Mike Fox Posted December 6, 2010 Report Share Posted December 6, 2010 See here: http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/8720...nd_bays/?ref=mr Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick Martin Posted December 6, 2010 Report Share Posted December 6, 2010 How convienient that they have found another species that needs protecting along with the sea horses and just as a no anchor Zone is proposed for Studland! Personally I have never heard of an Undulate Ray being caught in Studland Bay Swanage yes but more offshore than in close Martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cth Posted December 6, 2010 Report Share Posted December 6, 2010 How convienient that they have found another species that needs protecting along with the sea horses and just as a no anchor Zone is proposed for Studland! Personally I have never heard of an Undulate Ray being caught in Studland Bay Swanage yes but more offshore than in close Martin You dont know where to fish, will give you a few pointers if you like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gas Posted December 6, 2010 Report Share Posted December 6, 2010 Personally I have never heard of an Undulate Ray being caught in Studland Bay Swanage yes but more offshore than in close Martin You dont know where to fish, will give you a few pointers if you like I would now duck if I was U Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprinter Posted December 10, 2010 Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 Ok guys (and Gal's) We need to think about this, let Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted December 10, 2010 Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 as said before - they know they won't get a trawler ban on any active fishery, so they have targeted areas that are not fisheries (because they are active anchorages!) generally the commercial fisheries people are far more switched on to 'action' if required than the leisure boating sector - which starts from a huge disadvantage in the perception stakes ie hard working small commercial fishing communities v rich bast+rds and their gas gusseling toys... right now they continue to avoid definition of the activities they propose to gain legislation to ban within these areas - to avoid making the issues real and retain the emotional high ground - it (undefined) is bad for the environment (undefined and unproven); it's hard to argue against such statements! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprinter Posted December 10, 2010 Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 Whilst that is true Duncan, i still think its worth getting AT involved on our behalf to see what they think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted December 10, 2010 Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 Whilst that is true Duncan, i still think its worth getting AT involved on our behalf to see what they think in relation to RSA and MCZ's it's currently too late - CEFAS has completed it's 'research' - see here the real issue is the funding aspects of the research - the only people prepared to fund the research had a clear idea of the results they wished to obtain... when anything is published from the research (other than the incredible NE web data sets) we should certainly get active about the lack of any real engagement. CEFAS shouts loud about the potential importance of the RSA sector, but also states that it does nothing to help itself - a classic stance. There has been no significant study published since 2004 (Drew Associates, 2004 (Crabtree et al. 2004). Research into the economic contribution of sea angling. Final report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) as everyone seems to have been more interested in who (s in charge/doing it). This isn't meant as an observation on AT's current activities - just the reality of those in power when (forced to) consider the RSA. OTOH when the 'research' associated with MCZs is published it may well become such an observation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted December 10, 2010 Report Share Posted December 10, 2010 (edited) sorry if I am coming over to hard - I think I am actually agreeing with you but highlighting that the time for AT's serious involvement in the NE research has already past. on balance even the extended MCZ at Studland isn't really a serious issue for the RSA, the Needles one certainly has the potential to be a much bigger issue for all RSA sectors including a huge 'knock on effect' to the charter market out of Lymington etc, and the Eddystone area for Plymouth. the effect for the leisure boater, and knock on to Poole's economy, of the MCZ in Studland being a no-anchor zone - would be huge. Likewise Babbacombe Bay off Torbay. However, they really wouldn't notice either the Needles or Eddystone areas at all. the commercial (catching) sector wouldn't really miss any of them - what's not trawled off the Needles will be picked up in the surrounding area just fine! FWIW the RYA, as a stakeholder and early recipient, published it's initial reaction to the South West proposals yesterday. I have copied it below "RYA commenting on coastal areas being explored by English MCZ project teams. The RYA is currently in the process of commenting on a number of coastal areas being explored by the regional English Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ) project teams. These comments will feed into the continuing debate about location and management of possible MCZs. The latest report to be scrutinised by the RYA is from one of the four regional English MCZ projects; Finding Sanctuary in the south west. Caroline Price, RYA Planning and Environment Advisor explains: Edited December 10, 2010 by duncan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.