Studland Bay MCZ - update

[oldharry]

Following the inclusion of Studland Bay in the Tranche 3 recommendations in July, we are now awaiting the next stage towards management of the site which is now the responsibility of the MMO.

The MMO recently produced this statement:

‘The Marine Management Organisation (MMO) are responsible for the management of non-licensed activities (such as sailing and anchoring) for Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) within 0-12nm.

While Studland Bay MCZ has now been designated, there are currently no management measures in place for non-licensed activities. If necessary, these will be introduced following a full and thorough assessment of the need to do so to achieve the site’s conservation objectives.

The MMO will be starting these assessments for certain sites, likely to include Studland Bay MCZ, in the coming months.

If you would like to be kept up to date as this work progresses, and to be contacted once the MMO start the process of speaking to stakeholders about Studland Bay, please contact conservation@marinemanagement.org.uk.’

In the meantime NGM at Seahorse trust sent in a plea that a Management Group should be set up as soon as possible to set up management measures (EFMs and no anchor zones presumably), so that his 'experience and knowledge' of the Bay can be used to the full!

He sent it to the wrong people.

MMO are currently undertaking a 'prioritisation exercise' which presumably means they are looking at their budgets and the degree of urgency for expenditure on managing the new MCZs.

 

[Boathook]

Thanks for posting oldharry.

I have just emailed (conservation@marinemanagement.org.uk) and asked to be kept up to date.

 

[Sea-Fever]

Thanks for the update indeed.

I drove past a farmers field the other day....guess what? Stuff was growing despite 100% of it being ploughed up every year. Why an anchor being laid once in a blue moon on any one particular patch of this bay should make the slightest bit of difference is beyond me.

 

[Tomahawk]

It’s because NGM wants the place to himself. At the bottom all his campaigning only boils down to selfishness.

Perhaps one "management" of the bay should be a total ban on diving save for one survey a year to be carried oit by commercial divers.

 

[oldharry]

It’s because NGM wants the place to himself. At the bottom all his campaigning only boils down to selfishness.

Perhaps one "management" of the bay should be a total ban on diving save for one survey a year to be carried oit by commercial divers.

There is direct research evidence from Australia that excessive diving on seahorse colonies will cause them to disperse. The same team lead by a PhD level seahorse research specialist found that Seahorses actually did better AWAY from No Go MPAs, because their predators thrived in the protected areas!

NGMs response, 'dont believe everything that comes from Australia'

The relevant reports have been passed to MMO some time ago.

 

[Tomahawk]

Given how much effort the Ozzies put into conservation of any manor of aquatic life...
I would take notice of their research.

Then make a lot of positive effort to contribute to developing appropriate management policies for the MCZ which would clearly justify a ban all but annual monitoring dive. The look on NGM's face would be worth something..