cgsac
29-04-2005, 00:41
Just found it on Cornwall County Council Website
Does not come down either way (from what I can gather but some stats I have gleaned from it.)
Quoted from the Report...........58%[2] do not want any form of Marine Sanctuary Zone in Whitsand Bay. Further analysis of results reveals widespread concern about a perceived decline in environmental quality (including fish stocks) within the Bay. 41%[3] support some form of change to commercial fishing practices or establishment of a closed area in Whitsand Bay.
It goes on to say......
Cornwall County Council does not intend to pursue any of the options set out in the consultation document. In the future, significant new information may become available or there may be majority local support for a community-led Marine Protected Area of some form, which may cause the County Council to reconsider its position.
Synopsis of Key Results:
A total of 994 people and 35 organisations responded to the consultation via the questionnaire, petitions, letters and emails.
49% of total correspondents, who provided contact details, were local to the Rame area.
33% of total correspondents described themselves as recreational anglers or angling associations. This was the largest interest group responding to this consultation.
58% of total correspondents do not want any form of Marine Sanctuary Zone in Whitsand Bay.
41% of total correspondents support some form of change to commercial fishing practices or establishment of a closed area in Whitsand Bay
32% of total correspondents support some form of Marine Sanctuary Zone around the Scylla only.
19% of total correspondents support some form of Marine Sanctuary Zone around the Scylla and the James Eagan Layne.
66% of organisations who responded offered qualified support for some form of fishery restriction or closure in Whitsand Bay.
Where people responded positively to some form of Marine Sanctuary Zone in Whitsand Bay, a trial is preferred over and above a permanent closure. 10% of total correspondents supported a voluntary or statutory trial.
Where people responded positively to some form of Marine Sanctuary Zone in Whitsand Bay, a statutory closure is preferred over and above a voluntary closure. 10% of total correspondents supported a statutory closure.
20% of correspondents do not want there to be an extension of the Looe Voluntary Marine Conservation Area, to include the area between Hannafore Point to Rame Head.
9% of correspondents supported the extension of the Looe Voluntary Marine Conservation Area, to include the area between Hannafore Point to Rame Head.
Well it looks like thats been shelved then. From what it looks (my opinion only), the local fishing lobby was too strong. Interesting points about the Scylla though.
The link is
www.cornwall.gov.uk/Consultation/whitsand/report/default.htm
Does not come down either way (from what I can gather but some stats I have gleaned from it.)
Quoted from the Report...........58%[2] do not want any form of Marine Sanctuary Zone in Whitsand Bay. Further analysis of results reveals widespread concern about a perceived decline in environmental quality (including fish stocks) within the Bay. 41%[3] support some form of change to commercial fishing practices or establishment of a closed area in Whitsand Bay.
It goes on to say......
Cornwall County Council does not intend to pursue any of the options set out in the consultation document. In the future, significant new information may become available or there may be majority local support for a community-led Marine Protected Area of some form, which may cause the County Council to reconsider its position.
Synopsis of Key Results:
A total of 994 people and 35 organisations responded to the consultation via the questionnaire, petitions, letters and emails.
49% of total correspondents, who provided contact details, were local to the Rame area.
33% of total correspondents described themselves as recreational anglers or angling associations. This was the largest interest group responding to this consultation.
58% of total correspondents do not want any form of Marine Sanctuary Zone in Whitsand Bay.
41% of total correspondents support some form of change to commercial fishing practices or establishment of a closed area in Whitsand Bay
32% of total correspondents support some form of Marine Sanctuary Zone around the Scylla only.
19% of total correspondents support some form of Marine Sanctuary Zone around the Scylla and the James Eagan Layne.
66% of organisations who responded offered qualified support for some form of fishery restriction or closure in Whitsand Bay.
Where people responded positively to some form of Marine Sanctuary Zone in Whitsand Bay, a trial is preferred over and above a permanent closure. 10% of total correspondents supported a voluntary or statutory trial.
Where people responded positively to some form of Marine Sanctuary Zone in Whitsand Bay, a statutory closure is preferred over and above a voluntary closure. 10% of total correspondents supported a statutory closure.
20% of correspondents do not want there to be an extension of the Looe Voluntary Marine Conservation Area, to include the area between Hannafore Point to Rame Head.
9% of correspondents supported the extension of the Looe Voluntary Marine Conservation Area, to include the area between Hannafore Point to Rame Head.
Well it looks like thats been shelved then. From what it looks (my opinion only), the local fishing lobby was too strong. Interesting points about the Scylla though.
The link is
www.cornwall.gov.uk/Consultation/whitsand/report/default.htm