If Parliament do not consider the evidence compelling, perhaps a board or commission of enquiry could be convened to report back on exactly how much is actually protected, at risk, or on the road to recovery, and what evidence is available to back the Government’s claim to be ‘pursuing a more tailored approach to the separation of mobile and static fishing gear’. Additional evidence the Committee may find useful: • Paper on the condition of the Clyde and the requirements for extensive restrictions on mobile demersal fishing gear • Assessing the potential vulnerability of sedimentary carbon stores to bottom trawling disturbance • Briefing on Blue carbon and the locations of our remaining Priority Marine Features (PMFs) • Our Seas FAQ
pdf.
application/pdf.
240370.