Studland - MMO Management protocols for the MCZ in place from 17th December

In Studland perhaps the biggest threat to the seagrass is the early year easterly gales which deposit huge amount of dislodged seagrass on the beach. Of course it is cold and often wet when that happens - not conducive to visits from Ecos! My dogs used to love it.
 
Tranona said:
In Studland perhaps the biggest threat to the seagrass is the early year easterly gales which deposit huge amount of dislodged seagrass on the beach. Of course it is cold and often wet when that happens - not conducive to visits from Ecos! My dogs used to love it.
Click to expand...
I seem to remember that the seahorse hugger used a picture of the stuff piled up after an easterly gale claiming that it was anchor damage.
 
Boathook said:
I seem to remember that the seahorse hugger used a picture of the stuff piled up after an easterly gale claiming that it was anchor damage.
Click to expand...
May well have done. The one who started the cute photos has now turned his attention to sharks - not so cute but dramatic enough to make the Telegraph creature of the day photo recently.
 
Boathook said:
I feel sorry for the sharks getting all the unwanted attention !
Click to expand...
Yes, but they can bite back.... If seahorses were scaled up to shark size they would be almost as dangerous. At their level they are super stealth predators, masters of camouflage and highly lethal to their prey, very far from the cuddly little creatures Disney makes them out to be.

As far as Seahorse Hugger in chief goes, he seems to be increasingly out of favour in the ongoing debate. One can only guess why. The Shark interest comes from Dr Ken Collins who worked with NGM trying to give credibility to their claims. Dr Collins is a shark expert.
 
Last edited:
MAGA - Make Anchoring Go Away. With all the logic and behaviour of Marjorie Taylor Greene the pro-VNAZ lobby ploughs on. "Its not us who have to prove anything it's you!" and woe betide anyone who can actually hoist them on the petard of their own words .
;)
 
Last edited:
Has anyone completed the survey? If it is skewed with leading questions like the others I won't bother. If there is an opportunity to make real comment I will give it a go.
 
I just completed it, and I would encourage everyone else to do so. It has options that include 'I am unwilling to observe the voluntary no anchor zone' and gives you space to explain why.
 
Having read through all the blurb these charlies have posted and intimated over the last 6-7 years, the last one I filled out I made it very clear that I thought one of the real threats was the use of powered craft operating inshore at speeds way in excess of 5 knots using the eco moorings as a slalom course with their little sports boats, jet skies and ribs. Its only a matter of time before one of them hits someone in the water or someone tendering ashore, let alone disturbance to the wildlife and all this in a supposed 5 kt restricted area
 
Tried to keep it brief in answer to the last question "There does not seem to have been any attempt to explain why, since seagrass coverage expanded significantly prior to the VNAZ, a VNAZ is required."
 
Moonbeam said:
Have any of you chaps seen this in the news last week.

Largest UK seagrass restoration project to end after five years​

Click to expand...
alahol2 said:
I think this one is more interesting... Only £2.5m wasted
Click to expand...


Yes. Fact is Natural England's own surveys previously failed to find any problems with the seagrass around Plymouth, so God knows on what basis they now find an improvement. It starts to look like the usual: - if the Science does not suit, make it up and call it a precaution.

They seem to have decided that seagrass had declined in an huge area of Jennycliff Bay. Despite reseeding a very large area, and a voluntary anchor ban nothing happened. No doubt they anticipated a huge success but it seems seagrass only wants to grow in areas that suit it, with or without leisure boat anchoring.

.
 
This all reminds me of the time the local bus company wanted to stop residents parking along a busy street because it was 'delaying the buses'. I went to the public consultation meeting and asked, 'What data do you have on what the current average delay is, and what improvement do you expect? Will the decision be reversed if there is no significant improvement?' They looked at me like I was from Mars. No understanding of how to use data, let alone any intention to follow it. Luckily it was thrown out purely for political reasons.
 
Has anyone tried asking MMO for a breakdown of the installation and running cost of all these eco-moorings, along with the income in the first year?

I have had reports recently that suggest income for the first year was less than 15% of the total needed to break even. I also hear that the MMO is being very close about releasing the actual figures. Even a formal FOI request was fudged, so what's going on?

From what I hear, the whole Eco Mooring project will go bust very quickly. So what happens next? It seems unlikely that MMO would actually try to put up a full anchor ban as threatened, as they have no means of funding and policing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top