Studland Bay Boating Ban

[oldharry]

Isn’t there already long running Sticky in Scuttlebutt on this

United, we stand divide you fall.

Yes, but not everyone here reads Scuttlebut!

 

[Robin]

Yes, but not everyone here reads Scuttlebut!

or MBY or live aboard or east coast (where IS that)some just start with 'new posts' like me and get pot luck variety

 

[nortada]

or MBY or live aboard or east coast (where IS that)some just start with 'new posts' like me and get pot luck variety

Or maybe has some very happy memories of Studland spreading over a number of years and would like others to be able to continue to enjoy it.

Studland today, Walton Backwaters tomorrow and Culatra next week so need to support folk in all areas.

Not sailed the East CoastSomething to look forward to. There is life east of Brighton

 

[oldharry]

Nowt wrong with starting a new thread about Studland if it passes on the news of whats happening there!

 

[aquadorman]

I agree that the survey (which I filled in) seems to be skewed in favour of a ban. I objected on the grounds of safety, ie Studland is sheltered from the prevailing winds, and it may not be safely possible to enter Poole Harbour in a wind over ebb tide situation. It is a great Port of Refuge!
BUT, who will enforce whatever outcome the survey permits? HOW will they do it, if indeed, there is concern for the marine life. I'd like to see the brave souls who try and chase a bunch of boaters away on a glorious sunny day in August.

 

[Restoration man]

Well it will kill off cobs quay marina ,a lot of the people who Moor there only go to studland bay anchor up for the day and go back on the night , if they don’t have that, coupled with the bridge I can’t see may stopping

 

[oldharry]

I agree that the survey (which I filled in) seems to be skewed in favour of a ban. I objected on the grounds of safety, ie Studland is sheltered from the prevailing winds, and it may not be safely possible to enter Poole Harbour in a wind over ebb tide situation. It is a great Port of Refuge!
BUT, who will enforce whatever outcome the survey permits? HOW will they do it, if indeed, there is concern for the marine life. I'd like to see the brave souls who try and chase a bunch of boaters away on a glorious sunny day in August.

Fines up to to £20k are written in to the legislation.....

 

[aquadorman]

£20K? Thats a tad steep. Still if we all hide our boat names and switch off our AIS's .....?

 

[Blue Sunray]

Dear stakeholder,

Between 28 October and 15 December 2020 the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) held a call for evidence seeking views on the draft Studland Bay Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ) marine non-licensable activity assessment.

We are contacting you because you have either responded to the Studland Bay MCZ call for evidence or you have expressed an interest in the MMO's marine protected area work.
Approximately 500 responses were received in the call for evidence, through online surveys or by email, providing valuable information to inform the MMO’s decisions on management to ensure the necessary level of protection for the features of Studland Bay MCZ.

The MMO has reviewed all information received and are proposing the next steps for the management of Studland Bay MCZ:

• For mooring, powerboating, sailing, diving and snorkelling, no further restrictions will be implemented at this stage.
• For anchoring, management measures may be required to avoid negative impacts on the site. The MMO will be holding a series of stakeholder events in March 2021 to develop suitable management measures.

Stakeholder feedback from these events will be crucial for the MMO to develop an approach that ensures the necessary level of environmental protection while minimising impacts on people’s use of the sea.

Please await further information about how you can participate in the planned engagement events.

If you no longer want to be contacted about Studland Bay MCZ, please contact

 

[ontheplane]

£20K? Thats a tad steep. Still if we all hide our boat names and switch off our AIS's .....?

But all they have to do is track you on radar, then intercept with jet skis (as they do already for speeding in Poole harbour). So one £60 fine for speeding or one £20,000 fine for this - wonder where resources may get diverted?

 

[thejonesey]

I received that email today too. I wonder what ‘management measures’ will entail. I expect no anchoring zones... Hopefully we can continue to put forward our case to allow Studland to be shared.

 

[steveeasy]

It would be wiser to find a solution as if its having a impact on the environment it wont continue much longer. we are becoming wiser of our need to protect our fragile habitats. That said what is the point of having such lovely coastal waters if we cant anchor anywhere. There is an easy and viable solution that would offer a compromise to most people.

Steveeasy

 

[RobbieW]

It would be wiser to find a solution as if its having a impact on the environment it wont continue much longer. we are becoming wiser of our need to protect our fragile habitats. That said what is the point of having such lovely coastal waters if we cant anchor anywhere. There is an easy and viable solution that would offer a compromise to most people.

Steveeasy

Please, please have a read of this material, Evidence. There really is no evidence of habitat degradation at Studland caused by boating. Measures being proposed are being done under a precautionary principle but there is no evidence those precautions will improve the items described

 

[oldharry]

Its a question of degree. Clearly anchoring in eelgrass causes some disturbance. Nobody argues that. The issue is whether or not that disturbance is actually affecting the eelgrass. There is a lot of evidence to suggest the impact is minimal and well sustained. Natural England however take a very simplistic approach; it is being disturbed, therefore it needs to be protected so it can 'recover'. NE's replied to us earlier today (we asked 6 months ago!) confirmed this line: anchors disturb eelgrass, therefore it is at risk. In an MCZ that risk must be mitigated. No attempt to establish whether the activity is causing siginficant damage. It is causing disturbance, which could result in the loss of the eelgrass bed. So it must be protected. No account taken of the fact that after 60 years the eegrass has grown from a couple of hundred square metres to nearly 100 hectares of apparently healthy eelgrass, or of the fact boats have been anchoring in it in significant numbers throughout that time. It is hard to see how it could be in very much better condition or extent if boats hadnt been around. There isnt room for any more - its covered most of the available space!

Likewise, NE says Studland has the highest count of breeding seahorses in the UK. It is therefore a highly significant site for seahorse breeding. The real reason is clear. Its the only place in which seahorses are regularly counted and studied! I see Robins in my garden most days. But I very rarely see them elsewhere, and I have never seen a nest or fledglings anywhere else. So my garden must be a very special Robin habitat, and should become a bird sanctuary for them! Its exactly the same reasoning.

 

[oldharry]

MMO have now published a highly detailed breakdown of the questions raised in the Public Consultation. It is refreshing to see that they give full exposure to our views, and widely quote Boat owners response Group reports and issues that we have raised.

Be warned the wholke report is 160 Pages of detailed material. The third section is the most relevant and gives most detail.

Managing marine non-licensable activities in Studland Bay Marine Conservation Zone.