STUDLAND - How much do they want???

[Seajet]

I saw a stand-up comedian on telly the other night, talking about 'alternative medicine'.

"Yep, we tried all that stuff, and the things which actually worked, what'ya know, we call them Medicine ! "

 

[XP_Dude]

Coming over here stealing our Sea Horses...

They've just gone on their summer holiday:-

http://forums.deeperblue.com/dorset/89480-dorset-spear-fishing-2011-a-47.html#post855176

 

[oldharry]

they are back!

The Seahorses that is' not the Polish divers. 3 have been seen earlier this week. Funny they stayed away while there have been very few boats coming in withbad weather? Boats are back - around 60 each day' and immediately the Seahorses turn up too!

 

[Twister_Ken]

The Seahorses that is' not the Polish divers. 3 have been seen earlier this week. Funny they stayed away while there have been very few boats coming in withbad weather? Boats are back - around 60 each day' and immediately the Seahorses turn up too!

Could it that seahorses stow away on yachts, d'ya think?

 

[Sans Bateau]

Could it that seahorses stow away on yachts, d'ya think?

No, its because they actually like the company of boats at anchor.

 

[fireball]

No, its because they actually like the company of boats at anchor.

No No No ...

It's because their chartplotters have failed (the seahorses) - so they follow the boats in as they don't know the way.

 

[oldharry]

RYA statement on Eelgrass, and BORG update.

RYA has released the following statement of their 'official' line on the anchoring and eelgrass debate. This spells out more fully the line they have always taken on this issue, and is entirely in line with what we in BORG have been saying. Bear in mind that this statement includes other Seagrass areas such as Osborne Bay where there are popular anchorages, as well as Studland:

"We understand that badly deployed anchors have the potential to impact on sensitive seafloor habitats such as eelgrass beds through damaging the fronds or dislodging the roots; it is also accepted that evidence exists to demonstrate that the anchor chain can also cause surface damage as it moves across the seabed with the tide. The potential for short-term impact on eelgrass by recreational boat anchoring is therefore something we recognise. What is less certain is whether this short-term often small scale activity has a significant impact on the overall integrity of the eelgrass bed and the longer-term structure and function of the habitat.

In the Solent in particular the issue is complex given the extensive die back in recent decades as a result of an aggressive disease and the subsequent re-growth that is likely to be on-going. It is therefore difficult to pinpoint the causative factors for localised peaks and troughs in distribution and density and in the absence of clear evidence it should be considered that a combination of factors are at play. Even so, we must recognise that eelgrass beds are a protected habitat under the European Habitats Directive and as such if there are means by which recreational boaters can minimise their potential to cause damage then it should be explored, whilst bearing in mind that the ability of boaters to seek refuge in anchorages which offer shelter in inclement weather conditions should not be compromised. The RYA’s primary concern is maintaining navigational safety for recreational boaters and this remains a priority for us in any discussions on this topic. "

Dr Collins of Southampton University said in a radio interview with Helen Marks (Open Country 18/12/2010):

"I dont question the fact that the Seagrass is doing well at the moment. It goes through seasonal phases. In the 1930s we lost virtually all the Seagrass in europe through disease, and we are still in that springing back phase, and I am simply advocating caution"

Dr Collins has since looked at aerial photographs which he says show that the eelgrass bed is smaller than it was in the 1970's. He has invoked the 'Precautionary Principle' a term defined in the Rio Treaty on Biodiversity 1992 which requires that if potential damage to an important conservation feature is identified even if there is no evidence that damage has taken place, then steps should be taken to protect that feature. This is very similar to the principle behind Health and safety legislation where potential problems need to be identified before they happen and steps taken to avoid them occurring.

This very different to the 'wholesale damage' to the Eelgrass Beds by 'G&T swilling sunday afternoon sailors' the BBC have presented to the TV viewing public this summer.

The timescale for the creation of the MCZ zones has been lengthened following complaints from many quarters that the work cannot be completed in time. The 'Public consulation period' following the publication of the white paper will now take place next spring, and DEFRA have made it clear they expect to continue to involve stakeholder groups right through the process. They expect to be making the first MCZ designations towards the end of 2012. These will be the straightforward ones where no one disagrees, and do not affect our activities.

Clearly where there is controversy, as at Studland, legal designation and management byelaws may take considerably longer to implement, although there is an overall deadline of 2015.

This the first stage to setting an overall strategy of 'Marine Planning' for all UK coastal regions by 2020 which may or may not affect us further.

 

[grumpy_o_g]

Surely we can all see these photos? Why the secrecy?

Edit: Sorry, that was rather curt - thanks for keeping us all in the picture and for all your efforts. I'm just really frustrated by the behaviour of these bozo's. These people call themselves scientists but seem to think that they can select who and how they get their pet theories confirmed. Probably nothing compared to your frustration after dealing so closely with them I'm sure.

 

[oldharry]

++++1

 

[KristiferColumbus]

In view of the rate the stuff spread inside Portsmouth Harbour a few years ago I think the whole situation has been hyped out of all proportion.It spread & established itself over an area about the size of three football fields in just two or three years so what is all the fuss about?

 

[oldharry]

In view of the rate the stuff spread inside Portsmouth Harbour a few years ago I think the whole situation has been hyped out of all proportion.It spread & established itself over an area about the size of three football fields in just two or three years so what is all the fuss about?

Exactly.

1. The Studland Seagrass did not recover in the location where Dr Collins did his study of anchor damage, in the two year period.

2. It is an internationally important habitat, which we are told is in general decline.

3. It tends to grow in habitats important to species homo sapiens yottiensis. Conservationists tend to regard this species as predatory, and undesireable.

 

[Twister_Ken]

Found, in a Guardian story about Top Gear breaking BBC guidelines on impartiality...

..."Trust is the foundation of the BBC: we are independent, impartial and honest."

"We will be rigorous in establishing the truth of the story and well informed when explaining it. Our specialist expertise will bring authority and analysis to the complex world in which we live."

"We will be open in acknowledging mistakes when they are made and encourage a culture of willingness to learn from them."

Sure. Tell that to the seahorses.

Story here:

 

[Sans Bateau]

An excellent example of double standards

 

[pugwash94]

Wind Farms in Channel - Effect on Seahorses

The projected wind farm off Bournemouth will result in major disruption to the sea bed in the area that it is believed that sea horses migrate to during the winter. Even after the construction the masts will affect the behaviour of currents on the bottom.
Has anyone raised this issue with the authorities? It seems to me to have many implications for the construction of the wind farm - The Precautionary Principle perhaps?

 

[sea urchin]

MCZ public consultation postponed til summer 2012

The consultation with the public over MCZ designation has been put off until next summer.

See the MCZ Project Newsletter no 5 which provides a new project timetable.
It says:
"Ministers are clear that achieving designation of MCZs should not be at the expense of sound decision-making." and .....
"Ministers will consider the supporting evidence and potential environmental, social and economic impacts, before deciding sites to take forward for designation in 2012 (the Government may decide to designate some sites at a later date, for example if further evidence is needed to support the designation)"..........
"The public consultation on sites the Government intends to designate in 2012 is expected to take place during the summer next year"

The full revised timetable is in the newsletter -
http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5881

 

[Seajet]

"Ministers are clear that achieving designation of MCZs should not be at the expense of sound decision-making." and ...

That's about the most telling phrase I've heard re. clueless politicians, let's hope Old Harry ( verbally ) beats some sense into them !

 

[oldharry]

I know I'm 'up front' here, but it will take a lot more than a few lone voices to get any message across. We dont know yet what form these 'public consultations' will take, but it is my intention that as many of us as 'they' will allow in to whatever they set up, will be in there, fully briefed and equipped to fight our corner. We have the winter to get ourselves organised if we really mean business.

For all the promises of 'sound decision making', politicians have signed us up to a treaty that demands marine environmental protection even where there is no scientific or factual evidence of damage. The Treaty, backed by recent European law, demands that ANY area where there is the POSSIBILTY of environmental damage, should receive protection. At Studland for example, this clause has been invoked already by one expert, so nobody has to 'prove' that there IS any damage - only that there is a 'possibility'.

Also MCAA 2009 requires that where there is conflict between conservation needs and economic and social issues, conservation needs should take priority. Things are pretty heavily weighted pro conservation. However, there is a fair bit of negotiation taking place behind closed doors over disputed places like Studland, with some key contacts potentially on side at both Westminster and Brussels so all is not doom and gloom.

Also the clause in the statement quoted by Seajet about postponing some decisions is important. Until very recently they were not admitting to the possibility of postponing anything for further investigation.

But we HAVE to come up with FACTS. Not opinions, or casual one off observations. The Law-makers have to justify their decisions, and the more hard information we can give them, the more notice they will take. Difficult when no-one ever recorded anything about Studland for example.

 

[sea urchin]

We dont know yet what form these 'public consultations' will take, but it is my intention that as many of us as 'they' will allow in to whatever they set up, will be in there, fully briefed and equipped to fight our corner. We have the winter to get ourselves organised if we really mean business.

The DEFRA newsletter has something to say about planning for the consultation:-
"Work is underway to plan the public consultation period, and later this summer work will begin on agreeing how the ongoing adaptive management of the network will work once sites have been designated (including the role of stakeholders in their management and review). We will continue to work with stakeholders throughout the process."

So those with influence may be able to get in on the act - I mean in designing a consultation process which will work! But this is apparently going on imminently.

However, there is a fair bit of negotiation taking place behind closed doors over disputed places like Studland, with some key contacts potentially on side at both Westminster and Brussels so all is not doom and gloom.

Yes! And apparently negotiation CAN work
Somehow Chichester Harbour got itself taken off the MCZ proposal list, so why not Studland? (I think the grounds were that the Conservancy already had a good conservation plan. Perhaps you could argue Studland is already well taken care of by the NT.)

We have the winter to get ourselves organised if we really mean business.

Now we have been given a bit longer - we have until next summer, rather than next spring, to come up with the goodies. I did see somewhere in all the govt. bumf that "best available evidence" applies to the socio-economic inputs as well (not sure of which of their many guidance documents) - I am not sure that this will happen in practice though.

Next summer they will be consulting on the sites which they have decided to take forward for designation in 2012, so for the potential sites which have more complex and controversial issues, like Studland, there may be longer to collect data. At Studland if there is a need for greater time to collect socio economic data, then it may at least get the decision bumped into a later "tranche" for government consideration.

 

[KristiferColumbus]

"Finally, seahorses are as I understood, shy and retiring creatures. As referred to in earlier posts above, are we really saying that they're going to thrive under the noses of 1000 divers photgraphing and tagging etc? Who exactly are the SHT trying to fool here? "

They have managed to fool the BBC, big time!

As part of the precautionary principle there looks like a damn good case for banning both divers & the BBC

 

[oldharry]

As part of the precautionary principle there looks like a damn good case for banning both divers & the BBC

There's a growing number of people who strongly agree with you - locals and boatowners alike. I have already been in touch with MMO about this after meeting with the Studlanders 10 days ago, and locals are recording the numbers of divers turning up each day, and whether they are accompanied by a 'licensed handler'. They are also keeping an independent record of numbers of boats anchoring in the Bay this summer. MMO have promised that they will look at these issues once the figures for the current holiday season are in. We had already raised with them the dangers of over-exposure in the media last spring, before the BBC Tv programme.

There is of course nothing remotely ilegal about dving in the bay - simply the concern that there are far too many people turning up.

And Sea-Urchin: unfortunately the National Trust's responsibility stops at the LW mark - the boundary of Trust owned land. Some would say 'fortunately' as the Trust handling of the estate comes in for quite a lot of flack too! The seabed thereabouts is Crown Estates, who seem very reluctant to get involved in any seabed management measures at this stage, and I suspect are waiting to see what responsibility they will actually have under the new legislation.