This amendment adds to the list of things about which orders must be made when designating marine conservation zones, and suggests that there must be some, ""provision for the marking of","
marine conservation zones, ""on charts, GPS systems and, where necessary, on the surface of the sea"."
That is important inshore, where some heavy use of marine conservation zones may be allowed and, more particularly, where the licensing of such zones has been highly restricted so that almost nothing is allowable. If I take as a model the existing zone around Lundy—one of the very few examples that we have—you are not even allowed to drop your anchor there.
If there is to be a series of marine conservation zones all around the coast, which shipping will have to observe, which divers should observe and which both commercial and recreational interests must have knowledge of then they will, at the least, have to know where they are because they will be expected to abide by the zone rules. They have to be able to see what is where—for example, where they can drop anchor and where they may not even be allowed to go. They might have to observe other sorts of limitations; some boats, for example, still empty their dirty water into the sea. I should hope that would not be possible, particularly within the special conservation zones where the ecosystems are deemed to be vulnerable to such things. There are all sorts of reasons for having them clearly marked.
The Minister will know, as he kindly organised it, that I met with his Bill team, who explained to me that there would be difficulty in marking these zones on the charts because the chart-producing companies—I presume that means the Hydrographic Office, but there may be others—are not in public ownership. Having mulled it over, that does not seem a good reason to me for not marking them. I believe it absolutely essential for both commercial and recreational interests that some form of marking takes place, at least on paper and GPS, while in certain areas—particularly in high-use areas—it may be necessary to put buoys, for example, on the surface of the sea.
It is commonly understood that where a buoy is off a headland, for example, it is saying, "Do not go inside this buoy; you have to stay to its seaward side". That is common knowledge for all sea users, and it would be quite easy to develop a similar system for MCZs. What would be unforgivable would be to introduce them very quietly or invisibly, so that nobody really knew where they were. I beg to move.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 9 March 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c1048-9 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:58:13 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_535955
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_535955
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_535955