Sans Bateau
Well-known member
Excellent news Jon, its been a hard struggle (for you) but at last I hope common sense will become widespread.
Studland Bay summary
- Thread starter oldharry
- Start date
Tranona
Well-known member
Yes, they have never liked to location of the VNAZ. Not a good control to monitor the effect of anchoring because virtually nobody anchored there anyway.
ARCO7
New member
Very Good !
Well Done to Old Harry ,Borg and the Studland Bay PA's ,this is a major boost in the right direction ,and much needed good news after years of continual hype from the opposite side.
I think we all know its not over yet ,but I do hope certain members of the media that promoted this conservation hyped up story have the decency to apologise for their incompetent research and reporting
They should all eat a big chunk of HUMBLE PIE and report on the findings of this Government Funded Professional Survey ,but that might be asking too much .
When summer does eventually arrive I look forward to visiting a VNAZ free Studland just like the good old days !
Well Done to Old Harry ,Borg and the Studland Bay PA's ,this is a major boost in the right direction ,and much needed good news after years of continual hype from the opposite side.
I think we all know its not over yet ,but I do hope certain members of the media that promoted this conservation hyped up story have the decency to apologise for their incompetent research and reporting
They should all eat a big chunk of HUMBLE PIE and report on the findings of this Government Funded Professional Survey ,but that might be asking too much .
When summer does eventually arrive I look forward to visiting a VNAZ free Studland just like the good old days !
Seajet
...
Well Done to Old Harry ,Borg and the Studland Bay PA's ,this is a major boost in the right direction ,and much needed good news after years of continual hype from the opposite side.
I think we all know its not over yet ,but I do hope certain members of the media that promoted this conservation hyped up story have the decency to apologise for their incompetent research and reporting
They should all eat a big chunk of HUMBLE PIE and report on the findings of this Government Funded Professional Survey ,but that might be asking too much .
When summer does eventually arrive I look forward to visiting a VNAZ free Studland just like the good old days !
Arco7,
good luck with that one; you know how newspapers write front page articles destroying lives, then when it turns out to be false the correction is a line in small print on page 27 ?!
I'd like to see an inquiry into why this nonsense with the creation of quango upon quango and lots of public money spent ever happened in the first place...
This is not the end of the battle, but hopefully the beginning of the end; and we mustn't forget places like Falmouth & Wales still under serious threat, hopefully if sense prevails at Studland it will in these places too.
Tomahawk
Well-known member
It is not just the idiots on the South Coast
On the East Coast we have the RSPB's vision of heaven to contend with.. Alas it is all done and dusted now and under construction,,,
Some bright spark thought what a wonderful idea it would be if they took 10,000 acres of the highest yealding land and turned it onto a haven exclusively for up market trainspotters.. For upmarket trainspotters; read bird spotters.. They are basically the same thing.. just spotting birds is fashionable and trendy whilst ticking a mark 3 deltic of a list makes you some form of anorak.. This at a time when the Government has cut back on setaside payments in order to improve strategic food supply.
Not only that ... the sea walls around the Blackwater are sub standard.. Look at the EA flood risk maps.. However the EA hasn't got the money to improve the sea defences to protect people as it is very expensive to bring all that material to the sea shore.. Meanwhile the Cross Rail project is producing a huge amount of excavated material that could have been used to defend peoples homes. The RSPB bagged it for their playground ..
It seems that so called environmentalists and conservationists have no concept of the world outside their hobby.
On the East Coast we have the RSPB's vision of heaven to contend with.. Alas it is all done and dusted now and under construction,,,
Some bright spark thought what a wonderful idea it would be if they took 10,000 acres of the highest yealding land and turned it onto a haven exclusively for up market trainspotters.. For upmarket trainspotters; read bird spotters.. They are basically the same thing.. just spotting birds is fashionable and trendy whilst ticking a mark 3 deltic of a list makes you some form of anorak.. This at a time when the Government has cut back on setaside payments in order to improve strategic food supply.
Not only that ... the sea walls around the Blackwater are sub standard.. Look at the EA flood risk maps.. However the EA hasn't got the money to improve the sea defences to protect people as it is very expensive to bring all that material to the sea shore.. Meanwhile the Cross Rail project is producing a huge amount of excavated material that could have been used to defend peoples homes. The RSPB bagged it for their playground ..
It seems that so called environmentalists and conservationists have no concept of the world outside their hobby.
MarlynSpyke
Active member
Goodbye VNAZ!Well Done to Old Harry ,Borg and the Studland Bay PA's ,this is a major boost in the right direction ,and much needed good news after years of continual hype from the opposite side.
I think we all know its not over yet ,but I do hope certain members of the media that promoted this conservation hyped up story have the decency to apologise for their incompetent research and reporting
They should all eat a big chunk of HUMBLE PIE and report on the findings of this Government Funded Professional Survey ,but that might be asking too much .
When summer does eventually arrive I look forward to visiting a VNAZ free Studland just like the good old days !
ARCO7 mentions the VNAZ (Voluntasry No Anchor Zone): it’s worth quoting this paragraph from the email from Fiona Wynne of Natural England to stakeholders (she says please forward this email to anybody else who might be interested):
“The study took place over two years, with an option to extend it to a further year. The Crown Estate and Natural England have decided not to take up the option of funding an additional year of survey work. The voluntary no-anchor zone is no longer required for the purposes of this study therefore it will be removed as soon as possible, as stipulated as a condition of the original marine consent. “
Full email text on the BORG (Boat Owners Response Group) website at http://boatownersresponse.org.uk/latest-news/ . Link to the full Seastar Survey report (71 pages) when we get the link.
Nicholas123
N/A
Three cheers for old Harry who seems to have done a wonderful job but I'm still concerned about anchorages I use round the Isle of Wight.If these "Conservationists" can stop us anchoring because of little known snails in areas that it is practically inconceivable the anchoring that does take place is doing any harm then nowhere is safe.
While they can gain from it financially & extend their careers as a result of this legislation I can't imagine them ever giving up the goose that lays the golden egg!
While they can gain from it financially & extend their careers as a result of this legislation I can't imagine them ever giving up the goose that lays the golden egg!
MarlynSpyke
Active member
Nicholas123 mentions snails, and you get to wonder what the priorities are in this conservation business. If you look at the list of creatures “of conservational interest” in the Balanced Seas proposed MCZ report you see things like Defolin’s lagoon snail, lagoon sea slugs, stalked jellyfish, seahorses, tentacled lagoon worm, and so on. What about fish? They list just three: European eel, smelt, and undulate ray. No, not kidding, it’s true.
So all the other fish in the sea don’t matter?
And what about porpoises and dolphins? When I was a kid we’d see dolphins on our summer holidays particularly in the West Country. But the last 15 years I must have spent weeks and weeks on the sea in a sailing boat along the south coast, between Chichester, the Solent, Dorset, Devon and sometimes Cornwall, keeping, of course, a good look-out, but not seen one single dolphin. We’ve seen seals, basking sharks, a sunfish and one harbour porpoise (a few years back, off Portsmouth).
There should be far, far more porpoises and dolphins (and cod and haddock and skate and bass and so on) but they seem to be ignored.
Conservation priorities seem just bizarre. Blobs of jelly over dolphins, or stocks of proper fish!
oldharry
Well-known member
Thanks everybody for your good wishes, and it is good to know that at last what we have been saying all along is being confirmed. But we are not out of the eelgrass yet, and I suspect there will still be a lot to do to ensure that MCZs are based on sound science, and conservation objectves will be realistic, effective and applied where they really are needed. However for the first time I feel we may have started on the home run, with a chance of a balanced result.
Marlynspike hits the nail on the head: really the MCZ process misses the point, and although its a step in the right direction it fails completely to address many of the serious issues, which so many of us are aware of. Dolphins and Porpoises - where have they gone? I remember seeing a huge pod of dolphins off Torbay back in the 70s - possibly 60 or more. I have not seen one now for at least 12 years along the S coast. MCZs do nothing for them. The common mackerel: as a boy Icould drop a line and pick up half a dozen in as many minutes. Now? Its an event to catch one. Unique submarine features like the chalk pillars off Winter bank near Littlehampton have been totally destroyed by heavy beam trawlers, raking the seabed to a depth of a foot or more below the surface, with four ton steel trawls - and they worry about the effect of our little anchors!
Marlynspike hits the nail on the head: really the MCZ process misses the point, and although its a step in the right direction it fails completely to address many of the serious issues, which so many of us are aware of. Dolphins and Porpoises - where have they gone? I remember seeing a huge pod of dolphins off Torbay back in the 70s - possibly 60 or more. I have not seen one now for at least 12 years along the S coast. MCZs do nothing for them. The common mackerel: as a boy Icould drop a line and pick up half a dozen in as many minutes. Now? Its an event to catch one. Unique submarine features like the chalk pillars off Winter bank near Littlehampton have been totally destroyed by heavy beam trawlers, raking the seabed to a depth of a foot or more below the surface, with four ton steel trawls - and they worry about the effect of our little anchors!
oldharry
Well-known member
Seastar report
Crown Estates tell me they are having 'technical issues' with their website, and expect to post the Seastar report tomorrow. they have promised to let me have a link as soon as it is available.
Crown Estates tell me they are having 'technical issues' with their website, and expect to post the Seastar report tomorrow. they have promised to let me have a link as soon as it is available.
Tranona
Well-known member
Dolphins are still seen regularly off Poole/Swanage. Had a lovely 10 minutes a couple of years ago at the end of the Swash Channel with a friendly pod of about 6.
But you ar right about the failings of the current process, driven as it has been by monority interest groups. However, given the lack of agreement about what the problems are, never mind the possible solutions it is hardly surprising little progress is made.
But you ar right about the failings of the current process, driven as it has been by monority interest groups. However, given the lack of agreement about what the problems are, never mind the possible solutions it is hardly surprising little progress is made.
Last edited:
oldharry
Well-known member
Seastar report now available for download
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/med...and Bay second seagrass monitoring report.pdf
or via the BORG website
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/med...and Bay second seagrass monitoring report.pdf
or via the BORG website
alahol2
Well-known member
Well, that was an interesting read. I thought one of the most telling paragraphs was at 4.1.3...
4.1.3 Scientific community participation
Since the onset of this study several attempts have been made to encourage the
involvement of individuals and organisations (e.g. The Seahorse Trust and some members
of the scientific community) to contribute to this study for the greater good of the project as
well as the fauna, flora and habitats in Studland Bay but to date any such attempts have
been turned down. ...
...The lack of positive involvement in the
project therefore seems like a missed opportunity to: 1) improve the scientific knowledge
base regarding UK seagrass habitats; and 2) positively influence the long-term future of the
fauna and flora within Studland Bay.
Whilst, to a fairly high degree, the boating community has observed the VNAZ in search of 'scientific' evidence concerning anchoring in and around Eel grass the scientific and conservation interests appear to have deliberately avoided any involvment. I think that just about sums up their attitude of 'we are in the right no matter what the evidence may say'.
4.1.3 Scientific community participation
Since the onset of this study several attempts have been made to encourage the
involvement of individuals and organisations (e.g. The Seahorse Trust and some members
of the scientific community) to contribute to this study for the greater good of the project as
well as the fauna, flora and habitats in Studland Bay but to date any such attempts have
been turned down. ...
...The lack of positive involvement in the
project therefore seems like a missed opportunity to: 1) improve the scientific knowledge
base regarding UK seagrass habitats; and 2) positively influence the long-term future of the
fauna and flora within Studland Bay.
Whilst, to a fairly high degree, the boating community has observed the VNAZ in search of 'scientific' evidence concerning anchoring in and around Eel grass the scientific and conservation interests appear to have deliberately avoided any involvment. I think that just about sums up their attitude of 'we are in the right no matter what the evidence may say'.
Tranona
Well-known member
Probably for two reasons. Firstly one of the significant players that did not co-operate works for an organistion that is a major competitor to Seastar. The second is that the other player (mentioned in that extract) does not like being asked questions that he cannot answer.
MarlynSpyke
Active member
What about the fixed moorings?
Now the dire (and hugely exaggerated) conservationists’ warnings about anchors wiping out the eelgrass and seahorses have been debunked by Seastar’s careful work, what about Studland’s fixed moorings?
Yes, the chains do sweep circles of seabed bare, but this is a fixed area and a very small fraction of the total eelgrass beds. But does this harm the seahorses?
The conservationist’s knee-jerk reply would be “of course it will”. But Neil Garrick-Maidment’s (NGM’s) report at http://www.theseahorsetrust.org/use...air_of_Seahorse_during_the_summer_of_2010.pdf describes these seahorses living in an area right next to a mooring scar. Other seahorses used the same site in earlier years. So they presumably like it, it suits them, or they wouldn’t live there. Fig. 5 of the report shows positions of actual sightings, and most are very near to or even within the scar – it acts like a magnet. It really is worth taking a look at Fig. 5.
NGM suggests that the open areas over the scar might be used for courtship displays. But could it also be that the chain moving over the seabed stirs up food particles, or tiny creatures to feed the seahorses?
Not as far-fetched as some might think – the seahorses do whatever seahorses do in the nearby eelgrass, and when they sense the vibrations from a moving chain, that acts as a food signal and they shimmy out to see what’s been turned up. After all, bass are said to cruise the surf on an incoming tide in search of food churned up from the seabed, flounder spoons might work by disturbing the bottom, and stirring up a river bed with a stick is an early form of ground-baiting.
So the conservo’s should look very closely at the evidence (eg were more seahorses found in the vicinity of moorings than by random chance, as they were in Fig. 5?) - or they might find that the “conservation” action they want has driven the little darlings away!
Some conservationists believe that all activities of man are evil, and nature must rule, but more intelligent ones will note the successes of bird conservation where nest boxes, artificial nesting sites and even providing food have worked really well in restoring declining species. Human influence can sometimes be good.
But it would be a bit of a laugh if it turned out that a degree of disturbance of the seabed is what makes Studland Bay attractive to seahorses!
More background at http://boatownersresponse.org.uk/seahorse-qas/
Now the dire (and hugely exaggerated) conservationists’ warnings about anchors wiping out the eelgrass and seahorses have been debunked by Seastar’s careful work, what about Studland’s fixed moorings?
Yes, the chains do sweep circles of seabed bare, but this is a fixed area and a very small fraction of the total eelgrass beds. But does this harm the seahorses?
The conservationist’s knee-jerk reply would be “of course it will”. But Neil Garrick-Maidment’s (NGM’s) report at http://www.theseahorsetrust.org/use...air_of_Seahorse_during_the_summer_of_2010.pdf describes these seahorses living in an area right next to a mooring scar. Other seahorses used the same site in earlier years. So they presumably like it, it suits them, or they wouldn’t live there. Fig. 5 of the report shows positions of actual sightings, and most are very near to or even within the scar – it acts like a magnet. It really is worth taking a look at Fig. 5.
NGM suggests that the open areas over the scar might be used for courtship displays. But could it also be that the chain moving over the seabed stirs up food particles, or tiny creatures to feed the seahorses?
Not as far-fetched as some might think – the seahorses do whatever seahorses do in the nearby eelgrass, and when they sense the vibrations from a moving chain, that acts as a food signal and they shimmy out to see what’s been turned up. After all, bass are said to cruise the surf on an incoming tide in search of food churned up from the seabed, flounder spoons might work by disturbing the bottom, and stirring up a river bed with a stick is an early form of ground-baiting.
So the conservo’s should look very closely at the evidence (eg were more seahorses found in the vicinity of moorings than by random chance, as they were in Fig. 5?) - or they might find that the “conservation” action they want has driven the little darlings away!
Some conservationists believe that all activities of man are evil, and nature must rule, but more intelligent ones will note the successes of bird conservation where nest boxes, artificial nesting sites and even providing food have worked really well in restoring declining species. Human influence can sometimes be good.
But it would be a bit of a laugh if it turned out that a degree of disturbance of the seabed is what makes Studland Bay attractive to seahorses!
More background at http://boatownersresponse.org.uk/seahorse-qas/
steve350
Active member
seems the ban has been lifted
"Studland Bay seahorse no-anchor zone lifted". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-18719619
"Studland Bay seahorse no-anchor zone lifted". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-18719619
Clammer
New member
What about the fixed moorings.
MarlynSpyke has produced some interesting observations and deductions in his Post above. I have watched the Divers over the last few years as they search for Seahorses in Studland Bay. The divers concentrate around those moorings which are located in the Eelgrass beds. Presumably because that is where they expect to find Seahorses.
I have fished the Bay for many years and have observed prawns basking in the sandy pools found in the eelgrass beds. As soon as disturbed they shoot back into the eelgrass cover. The sandy/muddy pools have warmer water- sun reflection off the sea floor. The chain scars of the moorings give the same effect- warmer water pools. The Seahorses obviously enjoy these pools and the photos and Seahorse article quoted seem to prove it.
So the moorings are a favoured habitat of the seahorse.
Best leave the Bay as it is,fixed moorings, anchoring and seahorses. EFMs are no longer required as they were originally intended to be an addition to the current moorings to minimise anchoring damage.
MarlynSpyke has produced some interesting observations and deductions in his Post above. I have watched the Divers over the last few years as they search for Seahorses in Studland Bay. The divers concentrate around those moorings which are located in the Eelgrass beds. Presumably because that is where they expect to find Seahorses.
I have fished the Bay for many years and have observed prawns basking in the sandy pools found in the eelgrass beds. As soon as disturbed they shoot back into the eelgrass cover. The sandy/muddy pools have warmer water- sun reflection off the sea floor. The chain scars of the moorings give the same effect- warmer water pools. The Seahorses obviously enjoy these pools and the photos and Seahorse article quoted seem to prove it.
So the moorings are a favoured habitat of the seahorse.
Best leave the Bay as it is,fixed moorings, anchoring and seahorses. EFMs are no longer required as they were originally intended to be an addition to the current moorings to minimise anchoring damage.
Seajet
...
Clammer,
I couldn't agree more re EFM's no longer being required; I investigated these things in their various guises and came away distinctly underwhelmed.
I wouldn't trust my boat on one in a gale, or at any other time as one wouldn't know if the last boat on it was a humungous Sunseeker in a F9 and the thing was hanging on it's last thread, I'd also be concerned about chafe / cuts to the magic elastic band...
I contacted my insurers to ask how they felt about these things for a public mooring, and what was the insurance angle if the worst happened; " what is the maximum value boat you envisage using it ? " ..." Well it's close to Sunseekers' yard and on the main East-West cruising boat route, so a good few £ million "... " Err, we'll get back to you ! " click...
I couldn't agree more re EFM's no longer being required; I investigated these things in their various guises and came away distinctly underwhelmed.
I wouldn't trust my boat on one in a gale, or at any other time as one wouldn't know if the last boat on it was a humungous Sunseeker in a F9 and the thing was hanging on it's last thread, I'd also be concerned about chafe / cuts to the magic elastic band...
I contacted my insurers to ask how they felt about these things for a public mooring, and what was the insurance angle if the worst happened; " what is the maximum value boat you envisage using it ? " ..." Well it's close to Sunseekers' yard and on the main East-West cruising boat route, so a good few £ million "... " Err, we'll get back to you ! " click...
oldharry
Well-known member
Agree entirely with Clammers views on the need for EFMs in the Bay. MMO have invited both Clammer and myself to assist in an EFM pilot trial. This was some months ago, since then MMO has suffered another round of cutbacks, so it may never happen.
However, talking to the MMO's Head of Conservation and Enforcement earlier this year, MMO clearly intend eventually to bring all private moorings outside Harbour authority jurisdiction under control, as required by MCAA2009. I suspect they may be considering only licensing the use of EFM type moorings in these locations, or at least in ecologically sensitive locations. if so they will want to conduct trials to ensure what will work properly and safely.
Seajet showed me the reports he had on them, that he mentions, and I would certainly want to know more before leaving my boat on one!
I will post a little more background on mooring rights or lack of them on the BORG website as we have researched the issue in some detail for the Studland mooring holders.
However, talking to the MMO's Head of Conservation and Enforcement earlier this year, MMO clearly intend eventually to bring all private moorings outside Harbour authority jurisdiction under control, as required by MCAA2009. I suspect they may be considering only licensing the use of EFM type moorings in these locations, or at least in ecologically sensitive locations. if so they will want to conduct trials to ensure what will work properly and safely.
Seajet showed me the reports he had on them, that he mentions, and I would certainly want to know more before leaving my boat on one!
I will post a little more background on mooring rights or lack of them on the BORG website as we have researched the issue in some detail for the Studland mooring holders.
Last edited:
Sans Bateau
Well-known member
if the MMO insist on EFM type moorings, then when considering the previous (theory) posts, then this could have a further impact on Studland as a seahorse habitat.
Once again conservationists MUST be reminded that seahorses have coexisted with the environment which is Studland, long before conservation became a fashion.
Once again conservationists MUST be reminded that seahorses have coexisted with the environment which is Studland, long before conservation became a fashion.
