Studland bay preservation association

[DogWatch]

d) How is it that the Seahorse Trust are able to make claims before any testing by an independent body are carried out. Any reports that come from the Trust MUST now be treated with extreme caution, they have an agenda and are obviously closed to any suggestions otherwise.

e) Why are the seahorse trust ABUSING the very creatures they claim to be protecting. Does any other site that has these seahorses have a similar body fiddling with the creatures and abusing other members of the public who have the same rights of use.

f) Why do the seahorse trust hate pleasure boats so much, isn't diving a hobby too? Is there an element of politics of envy going on by members of the trust.

g) Who is policing the funds of the trust, is there protection in law for people who think they are giving to a legitimate registered charity?

There is nothing more dangerous to freedom than a group of idiotic geeks on a mission.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

It could have blown off the boat in a swift breeze by accident and not chucked over .. which lets face it anyone would screw up into a ball and throw... not that I do that !

I have conducted an exhaustive scientific study into napkins and I will sometime in the future publish my findings.

But until then I will hint that I have found that once immersed in water a screwed up napkin, whether it be simply blown from a road, accidentally dropped by a beach picnic party or thrown over board by a blood sucking, rich, seahorse murdering boat owner, does unball itself.

As I suspect it was a boat owner in this case, all Studland using boat owners should be put down at birth, just in case.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

The excrement was real,

Please explain - scientifically if you want - how a complete turd can survive a marine toilet? By the very action of pumping out a marine toilet it macerates faeces into tiny little bits. There is no way a complete turd can survive the pump.

The excrement was real,
I'm glad mad frankie thinks raw sewage in the sea is so funny, I'm sure the public will also laugh when they see it, just before they cancel thier holiday in Dorset.

So you are willing to libel all Studland boaters and lie to the general public just to gain some points.

You are beneath contempt and if you do go ahead with the 'complete turd' story I am sure that Jabesco and other marine toilet manufacturers will be able to shoot your story down in seconds.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

I have to say I was being a bit flippant about Steve as I know him very well and work closley with him

I know, which is why I didn't reply to your earlier post to me and your theory that my avatar is 'sexist'.

You really are a strange bunch of people. Starting a fight and then expecting a reasoned debate.

I tried to join your little trust last year. But you don't allow people to join, do you?

 

[Major Catastrophe]

HI Ebergeekian,

where do you get the evidence that Seahorses are thriving ?, we are studying them and we dont know that, there is no evidence to back that up, if you know something that we dont know please let us know.
If you go by sheer numbers we could (and I wouldnt because it would be stupid ) argue that because the year before last we saw 40 seahorses and last year we saw less that means Seahorses are declining. What we need is long term evidence and our survey tagging work will show this.
Where I think there has been a lot of confusion is because people lump us in with the VNAZ, as I have stated many times I think the VNAZ is a waste of public money which could be better spent in other ways.
What is highly evident from our research dives is that the seagrass is being damaged, it has large holes in it, the moorings bouy chains are creating large areas void of seagrass and there is anchor damage that is not self repairing.
We have discovered this in our dives and through working with others who have side scanned the site and through an extensive photographic survey (video and stills) of the site. Working with others we have logged the fluidity of the seabed in the seagrass around the edge and in the damaged areas and this clearly shows that areas damaged by anchors and moorings have a higher than accepatble amount of seabed fluidity which stops the seagrass re-establishing. If nothing is done this will lead to long term irreparable damage to the bed. IF the seagrass disappears it will mean the loss not only of the seahorses but the undulate Ray breeding popualtions and other unique marine species (the list at Studland is endless) and ultimately it will mean migration of the sand and silt on the seabed, this in turn will mean beach erosion through wave and current action but also because naturally dead seagrass fronds help to hold the beach together it will mean a loss of the beach. There is already major concerrn about beach erosion at Studland and other sites so we should all be worried about this. Not only would all of the above happen (and you dont have to take my word for it there is well documented evidence all around the world to back this up) but also we will be loosing a valuable sink for CO2 which as everyone knows is one of the leading contributors to global warming.
Every little piece of CO2 sink we loose whether seagrass, prairie or rain forest is bad news for all of us. As global warming takes a hold then sea levels will rise which will mean the loss of the seagrass beds and the beach and ultimately humans.
It may be a small bit to do but by preserving Studland Bay and not just saying 'its always been there so it is OK' is a small bit in preserving the human race from the efects of species degredation, habitat loss and ultimately our own downfall.
I ask the question do you want to live in a world with fewer species, less diversity of habitats and global warming?
I know I for one dont and if through my research work and campaigning I can just make a little difference then so be it, if this neans we all have to adapt our ways a little to make the world a better place then we have to do it. In my day to day life I am constantly changing how I do things even though it inconveniences me because I look at the bigger picture and I hope upon hope that my 18 month old grandaughter has some sort of world to grow up into. Personally I feel she is worth it.

Best wishes

Neil
Director
The Seahorse trust

All very good words Neil, but as with Steve you never answer the fact that anecdotal and local knowledge says that in living memory the eel grass has spread in the bay...considerably.

I challenged Steve last year to get hold of wartime RAF and Luftwaffe air photographs of the bay and use the mark 1 eyeball to judge the spread of the eel grass.

But with Steve he writes lots of words but never does any real work to defeat arguments.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

Perpetrators of the other issues (poo in the water, litter) are already breaking the law.

Which law is being broken? Unless there is a specific byelaw covering Studland.

Even Annex IV of the MARPOL 73/78 convention does not apply to small craft carrying less than 15 passengers.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

I've not seen any comments directly about rich yachties

Search the forum for ST44's posts from the last two years or even click on some of the links I kindly posted at the top of this thread. Me, you, all of us are rich yotties.

Here's one of Steve's from 2008

 

[lydiamight]

Tagging Seahorses

Taken from The Seahorse Trust web-site

"Do not chase, disturb or touch seahorses. Seahorses are a protected species and it is an offence to disturb them."

How do you go about tagging them without beaking the law?

 

[Allan]

Search the forum for ST44's posts from the last two years or even click on some of the links I kindly posted at the top of this thread. Me, you, all of us are rich yotties.

Here's one of Steve's from 2008

Many thanks for that. I now have the information required to to prove, from ST44s own words, that any ban does not apply to me!
Allan

 

[Major Catastrophe]

Many thanks for that. I now have the information required to to prove, from ST44s own words, that any ban does not apply to me!
Allan

Or me and thousands of boat owners who save hard, give up flash cars, holidays and other things to own a boat.

But when it comes to seahorses, 'rich boat owners' is great phrase to give to a lazy newspaper editor.

 

[Robin]

I have conducted an exhaustive scientific study into napkins and I will sometime in the future publish my findings.

But until then I will hint that I have found that once immersed in water a screwed up napkin, whether it be simply blown from a road, accidentally dropped by a beach picnic party or thrown over board by a blood sucking, rich, seahorse murdering boat owner, does unball itself.

As I suspect it was a boat owner in this case, all Studland using boat owners should be put down at birth, just in case.

Come come Major, surely only down market people like er... divers and beach goers use paper napkins. Us RICH YOTTIES use proper cotton ones embroidered with the yacht name don't you know, so it couldn't possibly have come from one of us.

I really really hope they try the turdy picture on the media at large. That one and the comments about folk peeing overboard are so dumb they will be laughed off the planet.

Perhaps we should also warn Bournemouth Council who spent £millions on the new artificial surf reef that just opened, because seahorses have been photographed there also, it was on BBC South Today programme. That reef should be fenced off and declared a no swimming no diving no surfing no go zone with immediate effect. In fact I think I will ask the Bournemouth Echo to look into it, seeing as how they seem so impressed by ST44's drip feed of tales for the need to protect these creatures. That should really go down well with the local Council Tax payers who forked out for the reef.

 

[TheSeahorseTrust]

Dear all,

I know many of you are only trying to wind us up, sorry it is not working and sorry to disappoint you on that, I am too old and long in the tooth to be wound up like this and quite hoinestly daft comments are like water off a ducks back to me.

For the one or two who are willing to hold a sensible intelligent debate thank you, this is all The Seahorse Trust has asked for from the beginning, instead we have been subjected to some of the most aggresive, unintelligable abuse, vile comments in public meetings and personal threats I have heard for a while. When people have to resort to this sort of tactic (including the verbal abuse we get on the beach) then in my mind they loose the arguement!!

This is my last post on this issue as I am more than happy to have a constructive debate but I am not prepared to put up with abuse and absolute nonsense.

I know this arguement has been put forward many times about an increase in the seagrass backed up by anecdotal and other evidence but whenever I ask for the evidence nobody has it or can put me in the direction of it. So I will ask again if you have the evidence one way or the other then please let us know and show it to us.
I had one gentleman (and I use that term loosely as his behaviour was far from gentlemanly) who told me he has studied seahorses in Studland Bay for 50 years and has prove that they are thriving and increasing in numbers; again when asked for the evidence he cannot back up what he is saying.

All of the people working alongside us (and I dont mean Seastar doing the Natural England VNAZ as they are no part of our work, which is much more indepth and long term than theres) are working on papers and evidence that is being peer reviewed and will be in the public domain when they have gone through that process, so we are prepared to put our evidence out there for discussion. If those of you who say that you have the evidence step up to the mark and produce it.

This is my final comment on this forum and I wish you all the best and have a happy season yacthing and boating and if when we are down there or at one of our other study sites (we do have quite a few) then come over and have a chat (if some of you are prepared to not hide behind the comutor. Notice I am 100% happy to reveal who I am) I am always prepared to talk about the subject and despite what some of you think I do listen to what you are saying.

All the best

Neil
Neil Garrick-Maidment
Director
The Seahorse trust.

 

[sarabande]

part of your charitable trust's objectives include publishing the results of your research.

This you have clearly failed to do in a format which allows peer review and objective analysis. You are also failing to undertake research using an appropriately scientific methodology.

You are bringing the Trust into disrepute, and losing public confidence and trust, and I consider it appropriate for these matters to be raised with the Charity Commissioners.

 

[Robin]

Dear all,

I know many of you are only trying to wind us up, sorry it is not working and sorry to disappoint you on that, I am too old and long in the tooth to be wound up like this and quite hoinestly daft comments are like water off a ducks back to me.

For the one or two who are willing to hold a sensible intelligent debate thank you, this is all The Seahorse Trust has asked for from the beginning, instead we have been subjected to some of the most aggresive, unintelligable abuse, vile comments in public meetings and personal threats I have heard for a while. When people have to resort to this sort of tactic (including the verbal abuse we get on the beach) then in my mind they loose the arguement!!

This is my last post on this issue as I am more than happy to have a constructive debate but I am not prepared to put up with abuse and absolute nonsense.

You are not having a constructive debate, you are running away again when anyone asks a question that challenges. For example HOW DOES ANYONE JOIN the Seahorse Trust?

I know this arguement has been put forward many times about an increase in the seagrass backed up by anecdotal and other evidence but whenever I ask for the evidence nobody has it or can put me in the direction of it. So I will ask again if you have the evidence one way or the other then please let us know and show it to us.
I had one gentleman (and I use that term loosely as his behaviour was far from gentlemanly) who told me he has studied seahorses in Studland Bay for 50 years and has prove that they are thriving and increasing in numbers; again when asked for the evidence he cannot back up what he is saying.

You know full well that 50 years ago we were not aware we would need to start collecting evidence to prove our case 50 years later. We have asked YOU to prove that our assertions are wrong by using aerial photographic evidence from the military which surely exists as this area has been used continually for training parachute drops. You chose to ignore that suggestion or I think said that the 'green' seen from the air is not eel grass but algae.

All of the people working alongside us (and I dont mean Seastar doing the Natural England VNAZ as they are no part of our work, which is much more indepth and long term than theres) are working on papers and evidence that is being peer reviewed and will be in the public domain when they have gone through that process, so we are prepared to put our evidence out there for discussion. If those of you who say that you have the evidence step up to the mark and produce it.

I have no doubt that your results will suggest exactly what you have asked for them to be. Unless the peers doing the reviewing were present to establish and monitor the areas selected and quality control the data production as well as being totally independent then the results will not be credible. If you and your mouthpiece ST44 had not already poured scorn on the ongoing VNAZ survey by Natural England before it even started you might have a slightly more credible point. Excuse me if I don't trust you.

This is my final comment on this forum and I wish you all the best and have a happy season yacthing and boating and if when we are down there or at one of our other study sites (we do have quite a few) then come over and have a chat (if some of you are prepared to not hide behind the comutor. Notice I am 100% happy to reveal who I am) I am always prepared to talk about the subject and despite what some of you think I do listen to what you are saying.

I don't hide behind my 'comutor', my names is Robin just like it says. However I don't see any point in discussing anything with totally closed minds that continually fail to answer direct questions and have been proven to have preconceived ideas and a positive hatred of anyone who dares challenge them, as witnessed by posts on here and ST44's Facebook site.

By the way you need a spell checker.

 

[KevB]

If this isn't interfering with the seahorses in Studland then I don't know what is...

How natural is it to have a tag tied around it's neck?

If seahorses start to decline in Studland I think we can firmly put the blame on the intrusive diving and tagging carried out by the 'seahorse trust'

 

[Major Catastrophe]

Dear all,

I know many of you are only trying to wind us up, sorry it is not working and sorry to disappoint you on that, I am too old and long in the tooth to be wound up like this and quite hoinestly daft comments are like water off a ducks back to me.

For the one or two who are willing to hold a sensible intelligent debate thank you, this is all The Seahorse Trust has asked for from the beginning, instead we have been subjected to some of the most aggresive, unintelligable abuse, vile comments in public meetings and personal threats I have heard for a while. When people have to resort to this sort of tactic (including the verbal abuse we get on the beach) then in my mind they loose the arguement!!

This is my last post on this issue as I am more than happy to have a constructive debate but I am not prepared to put up with abuse and absolute nonsense.

I know this arguement has been put forward many times about an increase in the seagrass backed up by anecdotal and other evidence but whenever I ask for the evidence nobody has it or can put me in the direction of it. So I will ask again if you have the evidence one way or the other then please let us know and show it to us.
I had one gentleman (and I use that term loosely as his behaviour was far from gentlemanly) who told me he has studied seahorses in Studland Bay for 50 years and has prove that they are thriving and increasing in numbers; again when asked for the evidence he cannot back up what he is saying.

All of the people working alongside us (and I dont mean Seastar doing the Natural England VNAZ as they are no part of our work, which is much more indepth and long term than theres) are working on papers and evidence that is being peer reviewed and will be in the public domain when they have gone through that process, so we are prepared to put our evidence out there for discussion. If those of you who say that you have the evidence step up to the mark and produce it.

This is my final comment on this forum and I wish you all the best and have a happy season yacthing and boating and if when we are down there or at one of our other study sites (we do have quite a few) then come over and have a chat (if some of you are prepared to not hide behind the comutor. Notice I am 100% happy to reveal who I am) I am always prepared to talk about the subject and despite what some of you think I do listen to what you are saying.

All the best

Neil
Neil Garrick-Maidment
Director
The Seahorse trust.

Neil, As Steve is just as guilty of spouting much of the 'abuse and absolute nonsense' and your first post addressed to me was slightly abusive, you are a kettle calling the pot black.

You haven't answered any of my questions and you and Steve continually refer to future research results that you appear to have every confidence will support your claim. That does not instil any confidence in their probity.

You are using a picture of a turd and a square of paper, non scientific observation, abuse and insults to platform a very dodgy premise.

The moment you used the 'peeing over the side of your boat' argument I realised that your organisation and its hangers on have a tenuous grasp of any real science and you are a one issue pressure group with a single outcome regardless of contrary evidence.

I have now written to the National Lottery Heritage fund and the charity commissioners and asked them to reconsider your status and I have sent them links to every thread where you or Steve has posted in the last three years.

Re-reading them is actually a fascinating insight into your 'campaign'.

 

[KevB]

And of course... all the rubbish comes from boats

 

[sarabande]

Brutus:

There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.


Julius Caesar Act 4, scene 3

 

[jhr]

Caesar:

Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it in for me!

- Carry on Cleo

 

[sarabande]

I'd forgotten that wonderful line ! Kenneth Williams ?