BLUEMOMENT

Over on TOP the little englanders are throwing babies out of prams and getting all paranoid over the MMO (Marine Management Organisation), a sort of non-accountable government body that is charged with managing the seas to the extent that the aforesaid little engerlanders believe the act of laying a mooring or even daring to sail over some patches of water would either be banned or require an impossible to get licence. Being from the south their hysterical bleatings claim this fascist regime would apply not just Studland Bay but to the whole of the UK, by which they probably mean the Solent.

Being of an enquiring mind I went for a trawl amongst the legislation and have, not surprisingly for one who claims a logical mind, ended up totally confused. The legislation that empowers the MMO does indeed refer to the UK but the MMO website appears to only be concerned with England with Wales and Scotland excluded. The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 seems to have covered the same sort of ground (or water) but as far as I can see makes no reference to the Crown Estates who I thought claimed all rights to the sea bed.

Is there amongst our readers someone who is aware of and understands this legislation, whether the powers are devolved, and how it is likely to affect us?

Having had some experience with the Rural Payments Agency whilst attempting to assist my late Mother in Law with her farming activities, it is my profound belief that all government departments are nothing but a bug gers muddle

FullCircle wrote: It has hopefully stopped that Twonk Seajet in his tracks, a bit.

Andy's all right. When I was restoring my Hunter 490 I approached the Anderson 22 people for advice (both Oliver Lee designs, many details in common) and Andy - for it was he - was extremely helpful with information, advice and pictures.

I went round the aquarium at Keppel Pier a couple of months back. They have a fascinating video presentation showing (a) the diversity of things which live in in Millport Bay and the Firth of Clyde generally and (b) the effect scallop dredging (in particular) has on life down there. It left me, as I imagine it was intended to, with a strong feeling that Something Must Be Done.

Mind you, the Seahorse Trust seem like a [rest of this sentence omitted on grounds of legal self-preservation].

marisca wrote: The legislation that empowers the MMO does indeed refer to the UK but the MMO website appears to only be concerned with England with Wales and Scotland excluded. The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 seems to have covered the same sort of ground (or water) but as far as I can see makes no reference to the Crown Estates who I thought claimed all rights to the sea bed.

Is there amongst our readers someone who is aware of and understands this legislation, whether the powers are devolved, and how it is likely to affect us?

If any of the below needs correcting, please chime up. I am not proud.
I contributed to one of the interminable threads on TOP, principally to point out that Englandshire has its own legislation and is distinct from that in Scotland. The Marine (Scotland) 2010 Act draws together a shed-load of regulations, statutory instruments and, most significantly, confirms the powers of Marine Scotland which is now the principal body tasked with management of Scottish waters.
By "waters" read the water column. Marine Scotland is now the umbrella organisation for fisheries protection, seafish (and fresh-water fishery) research, conservation and managing exploitation.
Another effect of the Scottish Act is to enable the setting up of Marine Protection Areas for purposes of research and conservation. A consultation is due to be started before the year end on likely MPAs and the restrictions which will be applied. I am not sure about the difference between MPAs and Marine Conservation Zones in England. I suspect there's not much.
The role of the Crown Estate is unchanged, remaining responsible for the sea-bed.
There are also local delegations which will be unchanged. Example: Clydeport is reponsible for the water column in the upper Clyde Estuary under an Act of Parliament passed prior to privatisation amalgamating the Clyde Port Authority and the Clyde Ports Trust. Clydeport, therefore, will act as an agent for Marine Scotland (if I read things properly).
I don't know enough to make a comparison between the Scots and English legislation to make a judgement on whether the wailing and gnashing of teeth on TOP is justified. However, there has already been criticism of the Scots Act, as not giving Marine Scotland enough power. There is no provision (that I can see) which would allow setting up (eg.) no-take zones. The only NTZ I am aware of in Lamlash Bay, Arran was set up under its own statutory instrument.
The Act provides that licensable activities (including moorings) will continue.

Thank you. My feeling is that, as far as I'm concerned, nothing will change. I will still fork out £40 (or whatever) to the Crown Estates via my Yacht Club and Clydeport will continue to run roughshod over anything that stands in the way of them making money.

Scallop dredging and bottom trawling seem to be the kind of activities that should have legislation.

If you have been following the story from Lancashire - they obviously can't organise a cockle picking in a brewery..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-la ... e-15547552


It only took 26 rescue missions in two months for them to realise 'Something Must Be Done'.

There is a new charity called Sustainable Inshore Fisheries Trust that has the aim of reimposing area bans on shellfish trawling. It's first campaign is the Firth of Clyde and you can find out more on their website: http://www.sift-uk.org