Marine Conservation Zones coming soon to south-west England

[Finding Sanctuary]

The Marine and Coastal Access Act introduces a new national designation for marine protection - Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs). MCZs must be identified and designated in the seas around England, to help create a coherent network of marine protected areas by 2012. New Marine Conservation Zones and existing designations: European Marine Sites, Marine Nature Reserves and Sites of Special Scientific Interest, will make up the network of marine protected areas.

 

No MCZs have been proposed yet for the south-west, with the exception of Lundy Island whose protected east coast will have it’s designation changed from a Marine Nature Reserve to a Marine Conservation Zone in January. (This switchover will not alter the management measures currently in place.) Sea angling is one of the activities that could be affected in certain ways by MCZs. For example, some sites may become no-take zones in order to meet conservation targets, so it is important that you know how you can influence these decisions now, before they have been made.

 

Four projects have been set up around England to work with sea anglers and other sea users to decide where these zones should go and what level of protection they should have. These projects are: Finding Sanctuary in the south-west, Balanced Seas in the south-east, Net Gain for the North Sea and Irish Sea Conservation Zones for the Irish Sea.

 

Sea angling is recognised as an important activity in the south-west and with a detailed knowledge of local marks and fish ecology, sea anglers will play a vital role in developing ideas for MCZs, ensuring they protect key areas such as spawning and nursery grounds.

 

In the south-west, Finding Sanctuary has brought together sea anglers, divers, commercial fishermen, sailors, conservationists, scientists and many other marine stakeholders on its Steering Group. The Steering Group is responsible for drawing the lines on maps – deciding where MCZs should be placed and what level of protection they should have. The level of protection given to each MCZ will be decided on a case by case basis. The Steering Group will make its recommendations to Government in June 2011 and the final decision lies with the Ministers.

 

We have several liaison officers collecting information from sea anglers about which areas of sea they use, so that we can create a map of sea angling activity around the south-west. Accurate information about where sea angling takes place in the region is essential, as this is the information that the sea angling representatives on the Steering Group will use to stand up for your interests during the negotiations, with the aim of minimising the impact of MCZs on your activity. The sea angling representatives on the Finding Sanctuary Steering Group are Peter MacConnell (B.A.S.S. & Angling Trust), Mike Bailey (Brixham Angling Club) and Paul Taylor (Cornish Federation of Sea Anglers). We want to work with you to ensure we get the best result for everyone involved, but if we don’t know which areas are important to you, Peter, Mike and Paul can’t try to avoid them when planning MCZs.

 

There are three ways you can get involved to have your say:

1. Visit our Interactive Map

2. Call Finding Sanctuary on 01392 878 340 and arrange to meet your nearest liaison officer who will help you to map the areas which are important to you.

3. Join us at one of our drop in days around the south-west over the next few months for more information, to ask questions or record the sea areas you use on our maps. New dates and venues for drop in days are being added frequently and are detailed on the News section of our website.

 

We will try to check back here from time to time, but if you have any questions, suggestions or concerns please get in touch with us directly.

 

South-west

Finding Sanctuary

Email: info@finding-sanctuary.org

Tel: 01392 878 340

 

If you fish in other parts of the country get in touch with your nearest project.

 

South-east

Balanced Seas

Email: balancedseas@kent.ac.uk

Tel: 01227 827 839

 

North Sea

Net Gain

Email: dani@yhsg.co.uk

Tel: 01482 382 007

 

Irish Sea

Irish Sea Conservation Zones

Email: info@irishseaconservation.org.uk

Tel: 01925 813 200

[Worms]

Woo hoo, easy to digest information for anglers!

 

No excuses not to have a say!

[glennk]

I wont be responding because its obviously not my area and I cant say what people there would like to happen. I do have a question though for the South West Sea Anglers, I hope some of them read this and are willing to post a few answers up. Are you happy with your named representatives ? do you know who these people are ? (Peter MacConnell (B.A.S.S. & Angling Trust), Mike Bailey (Brixham Angling Club) and Paul Taylor (Cornish Federation of Sea Anglers)), and will they stand up for your best interests.

[barry luxton]

Woo hoo, easy to digest information for anglers!

 

No excuses not to have a say!

 

Ok Worms, i will.

 

Me being a bit cynical would have to say finding sanctuary (welcome btw) has joined the forum with just one topic in mind. If not i would welcome his comments regarding something that is more important, (my opinion) and that is to fix the legislation that is broke before yet more is heaped. To that extent it would have a dramatic effect on what this broke legislation has helped cause. The decline of the fish stocks, including the food chain. Facts and figures already posted elsewhere and the same ones used in parliament this week. So, Perhaps a comment regarding the cfp where the eu have intimated that it will be around 2012 before it is fixed. That will then lead to a period of time, say 5-10 years minimum to see the new legislation has had an effect, either positive or negitive, who knows, they might just be fit for purpose, i don't have much faith though, confirmed with a decade of paper shuffling regarding the low stocks of the common eel. Of course defra and our government helped in this paper chain. I'm expecting some of these nutters to propose hundreds of new poles with cameras stuck up them around the shoreline next, daft, not really when we are already one of the most watched nations from within. Save a few policeman what. As a side issue, this daft org, now wants the north sea anglers to count cod, defra will have to comply, you can't make it up.

 

Have a look at the photo below and tell me what is wrong with it, posted again sorry. The likes of the marine conservation society and 100,000 followers, prince charlie, are proposing a ban, no angling, ntz, in the very spot where my boy has caught his first pollack. It went back btw. With a lot of help due to the fact that they are signing for something that is pre-loaded with a yes we want ntz's without proof that the angler are causing a problem. After visiting the area for more than thirty years, it is a bit emotive, to say that you can't fish there no more. Trawlers can't in any event. That is what you could be signing up to Worms. Don't tell me to stand up and get involved, or join the at as it makes sence, because we already are involved, no doubt this post will irritate a few, tough. The government, defra already know the nursery and spawning grounds, why do they need a paper chain to get them protected?

 

Two specis immediatly spring to mind down the south west, bass, yes, it is well known the area were they play mothers and fathers in and the time of year etc, etc. Turbot, there used to be good catches of them a few years ago, not too far from dartmouth, well documented. One decent turbot was reported caught by one angler this year. However, sponges and dare i say it worms (pun) are more important than fish stocks.

 

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s126/ba...sistpollack.jpg

Edited December 5, 2009 by barry luxton

[glennk]

I think anyone living in that area is snookered. Finding Sanctuary have been very clever in their wording and the very threat of anglers loosing anything will be enough to bring them out in droves to give up all the information they have learned over the years. An example of this is that Natural England placed a questionnaire in a Whitby tackle shop and the local idiots were falling over themselves to fill it in, not even asking what it was about. God help us when they start with all this crap in the north sea.

 

It has always been my belief that Natural England know very little about the coastline and what goes on there. The real knowledge lies with those people who use that coastline daily. Natural England intend to utilise that knowledge to build these areas. By their very involvement, Sea Anglers, could be contributing to their own downfall. Sadly I see no way out of this and the best outcome can only come if the real anglers from that area have people they know and trust representing them. Dont let the once a month angling old fogies get on these committees otherwise your all very doomed.

Edited December 5, 2009 by glennk

[barry luxton]

Copy correspondance from a mate of mine who is a member of the named angling club.

 

quote:

 

As I understand it at present, there are no plans to ban anglers from the proposed MCZs. Their introduction is long overdue.

 

 

 

Even if anglers were to be restricted from some areas, I do not see that as a serious problem. It’s far more important to limit the wholesale commercial rape and pillage of our seas, if there are going to be fish for our Grandchildren.

 

 

 

The proposed areas which include Berry Head and Babbacombe are far too restricted. Important sites such as the “Skerries” and associated banks also need to be protected. I personally proposed a MPZ extending from outside Start Point through to the other side of Torbay.

end quote:

 

We have the simular veiws but a different perspective on the fix.

Edited December 5, 2009 by barry luxton

[Worms]

My initial comment was really aimed at the contact links at the bottom of the page. so that anglers could pick the right website to have a look and then make up their minds.

 

Don't forget Barry, any new CFP regulations or limitations will be subject to any limitations imposed on commercials by any protected zones, which also come into play in 2012.

 

I understand your reticence Glennk in not wanting to share your marks or catch results with NE or other bodies. My concern is this: If NE rely on anglers information to judge fish stocks etc in coastal waters (I'm sure they won't rely on just that) isn't it possible that recording no or very few fish in areas is more likely to get restrictions imposed? After all as far as angling is concerned there won't be the need to protect areas full of fish. It is more likely that they will want to protect areas of low numbers to conserve them.

 

I do agree with the need for active anglers to get involved in any representation. As for not responding because it's not your area, why not? it's still an area of coast that you can fish if you desire.

 

Barry, we've had this discussion a few times and yes I understand your worries based on past cock-ups. I just feel that the potential for this to work for everybodies benefit and to limit commercial fishing in sensitive areas could make a really positive impact on fish stocks etc. The only problem with doubting or being hesitant (as a group) is that RSAs don't get the say that they should regarding numbers of anglers compared with other recreational sea users.

 

If it is going to happen anyway at least let's have our say early and with as many anglers contributing as possible.

[barry luxton]

Are you advocating Worms that two lots of legislation are required to do the same thing, just because the first mega million one is an abject failure.

 

Don't forget the first ntz, lundy was without any proof or consideration that the anglers had anything to do with it's demise in any event. What makes you think that anglers will see any benifits from these new ngo's. Only grief. What threats are anglers looking at at the moment. It is coming from one place at present and nowhere else.

 

At present the rsa are up against 60,000 co-op members, that is what the other ngo, the mcs have done. Should the rsa be happy to negotiate with them as quite clearly the agenda's are different.

[Worms]

No I'm not advocating it Barry it's just that the whole system is being shaken up for better or worse. Regardless of previous legislation the new proposed legislation takes notice of all stakeholders. If the Co-op and MCS only have 60,000 members/supporters and are "anti-angling" thern 1.4 million anglers should have a reasonable comeback.

 

As it is I doubt very much that anglers are being directly targeted by the Co-op. I suggest that they are supporting green/line-caught/ozone friendly fish on their plates. and nought wrong with that in an ideal world.

 

Anglers need to take a similar stance on the sustainability issue but also need to make it clear that recreational angling is not a threat to fish stocks per se. Add on the old 'socio-economic' benefits and anglers have a strong case to push discussions of NTZs by housewives (no insult intended) out of the equation.............IF enough anglers have their say.

[barry luxton]

One of the reasons why i keep carping (pun again) on about the problem being top down is the eu are part and parcel of the link below. They are the ones who are saying that we need to comply with their dictats regarding conservation zones. As i said, not fit for purpose. Don't do as i do but as i tell you. Or not in my back yard springs to mind.

 

http://www.fishnewseu.com/latest-news/worl...atastrophe.html

 

and who do you think the UN is mainly refering to as the problem ? One guess could it be the i eu.

 

http://www.fishnewseu.com/latest-news/worl...e-deep-sea.html

 

And yet this week without being dictated to, our own commercial fleet has finally woken up to the fact that they can actually do something of more importance than yet more and more restriction. Way forward or what?

 

http://www.fishnewseu.com/latest-news/uk/2...57-percent.html

Edited December 5, 2009 by barry luxton