Time for some seabed love...

[lustyd]

Seabed around UK is a desert, well known fact of life. Fishes need underwater equivalent of forest.

The fish seem to be doing just fine in the places I've dived around the UK, and the reefs around Cornwall didn't look much like a desert to me. Perhaps you lack sufficient experience to find these things, after all you couldn't find the forests on land, and they are quite well mapped.

 

[Rossynant]

Perhaps you lack sufficient experience to find these things, after all you couldn't find the forests on land, and they are quite well mapped.

Different viewpoint.
I added an outside opinion to the thread concerning sea protection, as this is something which interest me, also professionally. Very outsider's opinion, as came to UK from curiosity to see the country, and not historical buildings of London... Somehow never got time before (or once when wanted - was denied Visa), while I have good idea of other parts of world.
So this is a comparison. Take it or leave it, if not interested how UK looks compared to rest of the world
You know better of course how Cornwall reefs are doing, I know North Sea only from other side; but the thread is not about Denmark, or of Polish Baltic shore.

First thing - for me desert is not a dead area (actually was involved in protecting wildlife of a desert ) but place less alive than could be; so perhaps a difference of meaning.
Comparison, so to say. I only took a look in UK lately and got some impression; but remember the sea 30 years ago. So there are reefs, looking good. How about those that are no longer? The ploughed mud also looking good? How many fish are there compared to "original" state, so to say couple hundred years back? Or compared to 30-40 years ago?

For counting the forest: I also remember UK having forest area of some 5% of land, nice to see another 5% (or I heard even 8 now) planted, but this is still artificial plantation to me, will establish as semi-natural forest in 100 years time or so. I came from land forested in 1/3, mostly natural forest about my place, and this not counting small "woods" which would be a cherished examples of natural ecosystem in UK, but are not even called "forest" here.

So to make comparison better:
There is a natural reserve in Milford area (Neyland precisely), quite cherished http://www.neyland.org.uk/leisure/westfield-pill-nature-reserve/ but in reality - former industrial ground, just lately returned to nature.
Personally I happen to have better "nature reserve" in my backyard, so to say, bit over hectare of wholly natural forest on hillsides that has never been cut down, standing there for millenia, complemented with some natural shrubs, meadows and such around a creek; this contains more 'rare species' than in Neyland. More of such forest there, just my garden is small. And it is not even counted as "forest", as this is classified a "farming land", part of a farm.
So please understand my different view on the subject, stemming from quite different experience...

As for the fish for you and those who remarked of big fish above - I still remember Sturgeons (Acipenser, in case I use wrong english name), beautifull fish coming up rivers here, from the sea. Some 4 metre long I saw as a child... Practically extinct now, we are trying to restitute this species back.
In all probability, this is known in UK as Loch Ness Monster, at least some pictures look like it

 

[ChrisE]

Well, dear, ask local pro fishermen; and I'm sure Tigers have been spotted, while rumours of Great Whites persist, after all they've managed it to the Med'.

I'm not all that worried about sharks either, if I fall in or end in a liferaft I'll take my chances but it's their environment.

I rather take the ' protected species ' point of view, and would cheerfully shoot or ram any lowlife going for their fins.

Well we agree on protecting species, whatever they are ....

 

[oldharry]

Rossynant, if you have received less of a welcome here than you expected, perhaps we should look at some of the things you have been saying:

Post 13: "Quite frankly I was astonished when visited UK - this whole country is a kind of desert, lifless. Some grass left. Somebody mentioned tree-huggers above, but where are your trees? Look around...

Later you say that a desert is NOT lifeless. In colloquial English, that is what the word means: a lifeless place. The forests were mostly cut down 200 years ago to defend ourselves from a certain Napoleon Bonaparte, who I seem to remember walked all over your country unhindered.

Post 19: I know it, in fact should know more of UK ecology than other forumites here

Why? Your comments to date show you have little or no knowledge of the true state of our seas. You have yet to produce a single verifiable fact - all you give us is vague and sweeping generalisations, of the kind we have come to expect from conservation fanatics. I for example know, or know where I can find, exact data on the presence of a wide range of coastal species in areas you claim are destroyed and lifeless.

North Sea and Channel is destroyed in it's entirety, no natural place left - so only hope in leaving some areas alone, in hope they would return to something closer to natural state (or at least get alive again) sometime in future.

Having taken part in the process of defining the UKs MCZ system and accessed the huge database of information on these places, I can tell you that there IS still a huge amount of marine life in these places, quite a lot of it largely untouched. It IS alive and well. our purpose is to keep it that way under growing economic and commercial pressure.
.
Post 26 " If you are afraid of a comment, on forum from some foreigner, having much attention from local conservationist - while you have your own competent scientists making research in place, well... yessss, now I do see a problem

The real problem is conservationists making assumptions about places without understanding the true facts. And this is not just the 'treehuggers' its the people employed by the Government to advise on conservation. The same over bearing attitude 'we are the experts, and if we say black is white... then it is' I am sick of hearing this sort of useless and ill informed spin from so called 'professionals' - for that is all it is. You try to compare your country to ours, without ever taking in to account the fundamental differences in terrain, archaeology, geology, climate, biodiversity, and economics. As you rightly say, ecology is vastly complex subject, and understanding the hugely complex interplay between species and their habitats, and the influences on them is still largely guesswork, rather like the science of meteorology.

The proof of that is in the entirely unforeseen consequences of UKs first MCZ at Lundy, where, having removed mans influence, populations are growing out of control with disease and deformity rampant in a formerly reasonably healthy and balanced environment. We interfere with these balances at our peril, and risk causing far more serious damage if we rush in without understanding what we are doing.

Now, if what you are complaining at is the devastation caused by the modern diesel powered fishing fleet, the appalling practices of throwing thousands of tons of dead fish back simply because the rules say they can not be caught in the first place. If you are objecting to the dumping of 100's tons of fish because the Trawlers have found a larger more lucrative shoal. If you are objecting to the heavy beam trawling which criss crosses our seabed with the finesse of a motorway construction unit. If you are objecting to the thousands of cetaceans killed unwittingly and unnecessarily in nets each year, then say so. You will certainly get my support.

But if all you can say is that you have been told the N Sea and Channel are lifeless deserts, then you will learn a lot more of the richness of the English language from those of us who KNOW at first hand what is actually happening.

Oh, and I went to school with, and was in the same year as the late Richard Sandbrook , FOUNDER of Greenpeace.

Couldnt stand the guy!

 

[Rossynant]

Rossynant, if you have received less of a welcome here than you expected...

No, newer expected a welcome here. Why, and what for? I've just put an opinion here, contrasting one, from different point of view - wouldn't I differ from others I would not post anything. This was short and naturally - how may I say - overstated? Well, provoked a discussion...
So you have above some more explanation why such an opinion; I don't care if it's right or wrong, or if based on "right information" - this is no scientific paper to worry about correct data or statistics. It is a personal opinion, not asking anyone to agree with it or even to read this - delete my posts if you don't like it. Won't bother you more anyway.

But first of all don't take me as somebody objecting to something. Not my business.
I'm far from UK, no intention even to come there for longer, though boat is there and have to equip her before sailing out - probably I will explore UK seas more, provided weather will be better than last summer...
Not being involved in marine wildlife can imagine, nevertheless, problems you have with Lundy - same goes for land ecosystems which developed under human influence. Now that it's protected, just left for secondary succession whatever this may be - there will be plenty of unexpected changes. But then would you say this was a mistake to let ecosystem form spontaneously there? Because what was there probably was not a natural one in first place. Might be a good idea to have some natural ones, at least a few in some places, wasn't this the idea?

Well, protection of nature in UK is for people there to decide, what you actually want to have or to achieve. Always a question what exactly protection is meant to achieve and how to do it. With anthropogenic ecosystem this is not so easy, but some decisions have to be made, because such cannot exist in stable form anyway. So no escape from problem.
Easier for me with land wildlife, many active methods can be employed to control the changes, or to prevent them if present state is to be preserved, like with pastures for instance. Everything available for constant observation, good data obtained over many years on which to base predictions and methods. Indeed, most difficult thing is to convince, or sometime fight against, some "activists"

 

[lenten]

rossyant----please correct me if this is wrong----a pole told me poland is 4 x bigger than britain and with 1/2 the population-----our population is still rising----an extra 30000000 in the last 10 years----it makes conserving natural land very difficult-----regards lenten

 

[Nicholas123]

rossyant----please correct me if this is wrong----a pole told me poland is 4 x bigger than britain and with 1/2 the population-----our population is still rising----an extra 30000000 in the last 10 years----it makes conserving natural land very difficult-----regards lenten

It's not just a problem we have got it's a problem the world has got & nothing rossyant has said has convinced me he even understands the problem let alone has a solution.Check this out & ask yourselves if the answers given in the last few minutes of the film will be sufficient to save us from ourselves without getting to grips with the size of the human population? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKaeCU&wide=1
All this conservation stuff just looks like a distraction to me.

 

[lustyd]

Different viewpoint.
I added an outside opinion to the thread concerning sea protection, as this is something which interest me, also professionally. Very outsider's opinion, as came to UK from curiosity to see the country, and not historical buildings of London... Somehow never got time before (or once when wanted - was denied Visa), while I have good idea of other parts of world.
So this is a comparison. Take it or leave it, if not interested how UK looks compared to rest of the world
You know better of course how Cornwall reefs are doing, I know North Sea only from other side; but the thread is not about Denmark, or of Polish Baltic shore.

First thing - for me desert is not a dead area (actually was involved in protecting wildlife of a desert ) but place less alive than could be; so perhaps a difference of meaning.
Comparison, so to say. I only took a look in UK lately and got some impression; but remember the sea 30 years ago. So there are reefs, looking good. How about those that are no longer? The ploughed mud also looking good? How many fish are there compared to "original" state, so to say couple hundred years back? Or compared to 30-40 years ago?

For counting the forest: I also remember UK having forest area of some 5% of land, nice to see another 5% (or I heard even 8 now) planted, but this is still artificial plantation to me, will establish as semi-natural forest in 100 years time or so. I came from land forested in 1/3, mostly natural forest about my place, and this not counting small "woods" which would be a cherished examples of natural ecosystem in UK, but are not even called "forest" here.

So to make comparison better:
There is a natural reserve in Milford area (Neyland precisely), quite cherished http://www.neyland.org.uk/leisure/westfield-pill-nature-reserve/ but in reality - former industrial ground, just lately returned to nature.
Personally I happen to have better "nature reserve" in my backyard, so to say, bit over hectare of wholly natural forest on hillsides that has never been cut down, standing there for millenia, complemented with some natural shrubs, meadows and such around a creek; this contains more 'rare species' than in Neyland. More of such forest there, just my garden is small. And it is not even counted as "forest", as this is classified a "farming land", part of a farm.
So please understand my different view on the subject, stemming from quite different experience...

As for the fish for you and those who remarked of big fish above - I still remember Sturgeons (Acipenser, in case I use wrong english name), beautifull fish coming up rivers here, from the sea. Some 4 metre long I saw as a child... Practically extinct now, we are trying to restitute this species back.
In all probability, this is known in UK as Loch Ness Monster, at least some pictures look like it

Is Milford Haven really a good example of where to look for wildlife? Perhaps I'll come to Poland and look in your factories for forests!

Next time you're in Britain try looking at the Kelp forests of Sennen Cove, the coral reefs of the Lizard, the mountains of Wales, the many estuaries untouched by man. Having dived in plenty of places, I know the difference between a desert and a thriving area, and comparing Cornish waters to those in the Med or the Canaries we certainly have significantly more sea life in terms of both number and species. You may see shoals of fish in the med, but that is purely down to visibility. To the trained observer (and even the amateurs like myself) it's easy to see the wealth of life here. Some of my favourites include sea horses, cuttlefish, John Dory, seals, the ever popular sea cucumber, sponges, coral, jellyfish, dolphins, anemones and that's just the top 10 amongst hundreds if not thousands of species I've seen in huge numbers (OK, maybe not the sea horses...damned yachties and their anchors...)

 

[lustyd]

rossyant----please correct me if this is wrong----a pole told me poland is 4 x bigger than britain and with 1/2 the population-----our population is still rising----an extra 30000000 in the last 10 years----it makes conserving natural land very difficult-----regards lenten

Poland
312,685 km2
2011 census 38,501,000
Density 120/km2

United Kingdom
243,610 km2
2011 census 63,181,775
Density 255.6/km2

Great Britain
229,848 km2
Est mid 2010 population 62,300,000
Density 277 /km2

 

[oldharry]

Is Milford Haven really a good example of where to look for wildlife? Perhaps I'll come to Poland and look in your factories for forests!

Dont have to go far from Milford to see some of the richest biodeversity in the country. Mostly undisturbed too! Skomer and Ramsey have some of the most varied and best marine life in the UK.

 

[lustyd]

Dont have to go far from Milford to see some of the richest biodeversity in the country. Mostly undisturbed too! Skomer and Ramsey have some of the most varied and best marine life in the UK.

I don't disagree, just pointing out that someone who is supposedly "in the know" might have picked a place without an oil refinery when looking for unspoilt nature in a foreign country. I had a smashing night sail from Milford to Padstow last summer with dolphins and phosphorescence (sorry no idea the spelling) and even a puffin

 

[Rossynant]

Dont have to go far from Milford to see some of the richest biodeversity in the country. Mostly undisturbed too! Skomer and Ramsey have some of the most varied and best marine life in the UK.

Why would You think I did not go? Visited all of Pembrokeshire coast, and practically whole Wales. Would be more, but because of weather left the boat ashore and went south for the summer instead. Cruise around UK maybe this summer, or so I hope.

Lustyd - well aware that UK is twice more populated than Poland, and it was so for last few ages, all that time Poland also had retained some 3-4 times more percentage of natural habitats so wildlife had much better chance... Commented on difference, not on causes. It was not Milford I picked, but a boat I bought there.

 

[oldharry]

Sailed that coast myself for 10 years 30/40 years ago. Did you see the Dolphins off Cardigan/Aberaeron? Used to see up to a dozen or more of them regularly when I was down that way, and I am told they are still there. Saw a Leathery Turtle off Porthmadog too circa 1975 - one of the first sightings on that coast.

 

[Seajet]

I've seen plenty of marine wildlife off the UK Southern coast, inc various sharks, porpoises, seals, dolphins, basking sharks, and pilot whales offshore mid channel; I'm not a diver so can only comment that eelgrass and weed continues to flourish where I can see them, along with jellyfish and various fish around my boat in Chichester Harbour.

Rossynant, you are welcome to come along for a sail, though I can't promise all of the above in one go !