THE Grimsby-based chief executive of Seafish, has urged those who taking part in Hugh's Fish Fight orchestrated march on Westminster today, to recognise facts before jumping on the bandwagon.
Chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, fresh from his discard success in Brussels, is now demanding the implementation of 127 Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in UK waters as quickly as possible. It has been described as "irresponsible and opportunistic" by the industry body.
In Seafish's view, calling for such measures, without due consideration of robust scientific evidence and detailed decision-making, presents a very real danger of undermining and undervaluing years of environmental improvements.
Dr Paul Williams said: "When livelihoods and communities are at risk of damage we must only deal in fact. It is vital that the discussions around such complex issues continue to be held by the people who have the knowledge and expertise to make considered informed decisions. To that end, the fishing industry has already been working closely with scientists and policy-makers for several years on the successful implementation of MPAs.
"This is not a 'new' campaign in the UK. We are already well on the way to designating more MPAs. I would urge all those on the march to ensure that they are well-informed on what they are campaigning for and give due recognition to the extensive work that has already been completed."
In Grimsby alone, more than 10,000 people are directly employed in the fish processing industry, and while much of the raw material is imported from Iceland and Norway, Britain's catch is part of that make-up. The town is home to several big players, including Young's Seafood, Coldwater, Seachill and Five Star Fish.
Dr Williams, based at Humber Seafood Institute, the beacon of the town's award-winning cluster, added: "Hugh's Fish Fight has lost sight of the fact that 31 proposed MPAs have been approved, out of the original 127 proposed, for a reason. That reason was that the Government's Scientific Advisory Panel found that the review of the scientific basis for the additional areas – what was being protected, why it was important, what would be the benefit – simply wasn't adequate. To put pressure on the industry and Government for more at this stage is therefore irresponsible and opportunistic as it is our understanding that more MPAs will eventually be considered anyway once proper scientific evidence for them has been gathered."
