Your Seas Your Voice

Mark-1

Mark-1

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 Sep 2008
Messages
5,550
Visit site
A sailing club I'm connected with got this by e-mail. I don't have the attachment.

Dear Sea User,

We've already contacted you in summer last year to inform you of our www.yourseasyourvoice.com website which asks you to recommend areas you think should be protected. We've since then remodelled the website to be more user-friendly. We've been supported by Kate Humble of Springwatch, and the project was mentioned on the Christmas Special on BBC2, December 31st (see i-player http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00pk84d/b00pk82g/Springwatch_Christmas_Special_2009/, and go to 1 hour 10 minutes through to see Kate and Chris Packam explain the need to get online and engaged with Your Seas Your Voice).

A map of the nominations made by the public so far is attached to this email (up to December 15th). Top spots recommended by the public thus far are Strumble Head, the Farnes, Studland Bay, Wembury, The Firth of Lorn, the Gower, St Abbs and the Moray Firth.

MCS have now added 73 sites to the website which you can vote for. All our sites our based on Seasearch dive survey information. http://www.yourseasyourvoice.com/mpa/. Please visit these sites.

Many thanks for your support thus far, and happy New Year.

Yours sincerely,

Mike Matson,
Your Seas Your Voice Volunteer

Jean-Luc Solandt
Your Seas Your Voice Project Co-ordinator
 
Searush said:
And what form of "protection" do they propose?
Click to expand...


Australia has the largest area of marine parks in the world, I think they are 8 times larger than the next nation USA.
Usually "divers" are behind these exclusion sites, their thinking is that no one can use these sites except divers. Locally it means there are restricted places for anchoring and no go zones for fishing etc. Some types of professional fishing are banned and there are usually different zones which are decided by people who have not got a clue. Interestingly divers have been screwed over on a couple of places of interest here.

As a yachtsman it means your limited to certain areas for anchoring so you don't effect the weed beds or your limited to their environmentally friendly but limited moorings.

The economic hardships they bring to the community unless you run a dive store are far reaching.
 
The first one in the UK is just off Lundy Island and that area has really progressed.
It is not an anchoring area so there is no no problem caused to sailors.

It seems a sensible proposition to me - our seas are overfished by any standards and in fact there is usually very good fishing around the protected area which acts a a significant area for regeneration of sea life.

I welcome a sensible application of them.
 
Gludy said:
The first one in the UK is just off Lundy Island and that area has really progressed.
It is not an anchoring area so there is no no problem caused to sailors.

It seems a sensible proposition to me - our seas are overfished by any standards and in fact there is usually very good fishing around the protected area which acts a a significant area for regeneration of sea life.

I welcome a sensible application of them.
Click to expand...

This is "Misruled Britannia" .What on earth makes you think that any rules will be sensibly applied?

If there was a rule that no-one associated with the campaign should be allowed to administer the rules or be employed in this area in any capacity then you MIGHT have a chance. It's empire builders' paradise!:mad:
 
Believe me I agree this is misruled Britannia.
I do however think that our seas are very overfished and my home patch is an area with the only such protected marine area in the UK that has been there for years and it works.

I am afraid that the chances are that the extension of these areas would be messed up and used to employ more and more public payroll people and for empire building but the principle of such areas is something I support.
 
Ludd said:
This is "Misruled Britannia" .What on earth makes you think that any rules will be sensibly applied?

If there was a rule that no-one associated with the campaign should be allowed to administer the rules or be employed in this area in any capacity then you MIGHT have a chance. It's empire builders' paradise!:mad:
Click to expand...

And did you read their proposals for Studland, before the results of any proper scientific study are known.

The real problem is that these guys are building up a head of steam to lead the process of designating areas for our other chums to make into no go reservations. What are the leisure boaters doing? Expecting common sense to prevail?
 
If that is the sea grass/seahorse issue then yes, I am not happy with the way they have gone about that.

My main concern is how we are fishing out the seas or trawling them up and destroying the environment.

Where there are anchoring areas the solution maybe , in some cases, to provide mooring buoys but my main concern, I repeat, is to try to give some sea havens to stop the commercial fishing.
 
Gludy said:
If that is the sea grass/seahorse issue then yes, I am not happy with the way they have gone about that.

My main concern is how we are fishing out the seas or trawling them up and destroying the environment.

Where there are anchoring areas the solution maybe , in some cases, to provide mooring buoys but my main concern, I repeat, is to try to give some sea havens to stop the commercial fishing.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I am not against conservation and taking action to for example preserve and grow fish stocks and to preserve rare expmples of marine life. Most of the sites they are proposing that I know personally seem quite reasonable, but it is too easy for the baby to be thrown out with the bath water when conservation is mentioned. All to often the need for sensible scientic reasoning seems to go flying out the window
 
Perhaps some of the views expressed in the thread would be more effectively placed on the yourseeasyourvoice website, no?
There are different takes on marine conservation measures and not all involve total bans on all activity other than diving. Since September '08 a large part of Lamlash Bay (Isle of Arran) has been a No-Take zone. This status does not prevent anchoring nor any other surface activity. The NTZ is the result of years of lobbying, not by empire builders but by local interests including the sailing club. The Scottish Executive passed a Statutory Instrument to confirm the status but I emphasise the initiative came from the community.
The hope is that scallops and other sea life will thrive in the area which will be a nursery eventually re-populating over-fished grounds nearby.
Sadly the NTZ is threatened by new planning applications for fish farms and, worse, commercial scallop dredgers flouting the NTZ by illicitly raiding the area by cover of night.
Far from bemoaning "misrule by Britannia" I would like to see more stringent policing if a moderate conservation measure is going to be abused in these ways.
 
We are singing from the same hymn sheet.

My main concern is to have a sensible conservation areas that bans commercial fishing and would allow reasonable anchoring or at least the provision of mooring buoys.

I do fear the butters getting hold of this and banning everything!!
 
Interesting how the concerns there are fairly universal.

The trouble with research is that the answers are not what you expect. Its rare that the commercial catch exceeds the amatuer take. Locally with some species the amatuer take is 6 time the pro catch. Its hard to convince people of this, and this is with only a percentage of amatuers interviewed, they don't have to keep log books.

Areas that have been closed off here totally to pro fishing, specifically net fishing have not shown any great improvement. In fact there has been some inbalances with the species. Meanwhile the demand for product is escalating. Fish farms you say, the pollution problem has to be overcome with these first.
 
Frankly,for example, I think trawling the bottom of the sea is a terrible practice - like ploughing a field every month and allowing nothing to live.

The area off Lundy has been preserved for years and even has coral growing there.

We really are stripping the seas and commercial fishing has to be more controlled than it is - I accept that the cost of fish will rise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top