Studland Consultation Consultation - we need to get proposals amended this Thursday

[Channel Sailor]

Well I was on the Zoom call. It was shocking, no representation or vessel navigation expertise in the panel at all. The whole premise for the initiative I would say is in question. George Eustace is the MP for Redruth looking after both Natural England and this MMO. Natural England (who are supposed to be "Advisors") appear to have use authority (from where?) to instruct the MMO to there work on this initiative. I still cannot understand who is responsible, except the RH Eustace at the top. Natural England seem to have looked elsewhere in the British Isles and noticed that Eel Grass might be suffering (over the past 20-30 years maybe). Then they find Eel Grass in Studland and decide based on shaky very recent local evidence that it needs Conservation. The reason for this conservation not being based on proper local evidence is because over 50 to 100 or more years there is no evidence (yet). It is quote possible in 1944 there was no Eel Grass at all in the bay, or it could have been full of it. For all we no in1914 it could have been full of sewage from Poole Harbour. BTW as an aside, I personally do recall the sewage outflow from Poole Harbour was awful in the 1990s.

Then there were the proposals for anchoring restrictions or moorings. I cannot imagine that a harbour authority or mooring business advisor was involved in those proposals. Pretty much unworkable. Just imagine what a blot on the landscape 100 or even 200 mooring buoys would look like on a winter morning. If any less than 100 then where will everyone else go to anchor. We are not talking about a location such as Lundy, this is a very popular holiday beach 2 miles from one of the biggest natural harbours stuffed full of leisure vessels of which many are skippers who want to anchor off the beach with their kids and are not that experienced with ocean conservation matters. It is also the only decent quick access shelter from the prevailing wind between Lymington and Weymouth (even these have the Needles Channel and Portland Race local to them).

The there was the mention of "Displacement". This is the issue of where on a nice weekend would the displaced small motor boats, small yachts and larger yachts go instead. Another 100 or so in Swanage maybe. There is no where in Poole because only limited places available in there. Where ever these displaced boat go, will they have an environmental impact there instead. Examples:- Another 50 off Newtown Creek, 100 in Swanage, 30 in Beaulieu, another 50 off Priory Bay, crowds of little boats off Pottery Pier, South Deep full of beached small boats. Will Natural England suggest alternatives for the displaced vessels, or will they ask for boating users (mainly from Poole!!) to give up their sport and take up jogging around the block instead.

I wonder if there was a similar debate before they built the Southampton Container Port and did Natural England stay in their office that day.

 

[FairweatherDave]

Very poor poll questions.....answers to be interpreted how you like.....
If they analysed the questions people asked they would know what people want much better.
"We've already dealt with that"......pah! Not to my satisfaction.

 

[oldharry]

....at least you now get some idea of what Marlynspyke and I have been battling for the last 10 years. I had this strong sense of deja-vue hearing all the claptrap and political spin being trotted out again and again. However it was gratifying hearing the comments about safety reflecting very exactly what I have been throwing at them for some years now! They still havent bit the bullet of defining what would constitute a 'genuine emergency' justifying using an NAZ. Yet that is absolutely key to the whole safety question. ANY pressure not to stop for fear of having to justify that feeling of unease that somethings 'not quite right' will lead sooner or later to somebody coming unstuck at sea.

 

[oldharry]

Very poor poll questions.....answers to be interpreted how you like.....
If they analysed the questions people asked they would know what people want much better.
"We've already dealt with that"......pah! Not to my satisfaction.

Yes, it was wporst still at last weeks key stakeholders meeting. Simple black or white answers to complex issues with many possible conditional responses .

 

[FairweatherDave]

....at least you now get some idea of what Marlynspyke and I have been battling for the last 10 years. I had this strong sense of deja-vue hearing all the claptrap and political spin being trotted out again and again. However it was gratifying hearing the comments about safety reflecting very exactly what I have been throwing at them for some years now! They still havent bit the bullet of defining what would constitute a 'genuine emergency' justifying using an NAZ. Yet that is absolutely key to the whole safety question. ANY pressure not to stop for fear of having to justify that feeling of unease that somethings 'not quite right' will lead sooner or later to somebody coming unstuck at sea.

Well you get much appreciation from here for your work (both). And you are correct that they do seem to be acknowledging the safety/shelter issue in a SW gale. But was that a technique for dodging the more general issue of where people prefer to anchor on a more casual basis? Or for passage making? Whatever, the BORG work is extensively cited in the annexe to one of the documents I saw and I got the feeling most questions came from concerned boaters.

 

[Blue Sunray]

The only way I can foresee anchoring being allowed in the Bay after July this year is if someone like the RYA is willing to fund a case for Judicial review.

On the specific point of 'saftey' It's clear that there won't be a clear definition it will be left more or less ambiguous.

 

[ryanroberts]

They talked about this briefly at the RYA Cruising Conference - from what I recall (again I am not an expert) I think thy said

• MMO proposing voluntary no anchoring zone across whole area, which is not the right answer
• Experts proposing other solutions - eg eco moorings

You don't start a negotiation by conceding usually.

 

[RobbieW]

I had to drop out after about 40 minutes, are there any links for a recording and was the poll only valid during the session or is there a link to something that can still be used ?

 

[FairweatherDave]

I had to drop out after about 40 minutes, are there any links for a recording and was the poll only valid during the session or is there a link to something that can still be used ?

There will be a opportunity to make comments as part of the public consultation that follows this zoom session....I would not worry about the poll. Useless questions. If at the zoom you should get an email with the details about making a comment about the proposals....but it will be open to anyone. I'm sure it will get publicised here

 

[Blue Sunray]

You don't start a negotiation by conceding usually.

You think there is a negotiation going on about this, how quaint.

The MMO were quite clear yesterday, they intend to put restrictions on anchoring in place for summer 2021. They are just yet to decide if they will also cover those parts of the bay less suitable for shelter and if they will initially be voluntary or compulsory. As they pointed out even if restrictions are initially voluntary they will bring in 'emergency' regulations if people chose not to observe their direction. They are going through the motions of consulting on this because they have to, that is very different from negotiating.

 

[NDG]

The only way I can foresee anchoring being allowed in the Bay after July this year is if someone like the RYA is willing to fund a case for Judicial review.

I will very willingly contribute if there is a need for a crowd-funded JR.

 

[dom]

I will very willingly contribute if there is a need for a crowd-funded JR.

Only the RYA could seriously do that: a one day court hearing might set one back £30,000 - £50,000 with considerable upside uncertainty, such as the risk of being ordered to pay the costs of the other side and so on. A £100K opening fund might be a good starting point?

In practice a rabble can rarely fund such an operation in the absence of a few key dominant payers who drive the process forward, or in voluntary/public interest cases where solicitors and barristers might be prepared to basically take charge and work pro bono.

Neither fit the bill here.

 

[Blue Sunray]

I will very willingly contribute if there is a need for a crowd-funded JR.

I'd agree with Dom, crowdfunding is a non starter here. Luckily we have a national body for dinghy, yacht and motor cruising, all forms of sail racing, RIBs and sports boats, whose dynamic leadership has a first class legal team ready to step into the breach.

Oh, hang on a moment, it's nothing to do with yacht or dingy racing, we're stuffed.

 

[ryanroberts]

So practically, I carry on sticking my hook where I like, respond with "I am the master of this vessel and decide what constitutes an emergency" while sipping Sancerre and wait until they negotiate their second phase funding for the national seahorse protection police? Unless it is enforced by Poole harbor or the actual police they are unlikely to have teeth or numbers for a year or so? With these sorts of organisations, voluntary is guaranteed to become compulsory anyway.

 

[chubby]

would a concerted campaign of letter writing to MPs get anywhere or has this been done: your constituency MP, Richard Drax as the MP who`s constituency includes studland and George Eustice as the secretary of state for DEFRA, George Eustice as a conrnishman might have some affinity with the sea?

I was on the zoom and not impressed by the quality of the MMO speakers who just seemed to slavishly regurgitate the dogma and be totally uncritical of the evidence from NE who would of course put the conservation view.

The argument that conservation over rides socio economic factors clearly doesnt apply when ancient woodland is dug up for HS2 or verges dug up to widen the M27 to produce a smart motorway or green field land is earmarked for development: whether you agree with any of these or not is not the question but are examples where socio ecomomic factors have over riden conservation.

Such wider considerations are about the pay scale of the MMO speakers from last night.

They included the mantra of explain, educate , enforce but mentioned police enforcement, fines, prison and prosecution for obstructing an officer of the MMO.

Most cruising yachtsmen are by their nature conformists who respect ancient traditions, hence the endless posts about where to fly what flag but it grates to have the prospect of criminal sanctions mentioned especially when in recent events the police have had difficulties in maintaining public order.

Moorings were discussed, yes there are those provided by Bankes arms pub for free but chargeable moorings would have to be supported by the infrastructure for laying and maintaining, servicing, taking bookings and collecting fees, all of which would require staff and equipment: Studland to my knowledge is not within the jurisdiction of poole harbour commisioners or swanage? MMO doesnt run moorings so who would?

How fully is the RYA involved in what might be a test case for a major part of the sport they represent/

 

[lustyd]

socio ecomomic factors have over riden conservation

Sadly that's probably the answer. Put a sufficiently large loss of money against it and the conservationists will be told to shut up PDQ. I'd imagine Sunseeker must use the bay for presales trips, and they can certainly put a number on that activity. I've not kept up to date through the whole process, was there ever a monetary figure put against use of Studland?

 

[oldharry]

MP Richard Drax is wholeheartedly on our side in this debacle, and working hard for us. Contact him NOW if you are in his Constituency Eustice on the other hand is an out and out greeny which is largely why NGM was able to con him in to pushing it through (that IS what happened. We tried to get to see him too, but there was division in the House, the meeting was cancelled, and we were fobbed off.

Yes MMO are reading froma script at present, and I think are rather overwhelmed at the strength of opposition. They did not expect last nights numbers and had to switch to a Webinar. They are only just beginning to wake up to the fact we wont roll over and meekly accept what they say, and that it wont be a matter of posting an LNTM and planting 2 - 3 buoys.

They talked about enforcement, because they DO have the power to protect the Poole MMO Man (who is nobody's fool by the way, and knows his stuff) . But they dont have the means to enforce without spending substantial sums of public money, which like every Gov Dept they dont have in their budget, particularly now post Pandemic.

NGM has put in an application to lay 5 EFMs. I wonder if he thinks he has just to lay them and forget about them? Does he realise these things are totally unsuitable to public moorings, as they have to be matched fairly closely to the weight of the boat. That they need lifting every 3 months for checking and repair, involving divers and special equipment, or that without maintenance there is a 70% total failure rate within 3 years? Of course when they break it will be 'deliberate sabotage by the wicked yotties'

RYA involvement is a great deal more behind the scenes tha we see, though on the surface they dont seem to be doing a great deal. They are going for purely voluntary/educational arrangements, and arguing with us against any statutory rule making.

WE NEED TO KEEP THE PRESSURE ON MMO OVER ALL THIS.

They invited us into the ring - we need to fight our corner as hard as we can, not just for Studland but for many other MPA's that are in pipeline that could and will affect us in years to come. There are for example chunks of the Solent they have their eye on, with eelgrass beds along parts of the N Coast of the IoW including Osborne and Priory Bay anchorages, as well as Bembridge. They tried and failed to close Newtown River to Boats, but locals there managed to fend them off and prevent MCZ designation. They have even set their sights on the big ship anchorage East of the IoW, though shipping interests are well funded to deal with that! They also tried to close the E branch of Chichester Harbour, until HM Richard Craven pointed out the Conservancy is already a Conservation Body and is already doing a very good job of balancing conservation with Harbour needs! That's just the Solent. Similar plans are being laid all up and down our coasts wherever there is shelter.

AT presnt our sport comes under MMO's 'non-licensable activities' remit. How much longer do you think that will last? If you havea private mooring not controlled by a Harbour Authority, you will have been on the MMO Hit list since around 2010. They have 'more important things' to deal with at present, but they Will get round to regulating your mooring in time. Already you cannot legally lift it for maintenance without a licence. They are not worried about it - yet. But the legislation is already in place to ensue EVERY mooring in the Country is officially licensed and approved.

Further the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 provides the basic legislative platform and framework for eventually licensing ALL small craft and their skippers eventually. The infra structure is not there yet and will not be for many years, but the legal basis for it is on the statute books now.

BTW did you know there are Seahorses in Chichester Harbour too? Local fishermen wont admit it to just anyone, but they have been native there for many years, same as Langstone and Portsmouth.

It will not matter to me too much now, I have had to swallow the anchor, but the face of sailing will be very different in 20 years time compared to the freedoms we enjoy now, and before long others will have to take up the fight. But fight we must if we are to be able to continue to enjoy our sport with any freedom in this Country.

EDIT: MMO's remit applies exclusively to English coastal waters. Scotland and Wales have their own arrangements, but similar cautions apply. The Welsh authority wanted to close off the E end of the Menai at one point to make it an MCZ, removing even the navigation marks!

 

[GrahamD]

I think that the RYA have failed the sailing community here. I get the impression that their response has been driven by the conservationists on the staff, rather than a robust defence of anchoring rights by their legal department. This will be a precedent that will come back to haunt us in many other locations around the country.

Anyone from the Royal Yacht Squadron on this forum? A few words from the great and the good in the right ears might help

 

[oldharry]

Sadly that's probably the answer. Put a sufficiently large loss of money against it and the conservationists will be told to shut up PDQ. I'd imagine Sunseeker must use the bay for presales trips, and they can certainly put a number on that activity. I've not kept up to date through the whole process, was there ever a monetary figure put against use of Studland?

Yes, ridiculously low figure: Marlynspyke responded very promptly with his own economic assessment! http://boatownersresponse.org.uk/Marine-economy-Poole.pdf

 

[chrishscorp]

Studland was registered as an MPZ on the 31/5/2019.

The meeting last night and the consultations is to determine a variance of the rules that apply to that MPZ, these can if neccesary could be drafted today and put into law tommorrow morning if they thought some of us in our 'luxury gin palaces' were taking the piss and the voluntary idea is not going to work.

They were looking to ban ALL activity in the bay which would have included even kayakers, paddle boarders and snorkellors due to the noise disturbance they create

It could be worth a Judicial review as they have just finished collecting data on anchoring and mooring activity around the English coast in various locations, so those that think this just affects Studland need to wake up. Studland is simply the starting point.

Below is a link to the other areas that they are looking at, it will load up but is slow you will then be able to zoom into see the other areas they have their eyes on we do have quite a battle on our hands, Studland is just the initial skirmish.

The consultation is closed but you can see the areas of interest on the map attached
ArcGIS Web Application

Edit, I see the link is locked to me only and wont open, I will try and get a picture done