Professor Tasman Crowe:

I will take a slightly roundabout route to get there, if that is okay. That consultation ended up working extremely well and much better than we thought it would. Owing to the arrival of Covid, we were eventually forced to go online. We had envisaged face-to-face workshops. We established a model of small groups of nine people at a time with a facilitator, who was very good at creating a respectful and relaxed environment. We made sure those groups were mixed. We had people from different perspectives, such as NGOs, fishery organisations, recreational organisations and so on around the same table. There was a structured approach, which required everybody to speak into that space and people became comfortable speaking into that space.

The first question we asked was, "What would your vision be for Ireland's marine environment?" Everybody gave very similar responses that they wanted to see clean healthy seas providing a foundation for sustainable and productive industries. There was general agreement that that was what we wanted to get to. What varied, of course, was the degree to which people would seek to restrict activity in particular areas - the kind of sustainable use thought process. Probably the biggest concern was that voices would be ignored and that livelihoods would be disrespected. There was a sense that we should be drawing on the considerable knowledge, experience and commitment to stewardship in the fishing community and then developing the plans. Everyone agreed with the principle that everyone should have a voice at that table.

There was also recognition that compromise would be a requirement. In some situations the decision would swing more strongly towards restrictive measures and in others it would swing more loosely. Obviously, the concern is that lines would be drawn on a map with no fishing allowed in particular areas and that would be that. We need to be very careful not to go into that space. There must be some discussion and reasoned argument. It was suggested that compensation and facilitation of alternative livelihoods should be considered in those kinds of situations. We need an understanding of the constraints under which the fishing community operates. There can be sound ecological reasons for doing a certain thing but it could be done a bit differently and still enable fishing to be cost effective.