Studland Bay - what you need to do

[oldharry]

Where were you coming from going to?

Now that inputs to the consultation phase has now closed, any idea when the findings will be announced?

Within the next 12 months" is the official reply.

Hopefully DEFRA will realise that SBPA, BORG and RYA are not going to let them get away with the sloppy schoolboy level science behind the recommendation, and I have left them in no doubt that we will challenege it every step of the way. How can we discuss how to protect something that doesnt need protection? What will be the Conservation Objective for an area that is currently in pretty good shape. Why restrict boats using the Bay when it will not achieve anything worthwhile?

[nortada]

Within the next 12 months" is the official reply.

Hopefully DEFRA will realise that SBPA, BORG and RYA are not going to let them get away with the sloppy schoolboy level science behind the recommendation, and I have left them in no doubt that we will challenege it every step of the way. How can we discuss how to protect something that doesnt need protection? What will be the Conservation Objective for an area that is currently in pretty good shape. Why restrict boats using the Bay when it will not achieve anything worthwhile?

Once DEFRA have made their decision how do you plan to challenge it? Surely it will follow the normal path into law?

[oldharry]

After designation Stakeholders (of which I am one) have to agree on Management Options. There's no public input at this stage afaik. If it comes to it I eill have the Dtudland residents stakeholder who I know Well on side, and RYA who have come out on our side thanks to Marlynspykes work but who have a new man in post who I have yet to meet.

[Tranona]

I expect there is always the possibility of a judicial review, although that is extreme and costly.

[nortada]

I expect there is always the possibility of a judicial review, although that is extreme and costly.

Who would pay?

Problem with this being a stickie, new posts are invisible in the main forum directory.

[Tranona]

Who would pay?

Problem with this being a stickie, new posts are invisible in the main forum directory.

That is indeed the issue. Clearly somebody or organisation that is affected and believes that the decision is wrong in law - not just that they disagree. The law is already in place giving DEFRA the powers. The issue would be whether the law has been followed correctly either process or giving due regard to the evidence presented.

It is not possible to determine if there is a case until the decision is made and the basis explained.

[nortada]

That is indeed the issue. Clearly somebody or organisation that is affected and believes that the decision is wrong in law - not just that they disagree. The law is already in place giving DEFRA the powers. The issue would be whether the law has been followed correctly either process or giving due regard to the evidence presented.

It is not possible to determine if there is a case until the decision is made and the basis explained.

So cutting to the chase, DEFRA's ruling will probably hold.

[Tranona]

So cutting to the chase, DEFRA's ruling will probably hold.

Yes, I expect so. That is the point of having these long winded consultations. Primarily political to ensure they cannot be accused of not consulting properly. Breaking it down into individual small areas is another part of the strategy as it minimises the size of the "objectors". The fact that small almost individual groups can be stakeholders shows this strategy works. Each proposed Zone is individual so failure to designate one does not have a big influence on what happens in others.

You can see this as either selecting appropriate solutions or a way of restrictions creeping up on us!

[MarlynSpyke]

Actually I go along with Defra on this one. There are in total 91 MCZ’s in the frame, 50 already designated and 41 in Tranche 3. If they average 6 “features of conservation interest” (FOCI) each, that’s 546 items to be considered, and they do require the presence of the feature to be validated and a statement of its condition in that location. There is actually a total of 73 different FOCI being considered among the sites. You can surely only have a meaningful public consultation if you break it down into manageable chunks. There is no way I would have been able to address the whole lot, and besides, although no doubt there are some great enthusiasts for Maerl beds and coldwater sponges out there (or, everybody’s favourite, the Trembling Sea Mat), I frankly don’t care and they are not in the frame as far as recreational boating is concerned.

Recreational boating would only be impacted in inshore sites, and the only boating activity remaining in the spotlight is anchoring in seagrass. (They hinted that anchoring could be an issue in the context of such treasures as subtidal mud, and subtidal mixed gravels, but seem to have backed away from this, the possibility of boats being under suspicion for transporting invasive alien species was raised, but BORG pointed out that our vigorous tidal flows do a pretty good job in that respect, and they can’t stop the tides).

So we are left with a handful of sites which might impact recreational boating. They dealt with the easy ones first, saving the ones with greatest socioeconomic impact to last. The one in Solent Central, Norris to Ryde, seems to have been dropped because of commercial (ferries) and recreational boating impacts, and the Yarmouth IOW one has had the seagrass bit trimmed off, so the process is being adapted as it goes along.

Studland Bay is a tough one, with strong conflicting boating and conservation interest groups pressing their cases. It could also be a sort of test case for seagrass (i.e. eelgrass) beds in general. It has also come to the attention of Government ministers, thanks to the site-by-site approach.

I must say that I have found Defra, Natural England and Marine Management Organisation people professional and helpful, and prepared to respond to a properly argued case, and I thank them for that. One publication was withdrawn when we pointed out serious bias and errors, and the infamous MB0102 Matrix assessments have been replaced by a better and more transparent system, although I still have issues with its application to Studland Bay. (See http://boatownersresponse.org.uk/Tr3...n-Response.pdf )

So I believe the process is being worked through quite well, although at the end of the day I suspect a much more positive impact would be achieved by reducing overfishing and controlling those fishing practices which have damaging side effects, because in reality I believe the impact of recreational boating on our waters to be negligible.

[oldharry]

To save any newcmers looking it up, the DEFRA Public Consultation is now closed. Thanks everyone who responded. We continue to work at and monitor what is going on, and if anything further of interest occurs we will of course let you know.

DEFRA say that they will make a decision "within the next 12 months", so the waiting game continues!

I see this page is getting around 85 hits a day still, which is good as it spreads awareness of the issues.