With two years of existence under their belt, MPAC, the alliance of fishing organisations formed to defend access to fishing grounds during the establishment of a network of marine protected areas in UK waters, have assessed their progress so far.

MPAC say the main markers in their organisation’s short history are:

Their formation in the Palace of Westminster on February 11, 2009, with support from “sympathetic MPs

The appointment of respected fisheries scientist, Dr Stephen Lockwood, as MPAC Chairman
Launch of the MPAC Fighting Fund and membership campaign, which quickly secured wide support from across all areas and fishing groupings in the UK
Regular engagement with senior DEFRA and devolved administration officials
Meetings with fisheries/environment ministers from DEFRA and the devolved administrations to outline the aims and purposes of MPAC
The extension of MPAC membership beyond the UK to include Dutch, French, Irish and Belgian fishing organisations, equally concerned about displacement from their customary fishing grounds
Regular engagement with the Government’s statutory advisors on nature conservancy to challenge the weak parts of the approach to establishing marine conservation zones and EU special areas of conservation (SAC) and special protection areas (SPA)
Emphasis on four “main flaws in the MPA approach to date:
A rushed timeframe
Unrepresentative stakeholder involvement
A weak evidence base for designation decisions
Failure to address the issue of displacement of fishing activities

Achievements have seen the building of a broad coalition of fishing interests, plus:

A high profile launch with extensive media coverage
A commitment to an evidence-based approach
Support for the introduction of MPAs to provide protection for rare and vulnerable ecology but rejection of flawed, rushed and woolly thinking in government policy
A successful challenge to Natural England’s initial assertions that it had a role as fisheries managers as opposed to advisors to government
Bringing a degree of realism to what MPAs can achieve in terms of building commercial fish stocks (as opposed to protecting biodiversity)
Securing public recognition that the potential contribution to the protection of biodiversity made by marine protected areas needs to be balanced by the contribution made by the fishing industry to the food security of the nation
Insisting on a more sophisticated measure of the extent of fishing pressure on seabed features
Challenging the use of extreme language and unsupported assertions by senior officials in the statutory nature conservation bodies – “the infamous rape and pillage remarks”
Effectively drawing attention to the international dimension of fishing activity outside the 6 mile limit and emphasising the need to adapt consultation and evidence gathering procedures to take account of that fact
Bringing to bear a rigorous approach to evidence used to designate MCZs, SACs and SPAs
Drawing attention to the cumulative impact of multiple offshore developments (amongst which is the establishment of marine protected areas) all of which increasingly constrain where fishing activity can safely and legally take place
Drawing attention to the absence of a formal marine spatial planning framework for rushed decisions on the designation of marine protected areas
Successfully securing a review of Natural England’s scientific and evidence procedures by the government’s Chief Scientific Officer which resulted in important tightening up of arrangements
Close involvement of MPAC members in the four MCZ regional stakeholder groups charged with making recommendations on designated sites for MCZs
Challenging the application of narrowly interpreted theoretical science to the selection of MCZs
Successfully bringing Government attention to the potential and often unforeseen consequences of displacement of fishing activity
The articulation of an alternative approach to managing MPAs, based on close involvement and dialogue with of the principle stakeholders at site level
Building understanding of the need for a local/regional focus along with a consensus approach that minimises the scope for displacement
Securing a ministerial decision to extend the time allowed for gathering evidence on which site designations will be based
Securing ministerial commitment to provide additional funds to strengthen the evidence base for the designation of marine conservation zones
Securing ministerial support for a phased (as opposed to a “big-bang) approach to the designation of MCZ sites, thus allowing for a more robust evidence based approach
Securing a written assurance from the UK fisheries minister that no MPA beyond six miles will be formally designated until such times that EU approval ensures that any restrictions will apply to all member states’ vessels, not just those registered in the UK.

But despite this list of achievements, the Coalition say there is no scope for complacency.

For the Coalition recognise the “huge task” that they face to ensure that every marine protected area established in UK waters is justified on the basis of sound evidence and that the impacts on fishing activities are minimised to the least extent possible.

“As the focus shifts from site designation to the management measures that will apply within marine protected areas (up to and including complete exclusion of fishing activity) it will be more important than ever for the fishing industry as a whole to work together through the Coalition.

“The Coalition stand ready to reinforce the efforts all those fishing groups and individuals who have registered their support for the work of MPAC and who are concerned about their future access to their customary fishing grounds.

2010 The Scottish White Fish Producers’ Association