough. Rafting up on a mooring is just about the worst possible scenario in my opinion. In an open bay like Studland it's also quite likely to become untenable quite quickly. Then what do you do.

Vic

Untenable just minutes after the first jetski or water ski boat arrives. Then there is any swell to consider because the tide in the bay runs parallel to the shoreline and in light winds boats will lie side on to the swell, usually good for a few rolls even if the swell is very light and almost invisible. In strong winds with some west in them the swell problem is reduced as boats lie perpendicular to any swell. I certainly would never raft up in Studland.

There is another problem too with paid for moorings. It is one thing to up anchor and move later if the wind shifts, Studland being an open sea anchorage, but it would seriously annoy me to have to move if I had just paid up beer tokens for the priveledge of using their buoy.

 

[Mark-1]

Thanks for the heads up, I listened to the show. Link repeated here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b016wxv5/Saving_Species_Series_2_Episode_25/

I just don't get it. The Eel Grass isn't rare. Sea horses are not rare. Are the other species rare? Why is Studland special and in need of protection? What makes Studland Bay a special case? Is it just that it's a convenient place to access to do research?

Anyway there's a campaign to write to Richard Benyon MP to insist that all MCZs are implimented. (http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/saveourmczs)

I think we should all express our views:

defra.helpline@defra.gsi.gov.uk

Richard Benyon MP
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State
Defra
Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London SW1P 3JR

Once again, I don't get it. Why Studland Bay? Why Eel Grass?


Finally, to save me reading tens of thousands of words, can someone who is going to decide what action is taken regarding Studland Bay? When will this decision be taken?

 

[oldharry]

Mark 1: Take a look here for a summary of the eelgrass conservation issue: http://www.boatownersresponsegroup....rvancy/2-studland-bay-conservancy/11-eelgrass

It is a key species, is globally in decline, and appears on all the marine lists of endagered species. Yes there is quitea bit of it around the South Coast.

Seahorses are a protected species under the Wildlife Act, so are listed when they appear in MCZs

For a summary of the background and timing of the MCZ programme/ argument read the first three posts of the Studland 'sticky' thread on this forum. Not tens of thousands of words, I promise you! Thats why I wrote it, because I did read through most of it! (and I still have a headache!)

 

[Mark-1]

For a summary of the background and timing of the MCZ programme/ argument read the first three posts of the Studland 'sticky' thread on this forum.

Thanks.

So it all comes down to John Benyon in April/May 2012?

It is a key species, is globally in decline, and appears on all the marine lists of endagered species. Yes there is quitea bit of it around the South Coast.

Seahorses are a protected species under the Wildlife Act, so are listed when they appear in MCZs

Even so, Studland's contribution to the worldwide stock of Eel Grass and Sea Horses seems trivial. Indeed, Studland's contribution to the UK stock of Eel Grass and Sea Horses seems trivial.

I've heard the view that the case for Studland's unique status is mainly because it's a handy place to dive from to view sea horses. Now I've listened to the Saving Species show it really does seem that might be the case. 'They' are showing zero interest in researching Eel Grass in harder to reach places.

 

[oldharry]

Just about every clump of eelgrass round the coast has been listed, even where it has died out. Falmouth had eelgrass when it was last surveyed 30 years ago. Locals say it has virtually gone, but there is still an MCZ suggested where it was - slap in the middle of the Falmouth race starting lines: http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=291397&highlight=Falmouth+racing

Yes, John Benyon is the key man in all this and will make the final decisions, though we do not know which way he is likely to lean.

 

[glashen]

Even so, Studland's contribution to the worldwide stock of Eel Grass and Sea Horses seems trivial. Indeed, Studland's contribution to the UK stock of Eel Grass and Sea Horses seems trivial.

I've heard the view that the case for Studland's unique status is mainly because it's a handy place to dive from to view sea horses. Now I've listened to the Saving Species show it really does seem that might be the case. 'They' are showing zero interest in researching Eel Grass in harder to reach places.

The problem is whatever we think about the truth, is the conservationists have got Studland Bay in their sights. I have read plenty of extreme points of view on both sides and don't think they help.

Old Harry has been responsible for the more reasoned and reasonable argument for allowing some anchoring to continue whilst accepting some measures are probably needed/inevitable to protect the eelgrass which is I think is also accepted by many who want more conservation.

Please don't think we could just ignore the calls for anchoring bans and think nothing will change.

On the subject of charging, I am not going to get into the economics of it, that is for those who come with a plan to the lay the EFMs. But if we get areas where free anchoring is permitted and the buoys take the strain off the eelgrass beds can we really object to paying to use them.

The fact that the Bankes Arms has provided free mooring buoys for many years is a bonus but hardly something we can insist continues, especially if the cost of those buoys increases by making them EFMs.

The worst case might have been the removal of the existing buoys, and an anchoring ban. The common sense approach is surely to find a way to provide Environmentally friendly moorings which will reduce the pressure on the eelgrass and provide anchoring areas for those who wish to use them

 

[Nicholas123]

There was an extended discussion about seahorses in the UK (and elsewhere) on Saving Species this morning. I think it will be repeated on Thursday at 9 pm or go to the iPlayer now:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b016wxv5/Saving_Species_Series_2_Episode_25/

The spokesman from the Seahorse Trust was more conciliatory to boat users in Studland than I have previously heard and backed a new type of mooring which doesn't use a ground chain. If it works it sounds eminently sensible.

I was in the Helford earlier in the year and saw a catamaran anchored in the eel grass area west of Durgan. Minutes after leaving it was dismasted. Do seahorses have teeth?

I was amazing to hear Niel Garrick-Maidment admit that seahorses are common all round our coast after his original sales pitch was that they are practically unique to Studland but it seems he is now changing his attention to the uniqueness off eelgrass & it's destruction by boaters so nothing has changed really.The conservation industry roles on......

 

[Mark-1]

I was amazing to hear Niel Garrick-Maidment admit that seahorses are common all round our coast after his original sales pitch was that they are practically unique to Studland but it seems he is now changing his attention to the uniqueness off eelgrass & it's destruction by boaters so nothing has changed really.The conservation industry roles on......

But if we all tell John Benyon what we think we've got half a chance.

There's a clear action we can all take.

 

[oldharry]

Yes, there was an interesting shift of emphasis away from Seahorses a while back once we started asking serious questions about it.

However, its a lot easier to sell conservation dreams about pretty little Seahorses than it is about seaweed and mud! And it raises a great deal more cash!

 

[Nicholas123]

Yes, there was an interesting shift of emphasis away from Seahorses a while back once we started asking serious questions about it.

However, its a lot easier to sell conservation dreams about pretty little Seahorses than it is about seaweed and mud! And it raises a great deal more cash!

Has anybody checked up to see if Niel Garrick Maidment has a commercial interest in flogging "eco friendly moorings?"

 

[Robin]

Yes, there was an interesting shift of emphasis away from Seahorses a while back once we started asking serious questions about it.

However, its a lot easier to sell conservation dreams about pretty little Seahorses than it is about seaweed and mud! And it raises a great deal more cash!

When all this first surfaced, Treehugger I think it was said openly that they would link seahorses to eelgrass because eelgrass was or would be fully protected under the new regime.

 

[oldharry]

Has anybody checked up to see if Niel Garrick Maidment has a commercial interest in flogging "eco friendly moorings?"

 

[Duffer]

Untenable just minutes after the first jetski or water ski boat arrives. Then there is any swell to consider because the tide in the bay runs parallel to the shoreline and in light winds boats will lie side on to the swell, usually good for a few rolls even if the swell is very light and almost invisible. In strong winds with some west in them the swell problem is reduced as boats lie perpendicular to any swell. I certainly would never raft up in Studland.

There is another problem too with paid for moorings. It is one thing to up anchor and move later if the wind shifts, Studland being an open sea anchorage, but it would seriously annoy me to have to move if I had just paid up beer tokens for the priveledge of using their buoy.

I take the point that you wouldn't want to raft up in any swell. If the moorings are going to be charged for (meaning there will be some sort of patrol boat to collect fees) is it not possible to impose a speed limit to keep waterskiers etc well away from the proposed new moorings? It drives me nuts when mobos etc kick up wash near anchored or moored boats and an enforced speed limit might make paying for a mooring well worthwhile. It is worth thinking about whether there are any "quid pro quos" for agreeing to a no-anchor zone.

Regarding Falmouth there is certainly eelgrass in the Helford river (round the corner). I would certainly welcome a speed limit in the Helford as the character of the lower Helford river has been wrecked by waterskiers and speedboats in recent years.

 

[Robin]

I take the point that you wouldn't want to raft up in any swell. If the moorings are going to be charged for (meaning there will be some sort of patrol boat to collect fees) is it not possible to impose a speed limit to keep waterskiers etc well away from the proposed new moorings? It drives me nuts when mobos etc kick up wash near anchored or moored boats and an enforced speed limit might make paying for a mooring well worthwhile. It is worth thinking about whether there are any "quid pro quos" for agreeing to a no-anchor zone.

Regarding Falmouth there is certainly eelgrass in the Helford river (round the corner). I would certainly welcome a speed limit in the Helford as the character of the lower Helford river has been wrecked by waterskiers and speedboats in recent years.

There IS a speed limit off the beach areas, not that it makes much difference. Anyway there is still the wash from boats outside of the bay proper because this is an open anchorage and one open also to any swell finding it's way round the corner from Handfast Point (Old Harry Rocks) There is also wash from the cross Channel ferries and the Condor fastcat ferry.

I would want to anchor anyway not pick up a buoy, let alone have to pay for it and to pay and be rafted up as well is plain crazy.

It actually won't affect me personally as our boating from now on is the other side of the pond, but after over 40 years of sailing locally I would hate future generations to be deprived of this wonderful historic passage anchorage or to be forced to pay for it.

 

[oldharry]

There is a 5 knot speed limit inshore at Studland. Unenforced by anyone. Will the MCZ rules suffer the same fate?

 

[glashen]

But if we all tell John Benyon what we think we've got half a chance.

There's a clear action we can all take.

You can try, but bear two things in mind,

1) Lots of individuals, BORG, the RYA have made submissions to Finding Sanctuary, and that is probably why we are not facing the possibility of Studland being a reference area and that most talk is now about EFMs and voluntary no anchor zones.

2) The government have a duty under the legislation to approve some MCZs Studland has been highlighted, through the seahorses and eelgrass. It has become something of a cause celebre for the conservationists. The government will probably go for a cheap and uncontroversial option as is possible, not designating the bay as an MCZ will not fit with the Green credentials they wish to claim. Fortunately banning all anchoring is now probably too controversial and enforcing it would be expensive so a compromise will suit them.

Speaking for myself I think at a few rare times Studland is too crowded to be enjoyable I would not object to some limit on those few occasions, and avoiding the eelgrass when anchoring or paying £10 to use a EFM buoy to preserve what is an important site is not that big a deal.

 

[Mark-1]

You can try, but bear two things in mind,

1) Lots of individuals, BORG, the RYA have made submissions to Finding Sanctuary, and that is probably why we are not facing the possibility of Studland being a reference area and that most talk is now about EFMs and voluntary no anchor zones.

2) The government have a duty under the legislation to approve some MCZs Studland has been highlighted, through the seahorses and eelgrass. It has become something of a cause celebre for the conservationists. The government will probably go for a cheap and uncontroversial optio n as is possible, not designating the bay as an MCZ will not fit with the Green credentials they wish to claim. Fortunately banning all anchoring is now probably too controversial and enforcing it would be expensive so a compromise will suit them.

Speaking for myself I think at a few rare times Studland is too crowded to be enjoyable I would not object to some limit on those few occasions, and avoiding the eelgrass when anchoring or paying £10 to use a EFM buoy to preserve what is an important site is not that big a deal.

So what are you suggesting people do if they want minimum restrictions on leisure use of,Studland Bay?