The Battle of Studland Bay - by the Telegraph

[grumpy_o_g]

For those that may have missed it (it's in the Sticky on the Scuttlebutt forum) there's a link here to Saturday's article in the Telegraph Magazine on the Battle of Studland Bay.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/8615766/Sailors-vs-seahorses-the-battle-of-Studland-Bay.html

Thanks to Lenseman for finding the link and especially to Old Harry for his contributions to the article....

 

[Jurgen]

Better get the hook down before the ban!
Once again an example of the intrests of the few riding roughshod over that of the majority, very little consideration given to the huge income generated by boatowners, an d not all of us are super rich, my wife and I had to work and save hard to by a boat uner 20K!

 

[oldgit]

"Better get the hook down before the ban!
Once again an example of the interests of the few riding roughshod over that of the majority"

Boat owner pleads poverty and persecution accompanied by dire warnings of the impending apocalypse. ...... That,ll convince em!


Seems an intelligent,thoughtful and balanced article on the pros and cons of the situation to me,things are going to change around our coasts,best to deal with it.

 

[Boathook]

"Better get the hook down before the ban!
Once again an example of the interests of the few riding roughshod over that of the majority"

Boat owner pleads poverty and persecution accompanied by dire warnings of the impending apocalypse. ...... That,ll convince em!


Seems an intelligent,thoughtful and balanced article on the pros and cons of the situation to me,things are going to change around our coasts,best to deal with it.

The magazine article was balanced but it is all the 'nature' programs on TV that 'attack' us naughty boatowners destroying the seabed. There was one last night on BBC2 accusing us of not caring, etc. In my view these programs are very biased and just look at 'now' rather than that boats and Studland Bay have been together since man invented anchors.

 

[oldgit]

The magazine article was balanced but it is all the 'nature' programs on TV that 'attack' us naughty boatowners destroying the seabed. There was one last night on BBC2 accusing us of not caring, etc. In my view these programs are very biased and just look at 'now' rather than that boats and Studland Bay have been together since man invented anchors.

The old saying.. If you want to make enemies "Try to change something" comes to mind .

 

[Seajet]

Most biased programme ever

I complained -again - to the BBC for having the brass neck to repeat that programme after the number of complaints it generated last time.

Note that Packham is a patron of the Sea Horse Trust - which BTW is one person.

So much for 'the truth about wildlife', this was a personal platform provided by 'our' BBC.

As I mentioned on Scuttlebutt, Joe Public is happy to put hand in pocket for 'save the cuddly seahorses' but may not be so keen on ' I'm a one-man band, please pay me to doss around on a lovely beach '.

Note in the sensibly balanced Telegraph article that the 'expert' Dr Collins runs and hides if anyone questions his findings, also even the founder of SHT let slip that the things are everywhere, so one has to question his motives in forming this trust, especially as he lives in Devon with both breeds of seahorse very close by...

If you object to being accused of 'destroying' when there is zero evidence for this, and the statement Studland is only used for gin-swilling, no mention of shelter, google 'BBC Complaints'...

 

[aviator]

A good reason for proper buoys to be put down so that anchoring is not necessary.

Eco-friendly is what they say in the article.

Lovely place to be but not the only one.

 

[Seajet]

When considering a long stretch of coastline, prevailing winds & strong tides it is the only one for a long way, even for Mobo's in calmish conditions.

Environmentally Friendly Moorings are spiffing, particularly for smallish boats, but expensive to purchase and potentially VERY expensive to install !

The big question is ' if you're going to force us to use EFM's, who pays for them ' ?

There would never be near enough for peak demand, though if one joins the 'Save Studland Bay' campaign on Facebook - predominantly run by residents - the numbers of visiting boats on average is far less than the career conservationists claim.

There is another snag with EFM's - insurance.

I rang my insurers ( Haven / St Margarets ) and asked what their opinion was as to insuring a public mooring like this.

" What would you say would be the maximum value of boat using it ? "

" Well it's near Sunseekers' yard, so better make it a few million "

" ------ ERRR, can we get back to you ? "

Funnily enough they haven't yet; so if a boat did use one of these EFM's, a gale came up and something happened, one can only guess at the insurance angle.

I suggest that while EFM's are fine if someone else is paying, we need to keep the right to anchor foremost.

 

[epervier]

Pay a couple of beam trawlers to steam through there for a week and clear the grass out of the way so that the anchors get a better take in the sand

 

[bumpy_the_dog]

People are losing their jobs, living standards are falling, the public mood is angry and resentful. And from school rooms to the media the default position is "natural world good, oll burning engines bad".

In this climate "rich" motorboaters slaughtering cute defenceless seahorses will have a tough time securing any kind of popular sympathy. Play the Disney movie version of the Battle of Studland Bay in your heads and ask, who's going to be the hero here?

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I thought it was a very balanced article and written by a yottie so definitely no eco axe to grind against us. As with MMGW, the ecomentalists shoot themselves in the foot by abusing anyone that opposes them. Using words like 'a***hole villagers' , 'Birmingham navy' and 'G&T boaters' will do nothing except alienate people. I'm sure the point has been made before but it seems to me that nobody has yet proven whether anchoring in Studland Bay has actually affected the seahorse population or not. Statements like they've only managed to find 40 of the creatures when 200 constitutes a sustainable community is just a nonsense because quite obviously its impossible to count them all especially given that they are notoriously shy. I have a feeling though that we will lose this one; as bumpy the dog says, who's going to have any sympathy for rich boaters apparently murdering cute little seahorses?

 

[Seajet]

For a start, no-one deliberately anchors on eelgrass anyway, as we're rather keen on our anchors holding; whenever I go to Studland I'm always peering for a clear patch of sand.

The fact those clear patches are getting fewer shows the eelgrass is spreading, there are wartime Luftwaffe recce photo's showing the bay almost devoid of weed, compared to now; disease got at the eelgrass in the 1930's and it has grown back again vigorously right through boat using's boom time...

I strongly suggest anyone on Facebook has a look at 'Save Studland Bay', which has some interesting comments by the residents; who are entirely pro-boat.

Wouldn't one have expected the residents of a beautiful, rather exclusive place would be keen on keeping boats and their owners away ?

The fact they are not, and treat the Sea Horse Trust with contempt, speaks volumes.

Another by-product of that idiot Packhams' programme is that the residents now report groups of foreign divers setting out from the beach at night to observe the wee beasties - so, that's really cheering them up and improving their precious habitat I'm sure.

 

[PEJ]

F

The fact those clear patches are getting fewer shows the eelgrass is spreading, there are wartime Luftwaffe recce photo's showing the bay almost devoid of weed, compared to now; disease got at the eelgrass in the 1930's and it has grown back again vigorously right through boat using's boom time...

Surely this is the important point and one that seems to being missed by everyone. It not like we are dropping our anchors on the little bugger's heads. They live in the eel grass, if the eel grass goes then so do they. So the issue is - does dropping anchors in the bay have a detremental affect on the grass. We don't need research on the sea horses, although that is a nice cute subject for research, we need research on the eel grass and how quickly it can spread and does it recover if its roots are damaged. But that is boring and no one seems to want to study the grass.

If the above is true then the grass is spreading despite all those anchors so no need to worry about the sea horses.

 

[Boathook]

......
In this climate "rich" motorboaters slaughtering cute defenceless seahorses will have a tough time securing any kind of popular sympathy. Play the Disney movie version of the Battle of Studland Bay in your heads and ask, who's going to be the hero here?

The boat owners when they show that the nasty divers puting tags on the sea horses kill them when they get trapped in the eel grass and weed.

 

[Seajet]

Surely this is the important point and one that seems to being missed by everyone. It not like we are dropping our anchors on the little bugger's heads. They live in the eel grass, if the eel grass goes then so do they. So the issue is - does dropping anchors in the bay have a detrimental affect on the grass. We don't need research on the sea horses, although that is a nice cute subject for research, we need research on the eel grass and how quickly it can spread and does it recover if its roots are damaged. But that is boring and no one seems to want to study the grass.

If the above is true then the grass is spreading despite all those anchors so no need to worry about the sea horses.

This is the point we have been hammering for over a year now, the locals with Studland Bay Preservation Association, and on Facebook 'Save Studland Bay' too.

The Sea Horse Trust - all one of him - point to Dr Collins who has supposedly studied the Eelgrass for 2-3 years and is vaguely on the side of the SHT, though his evidence is remarkably spare when asked ( as John Dyson of the Telegraph found ) and of little value as the eelgrass works on a decades - long cycle.

Photo's of nasty boats pulling up clumps of eelgrass with anchor poised are actually showing dead eelgrass which drifts around and gets thrown up on shore in heavy weather; the locals are used to this but the conservationists eager to carve out a career ignore them.

They have even claimed normal anchoring procedure is to pull the boat up to the spot with an electric windlass, or rather drag the anchor back to the boat thus !

Some women locals have reported being intimidated both in public & by private e-mails by a diver, which I find unacceptable.

The thing is, Studland is by no means unique in having Seahorses, we at BORG know a lot of places where they are seen, but people don't mention them in case their commercial operations get shut down by the idiot career conservation lobby !

What's really annoying is the fact we boat owners are very keen on the environment and true conservation, but it has been hi-jacked by these berks out to make a name for themselves and after a career doing sod all, funded by charity...