Boathook
Well-known member
The 5 comments that follow the article are quite good.
Studland Bay summary
- Thread starter oldharry
- Start date
The 5 comments that follow the article are quite good.
Seajet
...
One problem faced by 'the common sense camp' like BORG etc is that a lot of people at commercial ports know very well there are Seahorses there, but feel they daren't mention it for fear of serious financial enterprises getting shut down by the career conservationists !
The Port Of London Authority did very well when an MCZ was proprosed there, with a response on the lines of ' You and whose army? '
The Port Of London Authority did very well when an MCZ was proprosed there, with a response on the lines of ' You and whose army? '
Robin
Well-known member
We watched the Hungry Sailors on ITV yesterday where they were in Poole and the surrounding area. They went to a local specialist brewery in Studland and had 'Seahorse Ale', the owners were also divers.
Seajet
...
I don't think I'll be drinking Seahorse wee any time soon !
oldharry
Well-known member
If you are talking about a jar of Bankses best you dont know what you have missed. Well worth the walk up the lane from the anchorage.
Boathook
Well-known member
They also place some of the buoys at Studland to encourage boaters to go to the pub ...
As per oldharry they produce some nice beers.
Seajet
...
As I recall, the best thing about the Bankes Arms was the view from the garden giving a view of one's boat, hopefully still at anchor...but that was a while ago.
Last edited:
ARCO7
New member
Corrections and updates
Hello All,
Can I just correct the information about the Staff and Owners of the Seahorse Brewery and The Bankes Arms ,
1.. The Seahorse Brewery is actually called the Isle of Purbeck Brewery and has a Seahorse as its emblem and you'll see this painted on their delivery vans parked in the car park or outside the Pub . They do produce some fine Ales including , Solar Power , Old Harry's Harvest , Fossil Fuel and Studland Bay Wrecked to name a few .
2... As far as I am aware none of the Staff or owners are Diver's and are quite supportive of BORG, SBPA etc etc.
3...Captain Alex Gibbons (SBPA) ,who's family has fished the bay for 200 years or more says there are no known native oysters in Studland Bay and he cannot understand why Finding Sanctuary have included Native Oyster's as one of the Features of Conservation .He has given me permission to quote him on this .
You might wonder why HM Government are delaying the MCZ process while they ask for more proof and scientific data ? It appears in some areas the data collected so far is false or incorrect and they might eventually turn their focus on what the locals have to say for a change ,because they have totally ignored them up to now.
Hello All,
Can I just correct the information about the Staff and Owners of the Seahorse Brewery and The Bankes Arms ,
1.. The Seahorse Brewery is actually called the Isle of Purbeck Brewery and has a Seahorse as its emblem and you'll see this painted on their delivery vans parked in the car park or outside the Pub . They do produce some fine Ales including , Solar Power , Old Harry's Harvest , Fossil Fuel and Studland Bay Wrecked to name a few .
2... As far as I am aware none of the Staff or owners are Diver's and are quite supportive of BORG, SBPA etc etc.
3...Captain Alex Gibbons (SBPA) ,who's family has fished the bay for 200 years or more says there are no known native oysters in Studland Bay and he cannot understand why Finding Sanctuary have included Native Oyster's as one of the Features of Conservation .He has given me permission to quote him on this .
You might wonder why HM Government are delaying the MCZ process while they ask for more proof and scientific data ? It appears in some areas the data collected so far is false or incorrect and they might eventually turn their focus on what the locals have to say for a change ,because they have totally ignored them up to now.
oldharry
Well-known member
Quite right Arco7: The fact the brewery uses the Seahorse as its emblem is seen as evidence that the critturs have been around for a great many years. The landlord, Tim certainly supports the SBPA, attending their meetings, and hosting them at the Bankes (thats how I know they produce a first rate tipple!). He also distributes SBPAs leaflets in the bar - so yes he is is definitely 'on side' with the local residents.
The question of the Oysters was raised at a recent meeting with Natural England. The Dorset local Work group of Finding Sanctuary, of which I was a member, was told there was a bed of them on the south side of the Bay. Capt. Alex, and other fishermen have now told NE this is not so. I am not sure where the original information came from, but it was not questioned when DLWG was examining Studland a year ago. But that information was not accessible to the Public at the time.
As far as the delays are concerned, as Arco7 says, there has been a lot of questioning of the data that was produced to back the MCZ recommendations - not least our own questions about the validity of the data concerning anchoring in eelgrass, both here and elsewhere. DEFRA is clearly not prepared to base legally binding conservation recommendations on questionable data, and will not put any area forward unless it is satisfied that there is an adequate factual basis for doing so. Already there is clear talk around Studland of further work and surveys needing to be done. There is an overall deadline of 2015.
Many conservation organisations - Wild Life Trusts, Marine Conservation Society and suchlike are trying to bulldoze recommendations through regardless on the pretext that another year will make a difference. In practice I think they want to see things in place before the government pulls the plug on the whole thing in yet another round of cutbacks. The writing has been on on the wall in the House since last November when the Chancellor commented on the high cost of conservation.
The question of the Oysters was raised at a recent meeting with Natural England. The Dorset local Work group of Finding Sanctuary, of which I was a member, was told there was a bed of them on the south side of the Bay. Capt. Alex, and other fishermen have now told NE this is not so. I am not sure where the original information came from, but it was not questioned when DLWG was examining Studland a year ago. But that information was not accessible to the Public at the time.
As far as the delays are concerned, as Arco7 says, there has been a lot of questioning of the data that was produced to back the MCZ recommendations - not least our own questions about the validity of the data concerning anchoring in eelgrass, both here and elsewhere. DEFRA is clearly not prepared to base legally binding conservation recommendations on questionable data, and will not put any area forward unless it is satisfied that there is an adequate factual basis for doing so. Already there is clear talk around Studland of further work and surveys needing to be done. There is an overall deadline of 2015.
Many conservation organisations - Wild Life Trusts, Marine Conservation Society and suchlike are trying to bulldoze recommendations through regardless on the pretext that another year will make a difference. In practice I think they want to see things in place before the government pulls the plug on the whole thing in yet another round of cutbacks. The writing has been on on the wall in the House since last November when the Chancellor commented on the high cost of conservation.
Last edited:
DaveS
Well-known member
Same subject, but elsewhere: I see that a group of Barra fishermen are visiting the Scottish Parliament today to protest about a proposed MCZ (or equivalent).
Clammer
New member
The issues being raised about Barra seem similar in many ways to the issues at Studland. For example...Stakeholders haven't been listened to or if they have not the slightest notice has been taken. Local knowledge has been ignored.Natural England who seem to be running the Process in England decided Studland Bay should be an MCZ long ago and are now 'hellbent' on finding reasons to support their requirement of anchoring and mooring bans. As in Barra the whole issue is being decided by Scientists who have little practical knowledge and certainly no local knowledge.
Worth listening to the film clip on BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-16928873
Worth listening to the film clip on BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-16928873
ARCO7
New member
Prediction was Wrong
My previous prediction that there would be a credit crunch in the Euro zone in February 2012 has it seems been very narrowly avoided up to now so we can all breathe a huge sigh of relief .
I do hope my other prediction that Studland Bay Anchorage will be left well alone next year by the Uk Government due to over funding with and wastage of public money does become reality and we can all once again breathe a huge sigh of relief .
I have watched with huge interest the wartime films of Studland Bay blazing with burning oil after experiments on beach defence and anti-invasion measures after our defeat at Dunkirk . There are links to these on the Save Studland Bay Community Facebook page if you google it and I'm sure you'll all find this little known piece of Studland Maritime History fascinating.
The SBPA are now claiming that eco moorings would not be suitable for Studland Bay as the deep drilling required to fit the screw -in anchor point (7-8 ft) might disturb any remaining wartime oil that has remained buried for the last 68 years.
If you watch the films you'll probably see why they are so concerned .
There does seem to be an aweful lot of taxpayers money gone into this Marine Conservation zone project at Studland and just like the Boscombe Surf Reef across the other end of Poole Bay it has probably been a complete waste of time and Public Funds and had an adverse effect on the local marine life and eco system .
One Bournemouth Councillor has been quoted as saying "The Surf Reef is now dead and buried" ,well I hope in time that is said about the Studland Bay Marine Conservation Zone and the No Anchoring Idea .
If not then we should really ask for compensation from the MMO ,Defra and Natural England so we could replace our boats with shallow draft Macgregor 26 yachts that are able to anchor in 6 inches of water and can therefore anchor within the sandy area inshore of the eelgrass meadows . It should be about £30k each so a small chip in the UK Treasury's Deficit Reduction Plans .
On government funding I also note that my local Wildlife Trust (Hants and IOW) and Sussex have been given £500k to create a joint roadshow exhibition rightly named "Making Waves" to educate the public about the important marine eco system off their shores.
Any news on whether the Ark Royal is going to become another part of this important marine eco system ?
Has the country has gone potty or is it just me ?
My previous prediction that there would be a credit crunch in the Euro zone in February 2012 has it seems been very narrowly avoided up to now so we can all breathe a huge sigh of relief .
I do hope my other prediction that Studland Bay Anchorage will be left well alone next year by the Uk Government due to over funding with and wastage of public money does become reality and we can all once again breathe a huge sigh of relief .
I have watched with huge interest the wartime films of Studland Bay blazing with burning oil after experiments on beach defence and anti-invasion measures after our defeat at Dunkirk . There are links to these on the Save Studland Bay Community Facebook page if you google it and I'm sure you'll all find this little known piece of Studland Maritime History fascinating.
The SBPA are now claiming that eco moorings would not be suitable for Studland Bay as the deep drilling required to fit the screw -in anchor point (7-8 ft) might disturb any remaining wartime oil that has remained buried for the last 68 years.
If you watch the films you'll probably see why they are so concerned .
There does seem to be an aweful lot of taxpayers money gone into this Marine Conservation zone project at Studland and just like the Boscombe Surf Reef across the other end of Poole Bay it has probably been a complete waste of time and Public Funds and had an adverse effect on the local marine life and eco system .
One Bournemouth Councillor has been quoted as saying "The Surf Reef is now dead and buried" ,well I hope in time that is said about the Studland Bay Marine Conservation Zone and the No Anchoring Idea .
If not then we should really ask for compensation from the MMO ,Defra and Natural England so we could replace our boats with shallow draft Macgregor 26 yachts that are able to anchor in 6 inches of water and can therefore anchor within the sandy area inshore of the eelgrass meadows . It should be about £30k each so a small chip in the UK Treasury's Deficit Reduction Plans .
On government funding I also note that my local Wildlife Trust (Hants and IOW) and Sussex have been given £500k to create a joint roadshow exhibition rightly named "Making Waves" to educate the public about the important marine eco system off their shores.
Any news on whether the Ark Royal is going to become another part of this important marine eco system ?
Has the country has gone potty or is it just me ?
Last edited:
Seajet
...
ARCO7,
yet it has and no, you're not alone. That's about it for the moment.
yet it has and no, you're not alone. That's about it for the moment.
oldharry
Well-known member
Totally potty IMHO. Latest estimates show Govt will need to spend £110million at todays prices just on surveying MCZs over the next ten years. That is without any of the other management costs of setting up and enforcement. Studland estimate suggests £433,000 to set up now (others say over £800,000) + £90,000 a year - just to install and run EFMs.
Yes, our leaders sure have their priorities straight!
Yes, our leaders sure have their priorities straight!
ARCO7
New member
Money down the Conservation Drain
Old Harry that is very interesting !
Have you sent these figures to George Osborne ? lol
He'd be doing the Uk taxpayer a huge favour by getting out his red marker pen and crossing a few noughts off those figures before proudly announcing he's saved the country another few million by cutting the conservation allowance.
Meanwhile over in Dorset , the Police are deciding whether to scrap their Marine Unit after the Weymouth Olympics because of government enforced cutbacks ??????
Its certainly is a MAD MAD MAD MAD world we find ourselves in these days !
Old Harry that is very interesting !
Have you sent these figures to George Osborne ? lol
He'd be doing the Uk taxpayer a huge favour by getting out his red marker pen and crossing a few noughts off those figures before proudly announcing he's saved the country another few million by cutting the conservation allowance.
Meanwhile over in Dorset , the Police are deciding whether to scrap their Marine Unit after the Weymouth Olympics because of government enforced cutbacks ??????
Its certainly is a MAD MAD MAD MAD world we find ourselves in these days !
oldharry
Well-known member
Figures come from a draft Economic Assessment report which forms part of the MCZ recommendation.
The higher figure for the Studland EFMs appeared in a report comissioned by Crown Estates last November. This report demonstrated that EFMs were not a financially viable business proposition at Studland.
The higher figure for the Studland EFMs appeared in a report comissioned by Crown Estates last November. This report demonstrated that EFMs were not a financially viable business proposition at Studland.
oldharry
Well-known member
UPDATE
DEFRA has called for an 'independent review' of the data. This to be carried out by Dr Hull of ABPmer in Southampton. This sounded OK, and they are asking for input from people and orgnisations like BORG, SBPA and so on.
However we have this week heard that members of the Science Advisory Panel will be forming a part of the reviewing body - so just how 'independent' will it be?
In the meantime, Fireball of this parish, continues to apply his scientific skills to the situation, particularly at Studland, and is working on further reports which explode the whole myth of anchor damage. Any more scientists/ professional Naturalists out there want to come in on this and get a bit of common sense into the debate, let me know, and I will point you to the material Fireball is using. The louder our voice, the more effective we are likely to be.
This 'review' is due to be completed by mid-June, after which DEFRA will start assembling the final White Paper for public consultation towards the end of the year.
DEFRA have committed to 'ensuring stakeholder participation' throughout the process, so we have lodged our claim here, but we understand they are swamped with stakeholder applications from all round the coast!
In the meantime the argument rages on relentlessly in Studland, with our friend of the early days on these pages, ST44, still making his exaggerated claims through the SBPAs Facebook page. Worth a read, but it only reflects a small part of what is going on.
DEFRA has called for an 'independent review' of the data. This to be carried out by Dr Hull of ABPmer in Southampton. This sounded OK, and they are asking for input from people and orgnisations like BORG, SBPA and so on.
However we have this week heard that members of the Science Advisory Panel will be forming a part of the reviewing body - so just how 'independent' will it be?
In the meantime, Fireball of this parish, continues to apply his scientific skills to the situation, particularly at Studland, and is working on further reports which explode the whole myth of anchor damage. Any more scientists/ professional Naturalists out there want to come in on this and get a bit of common sense into the debate, let me know, and I will point you to the material Fireball is using. The louder our voice, the more effective we are likely to be.
This 'review' is due to be completed by mid-June, after which DEFRA will start assembling the final White Paper for public consultation towards the end of the year.
DEFRA have committed to 'ensuring stakeholder participation' throughout the process, so we have lodged our claim here, but we understand they are swamped with stakeholder applications from all round the coast!
In the meantime the argument rages on relentlessly in Studland, with our friend of the early days on these pages, ST44, still making his exaggerated claims through the SBPAs Facebook page. Worth a read, but it only reflects a small part of what is going on.
oldharry
Well-known member
BORG has submitted a full report to Natural England, ABPmer review panel and the MMO, of our position. Fireball has included two excellent papers the first of which looks at the whole situation at Studland, and explores thoroughly and carefully the evidence being put forward in support of an anchor ban. He has shown that the evidence demonstrates what every one who knows the Bay, both those fortunate enough to live there and regular visitors, can already see for themselves that the claim that anchoring is damaging and destroying the eelgrass is simply untrue.
There are a great many reports which confirm this view, and show Zostera marina to be a hardy species which recovers rapidly from any short term damage event, as evidenced by the fact it is still present in growing quantity after 60 years use as a busy anchorage! Fireball's second paper explores this in more depth, and shows ample evidence that this is the case.
We also submitted a detailed report giving the boat owners point of view, mainly summarised from your views expressed here on YBW, with some practical suggestions as to how Conservation Objectives could be met without closing the area as an anchorage.
We await replies from Natural England and the Review Panel, but MMO - perhaps the most important of the three, being the body charged with actually creating and enforcing the law concerning each individual MCZ, have welcomed it as a 'really constructive paper', and immediately invited us to join an advisory group dealing with the moorings issue.
Nothing much more is likely to happen now until mid summer when the review reports go to DEFRA, but we need to be ready for the 'Public Consultation period' in the Autumn before things go forward to the Minister for approval, as this will be the last chance to have a say before it all becomes law.
There are a great many reports which confirm this view, and show Zostera marina to be a hardy species which recovers rapidly from any short term damage event, as evidenced by the fact it is still present in growing quantity after 60 years use as a busy anchorage! Fireball's second paper explores this in more depth, and shows ample evidence that this is the case.
We also submitted a detailed report giving the boat owners point of view, mainly summarised from your views expressed here on YBW, with some practical suggestions as to how Conservation Objectives could be met without closing the area as an anchorage.
We await replies from Natural England and the Review Panel, but MMO - perhaps the most important of the three, being the body charged with actually creating and enforcing the law concerning each individual MCZ, have welcomed it as a 'really constructive paper', and immediately invited us to join an advisory group dealing with the moorings issue.
Nothing much more is likely to happen now until mid summer when the review reports go to DEFRA, but we need to be ready for the 'Public Consultation period' in the Autumn before things go forward to the Minister for approval, as this will be the last chance to have a say before it all becomes law.
Last edited:
Twister_Ken
Well-known member
Is that good? I thought 'we' were against moorings for reasons that have been expressed many times.
oldharry
Well-known member
Definitely good in my view: MMO is intending to trial EFMs at Studland, almost certainly with a view to using them more widely as a part of their national Policy in the forthcoming 'Marine Plan'. This means we will be fully involved in assessing any trial, and can directly influence the outcome not only at Studland, but potentially right across UK.
We have very firmly said right along that even if a limited number of visitor moorings are laid at Studland the choice of using them or lying to our own ground tackle MUST always remain fully open. Studlanders, and the RYA all agree on this. The anchorage MUST remain open as such. Those who prefer to tie up to a mooring (and there are some) can do so, while the rest of us continue to rely on our own ground tackle.
