This was the headline in the news section of an excellent UK monthly sailing magazine. Makes you wonder what the hoo-ha is all about? Well apparently there is a proposed anchor ban in Dorset’s Studland Bay. A boat owner’s response group are claiming this is just the tip of the iceberg and that the whole UK coastline is under scrutiny and that this could become the norm.
Apparently the issue is that the sea grass meadows in Studland are being severely damaged by anchors and this is where seahorses breed and they are under threat! The area supports spiny and short-snouted seahorses both of which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. The discovery of a pregnant seahorse in the bay suggested they could be breeding there. Anchors rip up the sea grass and it can’t regenerate.
In 2001 the EU decreed that coastal conservation zones should be set up. Marine conservation zones (MCZ’s) will mean in the future that sailors anchoring in them could be accused of committing illegal acts by disturbing the seabed and could face penalties some boat owners are claiming.
Now a member of this group describes the conservations as being like 'a many headed dragon with threats, flames and fire bursting out all over'. Strong emotive language indeed. My daughter is studying wildlife conservation at University....I've never quite imagined her in this light before!
Now there has been a voluntary no anchor zone in Studland since 2009 and Crown England have been funding a research project into the destruction of the sea grass meadow. The evidence from this project will be submitted to parliament later this year. Final MCZ proposals will be made in June. Studland is a key anchorage along the south coast and at weekends in summer there are often 300 boats there over the weekend.
It is claimed that a recent ‘sea horse trust’ meeting was gate crashed by an angry abusive mob of sailors who had no evidence to present. The sea horse trust also claim that trust divers surveying the sea grass meadow have been deliberately targeted by motor boaters who tried to run them down in three separate incidents.
So where do I stand on the issue?
Well I haven’t sailed the south coast and looking at the map of where the MCZ might go – I can see that it is the most sheltered part of the bay (against the prevailing south westerlies) – so I can see why it is a popular anchorage. On the other hand, sea horses and undulated rays are under threat and sea grass meadows are a vital ecosystem. 300 anchors each weekend over the summer could be devastating. If there is sufficient evidence that sea horses are being threatened further...then, sorry, as a lifelong conservationist – I’m with the MCZ. If it was proposed that an MCZ was needed in the yealm or Kingsbridge estuary and the scientific evidence supported the need for it – then fair enough...so don’t accuse me of nimby-sm (not in my back yard – for all our overseas readers not familiar with this term).
Of course there could be compromises.....perhaps a ban for part of the year when it is breeding season; perhaps a smaller zone could be designated. Maybe a better national wide survey to assess how important the Studland meadow area is....is it the only one nationally? Are there others which are more extensive in less intensively sailed areas which could be protected? As the UK Government moves towards identifying and designating the new Marine Conservation Zones (MCZ) then surely it is it is vital that voluntary management projects such as this one in Studland must work. Recreational boaters who deliberately anchor there and ignore the voluntary no anchor zone are being foolish. If we can all demonstrate self regulation then there will be no need for legislation.
So what I do find abhorrent is the allegations that conservation meetings were targeted by abusive yachtsmen and divers are being endangered by boaters. Appalling!
Maybe I have missed the point, but as a sailor, one of the joys is being close to nature. It’s more than just feeling the breeze in your hair and sunshine and spume on your face. Sailing gets you closer to nature.......the gannets and seals along my coast; the fish jumping; the wading birds in the little inlets; the occasional porpoise that dances in the bow wave............shouldn’t all sailors be environmentalists and conservationists? Shouldn’t we all have some degree of conservation mindedness? In an age when marinas and pontoons and moorings are spreading along all parts of our coastline.......I think we need to look closely at the need for MCZ’s and make educated, well informed decisions, based on scientific evidence! We have a responsibility for handing over a coastline to future generations which has some pristine areas left. If 6000 sailors are so incensed about not anchoring in Studland bay – then gather the evidence – commission your own conservation surveyors. If anchoring isn’t damaging the grass as much as is being claimed then there is a serious debate to be had....but base the debate on evidence from both sides of the argument!
Steve
Apparently the issue is that the sea grass meadows in Studland are being severely damaged by anchors and this is where seahorses breed and they are under threat! The area supports spiny and short-snouted seahorses both of which are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. The discovery of a pregnant seahorse in the bay suggested they could be breeding there. Anchors rip up the sea grass and it can’t regenerate.
Spiny Seahorse
In 2001 the EU decreed that coastal conservation zones should be set up. Marine conservation zones (MCZ’s) will mean in the future that sailors anchoring in them could be accused of committing illegal acts by disturbing the seabed and could face penalties some boat owners are claiming.
Now a member of this group describes the conservations as being like 'a many headed dragon with threats, flames and fire bursting out all over'. Strong emotive language indeed. My daughter is studying wildlife conservation at University....I've never quite imagined her in this light before!
Now there has been a voluntary no anchor zone in Studland since 2009 and Crown England have been funding a research project into the destruction of the sea grass meadow. The evidence from this project will be submitted to parliament later this year. Final MCZ proposals will be made in June. Studland is a key anchorage along the south coast and at weekends in summer there are often 300 boats there over the weekend.
Studland in the summer evening sun Copyright: pgmusgrave
It is claimed that a recent ‘sea horse trust’ meeting was gate crashed by an angry abusive mob of sailors who had no evidence to present. The sea horse trust also claim that trust divers surveying the sea grass meadow have been deliberately targeted by motor boaters who tried to run them down in three separate incidents.
One of the voluntary no anchoring desination buoys
So where do I stand on the issue?
Well I haven’t sailed the south coast and looking at the map of where the MCZ might go – I can see that it is the most sheltered part of the bay (against the prevailing south westerlies) – so I can see why it is a popular anchorage. On the other hand, sea horses and undulated rays are under threat and sea grass meadows are a vital ecosystem. 300 anchors each weekend over the summer could be devastating. If there is sufficient evidence that sea horses are being threatened further...then, sorry, as a lifelong conservationist – I’m with the MCZ. If it was proposed that an MCZ was needed in the yealm or Kingsbridge estuary and the scientific evidence supported the need for it – then fair enough...so don’t accuse me of nimby-sm (not in my back yard – for all our overseas readers not familiar with this term).
A map of the proposed voluntary no anchoring zone
Of course there could be compromises.....perhaps a ban for part of the year when it is breeding season; perhaps a smaller zone could be designated. Maybe a better national wide survey to assess how important the Studland meadow area is....is it the only one nationally? Are there others which are more extensive in less intensively sailed areas which could be protected? As the UK Government moves towards identifying and designating the new Marine Conservation Zones (MCZ) then surely it is it is vital that voluntary management projects such as this one in Studland must work. Recreational boaters who deliberately anchor there and ignore the voluntary no anchor zone are being foolish. If we can all demonstrate self regulation then there will be no need for legislation.
Google earth shows a fair few boats in the anchorage
So what I do find abhorrent is the allegations that conservation meetings were targeted by abusive yachtsmen and divers are being endangered by boaters. Appalling!
Maybe I have missed the point, but as a sailor, one of the joys is being close to nature. It’s more than just feeling the breeze in your hair and sunshine and spume on your face. Sailing gets you closer to nature.......the gannets and seals along my coast; the fish jumping; the wading birds in the little inlets; the occasional porpoise that dances in the bow wave............shouldn’t all sailors be environmentalists and conservationists? Shouldn’t we all have some degree of conservation mindedness? In an age when marinas and pontoons and moorings are spreading along all parts of our coastline.......I think we need to look closely at the need for MCZ’s and make educated, well informed decisions, based on scientific evidence! We have a responsibility for handing over a coastline to future generations which has some pristine areas left. If 6000 sailors are so incensed about not anchoring in Studland bay – then gather the evidence – commission your own conservation surveyors. If anchoring isn’t damaging the grass as much as is being claimed then there is a serious debate to be had....but base the debate on evidence from both sides of the argument!
Steve
6 comments:
Instead of being a soulless mouthpiece for 'conservationists' out to make a TV lifestyle, engage brain.
No evidence of anchors'ripping up' 'devastating' - see the Studland Parish Magazine from people in a position to observe.
The meeting was not gatecrahed, some locals got wind what was going on - boat users had been excluded by vested interests to this point - they asked and were allowed to attend.
Jon Reed, now of BORG,had been invited to attend- THE ONLY BOAT USER FOR THE WHOLE SW - AMONG HOW MANY VESTED INTERESTS ?
No boat users could come with evidence, as they were all there for the first tie to find out what was going on.
If you're going to trot things out without reading or understanding them, at least read the great deal of evidence BORG has put before you.
How about the fact the eelgrass comes and goes over a decades long cycle, and is showing far far more extensive areas now than in wartime aerial photos - despite the boom in small boat use since the war ?
The seahorse trust's own 'expert' has gone on record saying that his is the most extensive eelgrss research, and covers 2 years.
Hi also says the eelgrass is doing well at the moment - with boats around !
Get some FACTS not old tosh from selfish biased people with an agenda - BORG, like the Studland residents, wants the bay to be free for all to enjoy.
What about the safety aspect ? This is the only safe rest and refuge for the long distance beteen the dangerous areas of the Needles & Portland.
Look at the facts and get more info, PLEASE !
Now let's see if you can be honest and fair and post this.
Steve,
Either you are biased by your daughter - if she's a REAL conservationist she won't be taken in - or you're rather gullible; I hope you learn to read subjects up properly before repeating the biased and untrue words of others.
interesting comments - I have a slight degree of empathy but disagree with some of your observations and the way they have been put. I only summarised the yachting press article and put a personal view at the end. I did that if there is evidence that supports the argument that anchoring doesnt damage then fair enough. i reported the conservation group alleged it was gate crashed. I did say IF that did happen then it was appalling; I did also say that if there was sufficient evidence anchoring was causing damage, then fair enough on that point; and i did acknowledge the safety issue as well - so you need to read a little more carefully and perhaps be a little more moderated/less aggressive in reply first.
in the meantime - i still think that if it is a voluntary no anchor area then it should be observed.....if not then it helps those promoting the wider distribution of MCZ's along our coastline being enforced with legislation.
mouth piece for conservations - not at all but i do recognise the need for them and the good work that serious well informed conservationists do; and it isnt an unfair point that our coastlines have seen a huge growth in developments for recreational sailing and that this does impact on the ecosysterms in that area, albeit unintentionally. there are also fantastic examples in my own area where recreational sailing has done much to regenerate areas and conserve the flora and fauna of those areas - the kingsbridge estuary and the work of the harbour authorities there would be a classic example.
my daughter's reaction - was immediately 'what's the evidence for and against - typically balanced - which is what her lecturers seem to promote constantly - and all her work/training seems to be emphasising 'consultation with all stakeholders'and to go for 'win-win' situations for ALL stakeholders..and biodiversity..so that is reassuring for the future.
finally as i understood it from the article and some web research - the issue isnt so much the eel grass beds and lack or bloom of it; isn't it the fact that it is the habitat and breeding ground for rare spiny sea horses - which takes me back to the point i made - if there are other breeding areas around the UK for this creature - less important as a major boating anchorage - protect them instead of studland - that way everyone benefits. if however, it is the only place around the UK where these are found then its a conservation issue and there need to be some compromises both from conservationists and the sailing community.
Strikes me I gave a balanced perspective!
Steve
For distribution of the spiny (or long-nosed) seahorse visit the Natural England website at:
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/marine/protectandmanage/mpa/mcz/features/species/longsnoutedseahorse.aspx
It says, amongst other stuff "Spiny seahorses have been found in southern Norfolk, Essex, south-eastern England, along the south coast up around parts of Wales and on up the west coast of Scotland to the Shetland Isles. The UK and west coast of Ireland represent the northerly limit of the seahorse’s range: it is found on Atlantic coasts as far south as Morocco and in the Mediterranean."
So, not that rare then. And certainly not a Studland-only beastie.
drucan - sorry have replied to your comment but in the post above by accident - see what i said and thanks for the website - appreciated
steve
All of the same old rubbish from the BORG.
There is plenty of evidence that anchors and mooring chains damage eelgrass, a paper has been produced by Dr Collins proving this is the case at Studland.
They have 0 credibility, they are happy to rubbish everything the scientists and conservationists produce, yet they have nothing to back up any of their ridiculous statements.
Angry little men with their own selfish agenda.
The meeting was indeed gate crashed my a mob of misinformed boat owners, because certain people had been muck raking .
The Borg know nothing about eelgrass or seahorses, you only need to look at their website to see that, complete nonsense.
The claims about Studland being a 'safe haven ' is also rubbish, 300+ boats on a hot sunny day , what are they sheltering from exactly ?
I welcome your balanced veiws Steve, this is the way ahead.
Post a Comment