Studland Eco moorings will cost you this year

[bignick]

Installation of eco-moorings at Studland Bay | boatfolk

which states..

boatfolk and The Seahorse Trust
Studland Bay is a popular destination for boaters, however the dropping of anchors has damaging consequences for both the seabed and the creatures which call it their home. That's why we've joined forces with the Charity The Seahorse Trust to install ten eco-moorings at the site.

 

[KevinV]

Installation of eco-moorings at Studland Bay | boatfolk

which states..

boatfolk and The Seahorse Trust
Studland Bay is a popular destination for boaters, however the dropping of anchors has damaging consequences for both the seabed and the creatures which call it their home. That's why we've joined forces with the Charity The Seahorse Trust to install ten eco-moorings at the site.

Nothing contentious there then

 

[bignick]

Incidentally, the link that Redwing posted says that they have been given funding by FASS to install the rest of the 100 ecomoorings in 2024. Are the £10 fees from these going to go to the sea horse trust as well?

 

[Boathook]

View attachment 170754

I see that they have had just over £6k out of £100k required so far.

 

[Lodestone]

Interesting little quote from th new MMO leaflet on Studland Bay - Studland BayProtecting our preciousseagrass habitats together. My eyes rolled...

"The overall size of the beds is not necessarily an indicator of thequality and vitality of the seagrass habitat. Seagrass beds inEngland are facing multiple threats including physical damageand water quality."

Is this an official line now from the MMO - mark 1 eyeball useless in conservation
More importantly are they saying that they don't need proper research to assert that there is damage?

 

[oldharry]

Curious, when the Seastar survey commissioned by Crown Estates published 2012 found the eelgrass beds are in a condition 'above average for the Dorset Coast' NE siad it wasnt accurate enough. Marlynspyke of BORG did a series of transits across the Bay towing an underwater video camera. He then analysed a series of frames taken at random, all of which confirmed that using the intenrnationally accepted standards of measurement for eelgrass, and widely cited in research papers. He could find nothing wrong. I studied the videos myself and can find no evidence of the damage and devastation they claim. But then I was Social Worker with no scientific training, and Marlynspyke is not a trained Marine Biologist. He is 'only' a very highly qualified research chemist with a lifetimes experience of photographic interpretation with Kodak Eastman

"More importantly are they saying that they don't need proper research to assert that there is damage?" asks Lodestone above. The answer is 'yes'. A Keystone of the whole of international Conservation effort is the 'Precautionary Principle' This states that if there is a risk of damage to a feature the steps should be taken to mitigate that risk. This forms much of the basis of modern health and Safety Law and practice - the identification and mitigation of potential risk. If a risk exists, steps must be taken to minimise that risk, BEFORE anything adverse happens.

In Studland this means that an anchor dropped in seagrass could disturb it. Whether this disturbance matters or not, it constitutes a potential threat to the plants affected and if repeated regaulalrly could have wider effects . The Precautionary principle then cuts in and says that a threat exists and must therefore be mitigated, even if there is no adverse evidence. NE are falling over themselves to tell us they can see evidence of damage. Maybe they have some sort of Xray vision denied the rest fo us?

 

[Seven Spades]

Harry the risk to Studland is that they have now changed the environment, they have not applied the precautionary principle. They should not make changes unless they are sure it won't adversley affect the site. It is blindingly obvious that the eel grass has flourished with the presence of boats(probably because of the boats) and to now to remove them from the area could have devastating consequences. What happed to being cautious?

 

[oldharry]

...tell me about it! This what happens with politicised conservation. NE are experts at this: they modify the environment to 'preserve' an at risk species, throw natural balances out of kilter and end up with a string of disasters.

They thought the Lobster population off Lundy was at risk from overfishing, so they banned it. The result? a population explosion which overwhelmed their food supply so that they even turned cannibal in order to try to survive. NE's explanation? Oh its just the natural balance being restored.....

Reportedly, Seal Pups were thought to be at risk from human disturbance in a seal nursery area in N Norfolk. Oh dear, we'd better put a fence in to protect them from the nasty humans. The seal pups died because they and their mothers could not get to and from the sea safely any more.

In Studland, NGM 'discovered' a large number of seahorses in 2008. He counted 48 iirc. When we analysed the figures it seemed to us that many individuals appeared to have been counted several times! There was no reported control to prevent this. Nevertheless it was a good year for seahorse punters. NGM crowed over his 'amazing find', so naturally dozens more people came to see them. Dr Harasti a top Oz expert on the species visited the Bay a couple of years later. He warned that the seahorses would leave because of the level of disturbance. Seahorse do NOT like massive neoprene clad predators hanging round their territory. In 2012 NGM could only find 4 left: 'proof' the boats anchoring have scared them away he yelled to anyone who would listen. Sadly, a great many people did listen, and were taken in. The fact that the boats arrived 50+years earlier is conveniently forgotten, and the 48 seahorse arrived at the end of a series of boom yeasr for boating doesnt appear in the equation.

The whole conservation hypothesis for Studland falls flat on its face when you admit that boats and eelgrass have thrived happily alongside each other since the 1950's. NE's response? It's all anecdotal, no data lead evidence. Err, but where's the data led evidence FOR the NAZ?

Harasti also reports in Oz on a seahorse colony that had failed after a 'no take' zone was created to protect them. Seahorse predators had a field day and ate them all, as the fishermen were no longer catching them, and populations soared to the cost of the seahorses. He later found that seahorse colonies did better outside their protection zones!

Google Dr David Harasti for a lot of objective info on the species. I pointed this out, and sent a number of relevant reports to MMO, with the suggestion that licensed seahorse botherers should be restricted in the number of visits they make to a colony, to avoid the disturbance Harasti describes. I never heard any more than a polite thank you.

You dont have to look far to find dozens more such failures when Conservationists interfered with natural balances.

As an aside, when an eco mooring fails and the helical screw is uprooted, it does substantially MORE damage to the seagrass than a conventional chain and block mooring according to Ozzie research, where Eco moorings are widely used.

 

[iamtjc]

The crowded Studland anchorage at lunchtime today.
Thank goodness for the eco-moorings.

 

[Boathook]

A nice view wrecked by an abundance of unused eco mooring buoys.

 

[wonkywinch]

I'm confused whether I have to pay or not. Just arrived in Studland and the balls have numbers on them and "how to pay". Sadly, the contact details/instructions for the app are on the other side of the ball and it's blowing 20kts so I can't see it, I thought it said something like Pingu or a parking app? Tried to look at neighbouring balls with the binocs but can't see anything other than "Eco Mooring". The Boatfolk website still says they are free but donation welcome. Do I pay or donate?

Studland eco moorings | boatfolk

Facebook Post

 

[lustyd]

I’d wait and see if anyone comes and asks. Nobody wanted the moorings installed so I’d say it’s on them to collect.
Or pop a knife in it and return the area to its natural beauty, the choice is yours

 

[Lucky Duck]

I'm confused whether I have to pay or not. Just arrived in Studland and the balls have numbers on them and "how to pay". Sadly, the contact details/instructions for the app are on the other side of the ball and it's blowing 20kts so I can't see it, I thought it said something like Pingu or a parking app? Tried to look at neighbouring balls with the binocs but can't see anything other than "Eco Mooring". The Boatfolk website still says they are free but donation welcome. Do I pay or donate?

Studland eco moorings | boatfolk

Facebook Post

https://pyccruising.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/SBMP-Newsletter-June-2024.pdf

The reviews of the app, which also deals with parking on private land, are pretty grim

 

[Boathook]

https://pyccruising.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/SBMP-Newsletter-June-2024.pdf

The reviews of the app, which also deals with parking on private land, are pretty grim

I believe that the app is Sippi. I read somewhere that the directors of sippi are also directors of parking eye ?, a parking enforcement company so a win win possibly for them.

Not to sure how they would enforce any non payment on a mooring buoy. Others with more legal knowledge may know ?

 

[ylop]

I believe that the app is Sippi. I read somewhere that the directors of sippi are also directors of parking eye ?, a parking enforcement company so a win win possibly for them.

Former directors by the look of Co House.

Not to sure how they would enforce any non payment on a mooring buoy. Others with more legal knowledge may know ?

With great difficulty - but I guess if enough people just pay there a revenue stream for virtually no extra work over providing free moorings!

 

[Boathook]

With great difficulty - but I guess if enough people just pay there a revenue stream for virtually no extra work over providing free moorings!

I believe that the extra moorings were paid for by the Studland Bay 'society' and they need an income to provide and maintain the moorings. Whether they will be left in all year or the majority removed for the winter I hadn't heard.

I've looked at downloading the app but the reviews rather put me off !

 

[wonkywinch]

The moorings are labelled Eco Moorings by Boat Folk. Their web page (link above) says "these eco-moorings are free to use".

I've screenshot that but as others say, no law that facilitates enforcement even if run by a shady parking firm who operate on the margins.

Look forward to my "parking notice".

 

[RivalRedwing]

..

You dont have to look far to find dozens more such failures when Conservationists interfered with natural balances.

As an aside, when an eco mooring fails and the helical screw is uprooted, it does substantially MORE damage to the seagrass than a conventional chain and block mooring according to Ozzie research, where Eco moorings are widely used.

The example I like from Scotland is where the career conservationists errected a very nice, expensive fence to protect ground nesting birds from cattle on the coast (they had previously got on well, without interference) .... the cattle just waited for low tide and walked around it....

 

[Bristolfashion]

It's not about the few quid, it's about the lack of value add. There's no reason they are entitled to money, they aren't adding anything to the experience. If they weren't there your experience would be identical.

And no, I'm not on board with the idea that I'm paying them to not develop the land. It's not the case that every piece of land needs to make money, we should be declining development anyway!

If I own a boring field with no charm or facilities, I can charge you £100 an hour to sit on it should I so wish - and you can accept or decline - that's capitalism.

In this case, the dosh goes to the National trust who do excellent work, which is better than funding another helicopter for a wealthy land owner.

 

[lustyd]

In this case, the dosh goes to the National trust who do excellent work

Well that's interesting that they've wormed their way in. It was supposed to go to the Seahorse Trust who do nothing but restrict freedom in the name of nature. I won't comment on the national trust, but I still won't be funding this nonsense. I'm happy to anchor but will use their moorings if they've made it unsafe to do so.