Studland bay preservation association

Status
Not open for further replies.
Expensive project

So correct me if I'm wrong , but so far the cost of this Tagging Project together with the Public Engagement Surveys etc means that each of these 40 Seahorses is costing £3000 to tag and record ... if there are only 20 its £6000 ...but the people doing it say they are only volunteers and tagging only takes place from May until September . Its certainly an expensive project but obviously worthwhile.
I note that in their costings the DIVER's AIR cost's per year is £156 ... so say there are always two divers working together thats £78 each on bottle refills... 60 mins of air per bottle perhaps ? and the cost of a recharge £3.00 .. so that works out at 29 hours divetime each for 5 months ..so roughly 6 hours divetime a month tagging Seahorses and the person managing this is supposed to be getting £28000 a year according to the costings ? Good Value ?
 
Last edited:
Dear Neil,

I'm glad that you have brought a rather more measured tone to the proceedings but I am going to have to press you on a question that has been asked several times now, and which you have avoided answering, namely: how does one become a member of your organisation? Surely it can't be difficult to answer this?

If there is no mechanism for joining, then my supplementary question has to be: to whom are you accountable and how are your activities monitored and regulated?

You're really not doing yourself any favours by avoiding this question, because the natural implication to be drawn from your silence is that your organisation is a private and secretive cabal that brooks no interference from anyone and will not tolerate dissent, a point of view backed up by the rather challenging communication skills of your colleague Steve.

Even the Royal Yacht Squadron, a notoriously hidebound and reactionary Yacht Club, has procedures for seeking membership.....
 
Expensive Business Seahorses

Looking at the ESMEE FAIRBAIRN FOUNDATION Funding .
They are recorded as giving the Seahorse Trust £80000 in 2002 and it states " Towards the salary over two years of a Project Director and associated project costs of a Marine Task Force to promote Marine Conservation and Sustainable Development by helping the Fishermen of the South West to diversify into new markets".
Plus in April 2009 they were awarded a Lottery Grant of £41k which they stated "Will help pay for a Project Officer" ... on 6/7/09 on one of these threads The Seahorse trust stated "Steve is the Project Officer for Studland"...but I thought he said he was a volunteer ????
 
Last edited:
Helping Diversify into a Pay and Display Anchorage

MAD FRANKIE said:
Looking at the ESMEE FAIRBAIRN FOUNDATION Funding .
They are recorded as giving the Seahorse Trust £80000 in 2002 and it states " Towards the salary over two years of a Project Director and associated project costs of a Marine Task Force to promote Marine Conservation and Sustainable Development by helping the Fishermen of the South West to diversify into new markets".
Plus in April 2009 they were awarded a Lottery Grant of £41k which they stated "Will help pay for a Project Officer" ... on 6/7/09 on one of these threads The Seahorse trust stated "Steve is the Project Officer for Studland"...but I thought he said he was a volunteer ????
Click to expand...

On the 18/11/09 on this forum steve said " I'm not a trustee ,I don't get paid and the survey hasn't finished yet. I do all this in my own time, Studland is my local beach .I DON'T WORK FOR ANYBODY"
 
Last edited:
MAD FRANKIE said:
On the 18/11/09 on this forum steve said " I'm not a trustee ,I don't get paid and the survey hasn't finished yet. I do all this in my own time, Studland is my local beach .I DON'T WORK FOR ANYBODY"
Click to expand...

The Esmee Fairbairn money was in 2002, not 2007 - and maybe explains how in 2005, the earliest year on the Charity Commission website, they were able to spend much more than they received.

It may be that once the Esmee Fairbair funding ended, Steve Trewella either became or took over as an unpaid volunteer project officer. Let's not look for too many conspiracies here.
 
Seahorse Tagging Officer

I'm just very interested to see who this person is ,The job was advertised last May and there was no mention of it being unpaid . When they got their lottery grant last April they stated it would help pay for The Project Officer.
 
Last edited:
ST44 said:
I have read the terms of use for this thread.
It states that threatening behaviour will not be tolerated.
Many of the posts contain abusive comments and veiled threats.
There are mentions of where I live , and my children.
Debate is one thing, we will never agree on anything to do with Studland.
I take these threats very seriously.
Comments like ' I can come down and see you next thursday '
' Mr fencing has given us the location of a decent sized colony, I will bring my hand net down on thursday '
Seahorse are a protected species, these comments will be passed on to Natural england.
Where my family live is of no consequence on this forum.
I will be reporting this to the police
Click to expand...

You fool. Can you report me please. I'd love to meet you in court.
 
Last edited:
I have an idea. What if all the money that is being spent on a campaign to stop anchoring, and all the money that will be spent to fight that campaign was instead used to lay Eco friendly buoys that were free to use.
 
SolentBoy said:
I have an idea. What if all the money that is being spent on a campaign to stop anchoring, and all the money that will be spent to fight that campaign was instead used to lay Eco friendly buoys that were free to use.
Click to expand...

I think madfranky covered that above Solentboy check it out.......

It's about time somebody exposed these seahorse people for exploiting little innocent creatures & using sentimentality to con a gullible public.
Studland Bay is being turned into our very own localized Disney theme park.
I have a suggestion,maybe the divers could be used to pick up any rubbish & do something useful!
(I am all for prosecuting anyone for dropping it in the first place!).
(lovely looking boat by the way).
 
Last edited:
SolentBoy said:
I did and couldn't find it. Where? Not in this thread.
Click to expand...

MAD FRANKIE said:
I voted No ... there are at present 25 fixed moorings close of the South Beach that belong to locals .... if anchoring was banned and eco fixed moorings were put in place ..lets say 200 ..enough for everyone on a hot Summers Sunday then that would mean the whole bay would be scattered with fixed mooring buoys all year long. It would also mean full time staff from April to September to patrol and collect the mooring fees ...12 hours a day ,with a rib so how much would that cost? We are fighting to keep the Bay free for all as it always has been .
Click to expand...

I think that is the post you were pointed to. I think there maybe a argument for a balance with some areas where anchoring is permitted and others where it is discouraged plus some eco friendly buoys. The problem is that Steve in particular is so extreme that many of suspect if we give an inch he will try to take the whole of Poole Bay. Any restrictions must be based on the science showing substantial damage to the eel grass.
 
Interesting that Natural England list one of the main risks to seahorses to be :

Diving in shallow areas requires good buoyancy control in order to avoid stirring up the seabed and causing damage which could disturb seahorses. Where possible, people should try to avoid swimming in the vicinity of seagrass beds as trampling can have an impact on the habitat and all the plants and animals that depend on it including seahorses.
Click to expand...

I assume that all ST44's / Seahorse Trust's diving activities are covered by a licence issued by Natural England? In which case I shall be looking at ways to object to the continuance of this licence due to the unnecessary trauma the attachment of tags and intervention in their habitat caused, given that all parties agree that numbers are increasing and therefore invasive monitoring is clearly not required, especially given the technology to leave an underwater camera on the seabed monitored from ashore, which could put an end to these apparent "start of day" and "end of day" dives carried out by these vigilantes.

If the Seahorse Trust are geniunely interested in conservation, then use their funding to commission university or similar research to give a definitive answer, not rely on a bunch of mud-slinging cowboys who are currently doing massive damage to the Seahorse Trust's reputation and, more importantly, doing massive damage to the creatures themselves.
 
If memory serves me correctly, Studland used to be regularily scallop dredged. This activity has ceased. So now it looks like the natural habitats are returning. Logically whatever we are doing now is having a beneficial effect. I suppse the concern is that the scallop dredging returns and destroys the natural habitats. Having seen the sea bed after it has been dredged it looks like a harrowed field, I am amazed that anything can recover from that but it does (including the scallops) which is why the fishermen dredge it twice a year!

A few summer moorings and weekend anchoring if it is causing damage is so insignificant to the scalloping that went on before. The reason the eel grass returned is that the scalloping stopped!

Logically we should just monitor the position and see what happens over the next few years.
 
glashen said:
I think that is the post you were pointed to. I think there maybe a argument for a balance with some areas where anchoring is permitted and others where it is discouraged plus some eco friendly buoys. The problem is that Steve in particular is so extreme that many of suspect if we give an inch he will try to take the whole of Poole Bay. Any restrictions must be based on the science showing substantial damage to the eel grass.
Click to expand...

The point I was trying to make is that the buoys should be free to use. No need for the rib, no need for staff, no need for anchors. Just a little money on maintenance of the moorings. A lot less money than tagging seahorses.
 
"Since discovering the Seahorses at Studland Bay in Dorset the site has proven to be
internationally important and on every dive it throws up some amazing surprises. The
bay has a very large concentration of Seahorses; over 40 in 2008 alone and this intensity
of numbers has made it a site of international importance, nowhere else in the British
Isles or indeed for that matter in the world; except the Rio Formosa in Portugal is there
this concentration of Seahorses.
But the bay is under major threat of damage due the large number of pleasure craft that
use it, particularly during the summer months.
Due to the large numbers of pleasure craft that use it the seagrass meadow is being
destroyed by anchor damage and anchor chain erosion and endless amounts of litter and
rubbish being dumped onto it, we need to gather as much data as we can in as short a
time as possible to allow us to put together with our conservation partners a
management plan."

This is quoted verbatim from the Seahorse Trust site: They claim to have 'discovered' the Seahorses here in 2005.

This and the above simply does not tie in with the facts:

a) Seahorses were being reported by local fishermen as long as 60 years ago.
b) Use of the bay by pleasure boats has been fairly consistent throughout that time. Why suddenly are the Grass beds 'under threat' from an activity of 50+ years duration?
c) Why is it well nigh impossible nowadays to find a safe area of sand to drop the hook in, wger 30 years ago there was only a limited problem? Hardly evidence that the grass is being damaged.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Top