(Image: PA)
Campaigners are outraged at the SNP’s stewardship of the sea. Our Writer at Large hears from them, and their fishing lobby opponents who have just hired an SNP minister as CEO
It's an astonishing dismantlement of the Scottish Government by Open Seas.
The Scottish charity and campaign group, which lobbies for better protection of the nation’s marine environment, has attacked almost every aspect of the SNP government's stewardship of the seas.
Marine protection areas established to safeguard the seas are a mirage, Open Seas claims. Most areas which are said to be protected have, in fact, no protection. Damaging trawlers and dredgers can fish in these marine protected areas.
Open Seas accused the SNP of being too close to the industrial fishing lobby and ignoring the sustainable fishing industry.
The former SNP minister in charge of fishing, Mairi Gougeon, has been appointed chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation (SFF), which represents trawlers and dredgers. Shortly after her appointment, the SNP gave nearly £1million to an organisation owned by the SFF.
Open Seas director Phil Taylor claimed there was a clear conflict of interest.
The Sunday Herald met Taylor, along with Anna Safryghin Open Seas research manager, Andrea Landas its sustainable food officer, Liam Kirkcaldy its communications director, as well as supporters Davy Stinson - a sustainable fisherman and founder of the Scottish Scallop Divers Association - and Peter McKenna, the well-known restaurateur behind both The Gannet and Bistro Eleven-Fifty-Five in Glasgow.
Peter McKenna left and Andrea right (Image: Supplied)
All said SNP policies were destroying the seas, and failing coastal communities and the economy. Healthier seas, they say, mean more fish stocks, and more fish stocks mean more prosperous coastal towns and more money in public coffers.
Taylor says Scotland’s seas simply “aren’t in good health”. Of 15 indicators which measure the health of the seas, “less than five are being achieved”. For example, seabird populations are “used as a bellwether” for sea health - the more birds there are, the more life there is under the waves. “Bird numbers are in serious decline,” Taylor says.
Stocks of commercial fish species have crashed. “The scientific advice now is to catch zero cod in Scottish seas. It’s a really damaging indictment on the health of our seas.”
The seabed is crucial. If it is damaged then the entire ecosystem collapses. Trawling and dredging destroy the seabed for years. Evaluations of the seabed show “decline of as much as 90%,” Taylor says.
This is ruining the “prospects” of coastal communities and local fishermen. Large-scale trawlers are often nomadic - fishing all over Britain. Whereas small boats, which do much less damage, often fishing with long lines fitted with multiple hooks, are based in local communities around the coast.
Trawlers go much further out. Small local boats fish closer to shore, where the seabed is often ruined and stocks all but gone. “The number of fishermen in Scotland is falling. They’re being pushed right to the edge of survival,” Taylor added.
When the seabed is given time to recover, stocks return and local fishermen can once again make a living, the Open Seas team explains.
Industrial trawling for scampi, for instance, is hugely destructive, tearing up the seabed and often killing large species like sharks and skates. When fishing grounds recover, species like dolphins and whales return.
Fisherman Davy Stinson explains that once an area has been dredged, it’s no longer possible to fish there and earn a living. Stinson fishes sustainably, often diving to harvest scallops.
Astonishingly, in some sites designated ‘marine protection area’ (MPAs) by the government, trawling and dredging is still allowed. Most members of the public believe that in MPAs only sustainable fishing is permitted. That’s not the case.
Stinson recalls diving in Scottish inshore waters and “seeing species like monkfish, even in the shallows. Now, I don’t know the last time I saw a monkfish. It certainly wasn’t in Scotland. It was probably the last time I was working in Norway”.
Due to industrial fishing being permitted in protected areas, Stinson says: “You cannot say that MPAs are showing signs of recovery.”
Scotland's sea bed (Image: Emily Throp)
MISLED
Liam Kirkcaldy, Open Seas communications director, says the general public has been misled about MPAs. “If something is called an MPA it doesn’t necessarily mean there are restrictions on fishing activity there. Different MPAs have different designations in terms of protection. Some MPAs are just lines on the map - there’s no restrictions in place.
“If you ask the Scottish government it will say there’s about 30% of the seas around Scotland that are MPAs - but in reality, they aren’t protected in any way. It’s really confusing for the public.”
Taylor explains that while around 25% of inshore coastal areas - that’s water up to 12 miles from shore - are designated as protected, in reality only around five percent should be considered truly protected.
Read more
More detail is revealed in Scottish government findings. Official government statements say that “the area of Scotland’s inshore waters where all commercial fishing is currently restricted, which are within the MPA network, is 60 square kilometres. This is less than 1% of both waters up to 12 nautical miles and waters in the inshore MPA network”.
Dredging is restricted in only 13% of the MPA network, or 5% of waters up to 12 nautical miles from shore. Trawling is restricted in only 13% of the inshore MPA network and 6% of waters up to 12 nautical miles. Importantly, the MPA network includes Special Areas of Conservation, Special Protection Areas, and Sites of Special Scientific Interest.
Open Seas says at least 30% of inshore waters need full protection from industrial fishing like trawling and dredging. Kirkcaldy explains that Open Seas doesn’t oppose dredging and trawling “everywhere, just in key habitats”. Achieving 30% protection can, he says, “be done by restricting dredging and trawling from happening in those key habitats”.
Ironically, there was a full ban on trawling in inshore waters established in the late 1800s, at the request of Scottish fishermen, to protect their industry. The ban lasted around 100 years until it was lifted by Margaret Thatcher’s government - which caused catches to eventually plummet.
According to the public watchdog Environmental Standards Scotland, the Scottish government has failed to meet its legal duties under Marine Strategy Regulations to protect and restore the seabed.
Stinson says he travels out into areas deemed protected where industrial fishermen “are still allowed to dredge and trawl at any time. It’s very sneaky”.
Even in MPAs which have full protection, including some designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest, industrial fishermen break restrictions and dredge, he claims. “The system is compromised. It isn’t policed.”
When asked why the Scottish government would permit such a seemingly broken system to continue, Stinson said: “Someone with a cynical outlook might say it's a ruse to facilitate the ongoing use of mobile gear.” The term ‘mobile gear’ means trawling and dredging.
He adds: “It’s just a way to pretend there are protections in place.”
Open Seas investigate Scottish waters (Image: Emily Throp)
DAMAGE
Anna Safryghin, Open Seas research manager, uses underwater drones to survey the damage done to Scotland’s seabed. In some areas designated as MPAs, “habitats are just completely destroyed,” she says. The MPA designation is little more than “just lines on a map”.
When asked why the system seems designed to confuse the public and why it isn’t more transparent, she replied: “That’s the £100million question. It should make sense.”
There have been commitments from the Scottish government to improve protections but “they either haven’t followed through or they’ve been stopped”.
Stopped by whom? “They’re lobbied by the fishing industry.” By which she means, the Scottish Fisherman’s Federation, which represents trawlers and dredgers.
Is the government trying to pretend it is protecting the environment but really keeping big business sweet? “That’s quite a good guess,” Safryghin adds.
Stinson says organisations like the SFF “can afford” to lobby government. “They have the ear of government.” Meanwhile, smaller fishermen like him, he says, are left out in the cold.
Stinson also believes SNP ministers are “utterly ignorant” about the fishing industry and so simply go along with the current status quo.
For more than a decade, Kirkcaldy explains, the government has promised to consult on improving protections. “They delayed consultation repeatedly. It’s been extraordinary.” Finally, after the last election, the consultation was announced. Open Seas will be campaigning hard for a complete overhaul of the system.
There is confusion among the group over why the Scottish government tried to introduce Highly Protected Marine Areas back in 2023 - a policy which eventually collapsed - given the existing system does not work.
In 2024, Open Seas took legal action against the Scottish government in the Court of Session over the failure to consider the environmental impact of industrial fishing. Open Seas argued the government was continuing to license scallop dredging in areas where ministers were legally required to protect the seabed. The court found the government acted unlawfully, but ministers appealed.
The government lost the appeal. Judges ruled ministers must “take decisions in accordance with their own … policies”. Scotland’s most senior judge noted that this “does not appear to be too difficult a task … because there is a statutory duty to do so”.
The Scottish government hands out fishing quotas, so has the power to control who fishes where and what is fished.
Scotland's sea bed (Image: Supplied)
CRAZY
Creating a functioning system of protection is “entirely straightforward. They just need to enact their own policies,” Taylor says. “What you really have is a government interested in protecting the status quo and delivering what is expedient for the loudest parts of the fishing industry”.
The current system is “crazy”, Open Seas believes.
Andrea Landas, Open Seas sustainable food officer, says Scotland is presented to the world as a “great seafood country”, but that’s not the reality. “In the past, there was much more abundance and diversity of stocks and species.”
Due to the industrial nature of fishing in Scotland, most of the catch is exported overseas. “We import most of the fish we eat,” Landas adds. “That doesn’t sound right for a ‘seafood country’.”
That’s why fish is so expensive in Scotland, the group explains, even though most Scots live less than 30-40 miles from the sea. The damage done to the seabed and the resulting decline in stocks exacerbates cost.
More sustainable, lower-impact fishing - like using long-lines with hooks, and day-boats run by local fishermen who fish close to shore for short periods - brings in more money for communities, Kirkcaldy explains. Stocks can recover, employment is created locally, and money spent locally. “It’s much better for communities, the economy and the environment.”
Trawlers are at sea for weeks, fish all around Britain, often with overseas rather than local labour, and return frozen fish. Chef Peter McKenna calls them “factory boats”.
The collapse of fish stocks has driven prices high. Wild salmon, for instance, is now £70 per kilo, McKenna says. It’s impossible for even high-end restaurants like his to put it on the menu. Prices put fresh fish outside the range of low-income families. “That’s a government issue,” he adds.
Taylor says the best way to lower prices is to “recover the abundance” of fish stocks, in order to address “the low volume of spawning stock and the amount of fish that’s out there”. Cod currently costs around £30 per kilo.
Landas says prices will fall if “smaller, low-impact boats have preferential access to inshore waters”, creating much shorter local supply chains. Sardines, once a cheap and healthy staple, “are on the brink of collapse”.
Too much government funding, Open Seas says, goes to “big trawlers” rather than “smaller fishermen” who work locally and more sustainably. Government, Landas believes, is “leaning in to making what is already big, much bigger - it’s not benefiting communities”.
Kirkcaldy adds: “Restoring the health of the inshore waters would create nurseries for important commercial species - like cod.”
Safryghin says many species like cod, haddock and herring were once found and fished inshore. That’s no longer the case as “everything starts with the seabed”. Industrial fishing destroys merl beds - a coral-like material crucial for healthy ecosystems.
Scotland's sea bed (Image: Supplied)
PROTECTION
When the seabed is allowed to recover, stocks replenish. Protecting inshore seabeds means better stocks out to sea as well due to a “huge spillover effect” as fish in protected areas move to deeper water.
Taylor is bewildered by the Scottish government seemingly favouring industrial fishing, as, he believes, this has put the entire sector on a “negative, downward trajectory”. He speculates that ministers know so little about fishing that they believe trawlers must be prioritised in order for the industry to survive.
He says, however, that the reverse is true. Focusing on industrial fishing will guarantee continued decline, whereas changing to a system of allowing inshore waters to recover together with local sustainable fishing guarantees long-term viability.
Tuna once came into Scottish waters, Stinson explains, to hunt herring. Now, they are found widely in Norwegian waters, where there’s a more sustainable system and - importantly - lots of herring. The lack of tuna in Scottish waters has nothing to do with climate change, Stinson says.
“They’re responding to fisheries management,” Taylor adds. “Stocks can rebound.”
The state of the seas has put former cabinet secretary Mairi Gougeon, who had responsibility for fishing, in the spotlight. She is to take over shortly as the chief executive of the Scottish Fisherman’s Federation, which represents industrial fishing.
Current rules state that as an ex-minister she cannot lobby government for two years after leaving. She stood down at the last election.
“Clearly, there are questions about how she can do this job for the next two years and not be involved in lobbying the government on issues relating to fishing which were part of her portfolio,” says Taylor. “It doesn’t make sense. It’s like saying you can continue being a journalist but not write.”
The appointment also shows the SFF’s “power”, he claims, describing it as an organisation “which operates in a way that’s not necessarily in the best environmental or social interests of Scotland. It’s an entity to advance the financial interests of its members”.
In terms of her previous work in government, Taylor says the appointment suggests Gougeon had “certain inclinations”.
Stinson claimed Gougeon “often rebuffed anything about reining in the mobile gear sector and wasn’t particularly helpful towards sustainable fishing. She had form. When she became CEO, it was a shock but no surprise”.
Some of the proposals around the current consultation on marine protection were drawn up during Gougeon’s time in government. Kirkcaldy says that as there must be “confidence” in the process, “it’s concerning that a senior politician has gone from the heart of government to work for a lobby group in an industry they previously regulated”.
Taylor adds: “There’s a clear conflict of interest. How can the SFF under her leadership now respond to proposals that were signed off by her as a minister?”
Scotland's sea bed (Image: Emily Throp)
MONEY
Taylor claimed there were also “direct financial links”. Open Seas pointed to recent funding of nearly £1million given by the Scottish government to Marine Environmental Services, a commercial subsidiary of the Scottish Fisherman’s Federation.
“A corporate body wholly-owned by the SFF was granted more than £900,000 in public money,” Taylor said. He believes there are public interest concerns, adding: “There’s institutional bias.”
He claimed that although the money is designated for “observer work on fishing boats to document how many fish are discarded, no data is ever published. Previous iterations of this research never saw the light of day.
“There’s a straightforward conflict of interest if public money is spent on services and the public cannot learn what benefit this yields. The direct benefit to the public must be shown.”
The consultation on better marine protection was launched on September 14. Gougeon’s new SFF post was announced on September 22. The government announced the funding for Marine Environmental Services last week. The Scottish government funding round opened in March. Gougeon stepped down in May.
Stinson said any alleged conflict of interest went beyond Gougeon as the SNP was “too chummy” with the industrial fishing sector. “They all piss in the same pot,” he said. “It’s inherent in the Scottish government system.”
Many other nations have drastically reduced activities like trawling and dredging, often with compensation for affected industrial fishermen.
Safryghin said research shows that non-industrial fishing causes “more money to stay within communities”. Nomadic trawlers may catch fish in Scottish waters, but land them at an English port. “Much of the money leaks away,” she adds.
“There’s this narrative that trawlers and dredgers are the backbone of coastal communities. The opposite is true.” It’s local low-impact fishing which brings in money for coastal communities.
Scotland has the worst marine protection system in the UK. Wales is “light years ahead,” Taylor says, and “England caught up with Wales about 2010”. Ireland also has a better system.
Stinson, who has worked in Norway, favours the Norwegian regulatory system where “you cannot conduct any activity which is commercial unless you prove it is no harm to the environment”. There is no dredging whatsoever in Norway. Stinson says Norway has “the best quality fish, which reflects the health of the marine environment”.
Stinson has no trust anymore in the Scottish government, calling ministers “liars and hypocrites”. Taylor adds that long-served civil servants suffer from “systemic bias”, which influences government decision-making.
. (Image: Getty Images)
BIAS
Is the problem with government regulation ‘cock-up or conspiracy’? “Both,” says Taylor. “Bias is a form of conspiracy.”
Industrial fishermen have easy access to government, but not sustainable fishermen. Stinson says some of the bigger Scottish industrial fishermen have personal phone numbers for SNP ministers.
He claims that civil servants appear to show favouritism towards organisations like the SFF even though most Scottish fishermen "aren’t in that organisation”. Industrial fishing is “in a minority when it comes to the numbers of fishermen. Yet the government meets with these powerful lobbyists who don’t represent the majority of fishermen”.
Meanwhile, Kirkcaldy explains, “monitoring of the seas has actually declined”, leaving the public increasingly in the dark about the state of the marine environment. “If Scots had greater awareness, they’d want our seas managed in a fundamentally different way. The sea belongs to everyone, it’s a public resource. It wasn’t always treated like this.”
Open Seas and its supporters want greater restrictions on inshore industrial fishing such as trawling and dredging. “Just get rid of the thing that’s doing all the damage,” says Stinson. “But that’s the one move the government refuses to take.”
Taylor adds that an impact assessment should also be made of activities like dredging for scallops. Incredibly, no such assessment has been undertaken in Scotland. He adds that the attitude from government seems to be “we can’t regulate fishing” in case industrial fishing firms are upset.
Safryghin says quotas should be “redistributed to reward sustainable fishing. Give them a bigger piece of the pie and take quotas away from vessels which catch unsustainably”.
Taylor says he believes the Scottish government can be encouraged to change direction, behave “rationally” and start listening to scientific advice in order to improve life in coastal communities and the economy.
“The fact that there’s no cod on the west coast of Scotland should make everyone pissed off. The fact that there will soon not be any in the North Sea should be a rallying call to action.
“The solutions aren’t complicated. We’re suffering because governments over decades failed to act. Until this point, the stewardship of the seas has been at best misguided and at worst ignorant. We’ve an opportunity to turn that around.”
Stinson, who has fished for decades, adds: “In the future, our children will still need the seas. If we kill the seas, then they’ll be in a very bad place.
“The government should protect the commons. But they’re doing the opposite. They’re giving the commons to a small select group for their own profit, and the methods that group uses are destroying the commons.”
WHAT THE SFF SAYS
Elspeth Macdonald, serving chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation, pending Mairi Gougeon taking over, said the SFF “is fully committed to the protection of Scotland’s marine environment”.
“We make no apology for defending the interests of Scotland's fishing industry, nor for challenging the increasingly familiar narrative promoted by Open Seas, in which fishermen are routinely portrayed as the principal villains in the marine environment, and evidence that complicates that simplistic picture is wilfully overlooked.
"Nobody disputes that fishing, like all forms of food production, has environmental impacts …The industry recognises the need for effective conservation measures. But serious fisheries management requires considerably more than sweeping generalisations about trawling and dredging, selective interpretations of scientific evidence and demands for ever more restrictions on fishing activity.
"Scotland's fishermen operate in a heavily-regulated industry. Given that fishing is how they make their living, they have a very obvious interest in healthy seas and sustainable fish stocks. To that end, they are entitled to expect that decisions affecting their livelihoods are based on robust science rather than campaigning rhetoric.
"Open Seas believes its assertions should be accepted uncritically simply because they are made in the name of environmental protection. But its interpretation of fisheries science and its characterisation of the fishing industry deserve … as much scrutiny as the activities of those it criticises”.
Macdonald said allegations concerning Gougeon's appointment and funding for Marine Environmental Solutions were “particularly telling examples of the dangers of drawing conclusions without properly establishing the facts”.
Gougeon “was appointed following an open and fair recruitment process… SFF will comply fully with the conditions imposed under the Scottish Government's business appointment rules.
"To suggest that her appointment somehow establishes institutional bias in government funding decisions is a considerable leap, unsupported by the evidence … Serious allegations of conflicts of interest require something more substantial than the juxtaposition of two entirely separate matters.
"The claims concerning [Marine Environmental Services] are preposterous and equally ill-founded, implying … that the funding is for research of questionable scientific value.
"The funding supports the Independent Fisheries Science Support Scheme … The scheme is aimed at supporting the government in meeting its target for data collection and is internationally recognised as one of the most successful examples of co-operation between industry and science … Data collected through the scheme is owned by the Scottish Government and contributes to stock assessments”.
Macdonald added: “There is a considerable irony in an environmental campaign organisation raising suspicions about public funding for work that contributes to the very scientific evidence needed to manage fisheries sustainably.
“One might have thought that improving the evidence base for conservation would be something to welcome rather than seek to discredit …There exists a troubling tendency in some environmental campaigning to treat the fishing industry's practical knowledge and scientific contributions as inherently suspect, while presenting campaign organisations' own interpretations of complex marine science as … beyond question.
She added: “As for the current consultation on additional fisheries management measures in [MPAs] … the SFF is examining the proposals carefully … The SFF supports effective marine conservation, but restrictions must be justified by demonstrable environmental benefits, not imposed simply to satisfy demands for ever greater areas of the sea to be closed to fishing.
"Scotland needs both a healthy marine environment and a sustainable, economically viable fishing industry. Achieving those objectives requires sound science, proportionate management and an honest assessment of the evidence, rather than the simplistic portrayal of fishermen as an obstacle to environmental progress.”
WHAT THE GOVERNMENT SAYS
Agriculture minister Jim Fairlie said: “Since 2021, the Scottish government has funded [MES] to run the fish stock observer project. The project employs ex-fishermen to observe what current fishermen are catching. This is then fed into our scientific models and reported to the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea where it forms part of the evidence used to make formal evidence-based fish stock assessments.
“Additionally, the Marine Directorate observer scheme has been providing estimates of discard rates since 1978 running in parallel and collaborating closely with the MES scheme.”