Studland - RYA Response

[Ian_Rob]

So who in the RYA is formulating their response? Is Richard Hill their environmental lead? What is his academic background?

 

[mainsail1]

The response came from Phil Horton, RYA Environment and Sustainability Manager.

 

[Ian_Rob]

The response came from Phil Horton, RYA Environment and Sustainability Manager.

Thanks.

So what is Phil Horton’s academic background?

 

[RivalRedwing]

here:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/phil-horton-86993112/?originalSubdomain=uk

suspect that this is Richard Hill
https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-h-b4758886/

 

[Ian_Rob]

So Phil Horton doesn’t have degree in botany or zoology but Richard Hill has a degree in Marine Conservation.

 

[JumbleDuck]

So PH doesn’t have degree in botany, zoology or apparently any specialism in Eelgrass but Richard Hill has.

That would be an understandable basis for not challenging the science. It's no excuse for not checking the science with an actual scientist.

 

[Ian_Rob]

(deleted)

 

[RivalRedwing]

So Phil Horton doesn’t have degree in botany or zoology but Richard Hill has a degree in Marine Conservation.

There is no evidence that either have any practical experience in the specifics that are troubling us

 

[st599]

The RYA have replied to my letter and one of the points that they have made surprises me greatly. I quote: Our approach is:

• Not to challenge the scientific basis for action. Natural England and the MMO have a statutory duty to protect the designated habitats and species within the Studland Bay Marine Conservation Zone. This duty is based on international treaties and national designations. The MMO and Natural England responded to questions around the science both in their site assessment and at the consultation meetings.

What are the terms of reference of the group the RYA is interacting with? From what I've read a previous group undertook the scientific review, decided on the locations that were to be assigned and the protection level needed etc. Then DEFRA created a MCZ. Now this new group's role seems to be to implement DEFRA's findings.

 

[Ian_Rob]

That would be an understandable basis for not challenging the science. It's no excuse for not checking the science with an actual scientist.

I absolutely agree. I am sure both are well qualified but is there anything to show that they have any specialist knowledge of Eelgrass or Seahorses. They may be right but they could equally be wrong and that is no basis for the RYA to be taking the stance that they are.

 

[penfold]

Have sent them a polite snottogram complaining about their milquetoast handling of this. No doubt I will be ignored.

 

[RivalRedwing]

I absolutely agree. I am sure both are well qualified but is there anything to show that they have any specialist knowledge of Eelgrass or Seahorses. They may be right but they could equally be wrong and that is no basis for the RYA to be taking the stance that they are.

The challenge we face is that key experts in this are are likely very few in number and are also likely to have a conservation leaning (either deliberatly or subconsciously); it might be a challenge to get any of them to argue against the MMO view with the resultant flack they then receive from the conservation 'industry'.

 

[Blue Sunray]

The challenge we face is that key experts in this are are likely very few in number and are also likely to have a conservation leaning (either deliberatly or subconsciously); it might be a challenge to get any of them to argue against the MMO view with the resultant flack they then receive from the conservation 'industry'.

Not to mention the impact on their next grant application.

 

[Ian_Rob]

The RYA’s stance appears to have everything to do with a perceived political correctness rather than to be based on proven science.

 

[Tranona]

The RYA’s stance appears to have everything to do with a perceived political correctness rather than to be based on proven science.

That is the point. The "approved" proven "science" says anchoring damages the eelgrass (and seahorses) in Studland. What they are saying is it is not their place to produce scientific evidence, or to challenge what has been accepted, but to ensure that NE and MMO follow their terms of reference.

As already suggested on a number of occasions the only challenge is through a Judicial Review on the grounds that they (NE) has not considered all the evidence. Apart from the cost of such an exercise, the difficulty will be challenging the accepted evidence on its own terms - that is expert evidence in the same form as the evidence that has been accepted.

 

[st599]

That is the point. The "approved" proven "science" says anchoring damages the eelgrass (and seahorses) in Studland. What they are saying is it is not their place to produce scientific evidence, or to challenge what has been accepted, but to ensure that NE and MMO follow their terms of reference.

As already suggested on a number of occasions the only challenge is through a Judicial Review on the grounds that they (NE) has not considered all the evidence. Apart from the cost of such an exercise, the difficulty will be challenging the accepted evidence on its own terms - that is expert evidence in the same form as the evidence that has been accepted.

As said earlier, I doubt the terms of reference of the group implementing the changes will allow them to revisit the scientific evidence. The only thing the current group is doing is working out the best way to implement the decision.

 

[DJE]

Mass trespass anybody?


If and when they ban anchoring. Perhaps we could ask the RYA to organise it!

 

[Blue Sunray]

Perhaps we could ask the RYA to organise it!

Might be better off seeing if they can organise a party featuring alcoholic beverages in a place of production of the same.

Meanwhile I look forward to seeing (figuratively) you all here:

https://register.gotowebinar.com/rt...YZ9VM5l6cLwbRKHiUnYhb_s2ySZfwR3nAF-hbnGG-iQ2g

 

[doug748]

Mass trespass anybody?

...

Tempting, but there is nothing some of these activists would like better than seeing direct action of that sort. They could then put us all in a box marked: Old, Rich, White, Male, Privileged, Global Warming Deniers. Their media mates would lap it up.

The majority of this rot has started at University level. Sadly those characters at the Zoom session and the RYA lot, are from the same stock.
My only suggestion is keep at it, plus get on to your MP with some strong hints about elective representation and the need to face down policy driven by the fear, and arbitrary, socially correct, attitudes. Tell them we are quite happy to follow the Science, when we see it.

Bit depressing really.

.

 

[dom]

Tempting, but there is nothing some of these activists would like better than seeing direct action of that sort. They could then put us all in a box marked: Old, Rich, White, Male, Privileged, Global Warming Deniers. Their media mates would lap it up.

I’m neither white, come from a privileged background, nor a global warming denier.

The RYA for its part gives the appearance of a bunch of all-white, self-satisfied, old boffins and birds, wrapping themselves in whatever flag seems most likely to impress in the changing corridors of Whitehall.

The mistake is to expect them to be any different.