Always on
This project successfully funded on 10th February 2026, you can still support them with a donation.
Defend Our Bay
Port Isaac, United Kingdom
Aim
To secure legal representation for the public at the Port Quin Bay seaweed farm appeal hearing - Camel Fish Ltd v MMO, APP/ML/25/04.
Please help coastal communities to protect North Cornwall's fragile marine environment
Background:
In July 2023 applications for 2 adjacent large-scale seaweed aquaculture farms in Port Quin Bay in North Cornwall were submitted to the Marine Management Organisation (MMO). The first consultation period passed without community involvement, and the applications were only discovered by chance in February 2024. It became clear very quickly that the planned farm and the applicants themselves were thoroughly undesirable. The 1km square site would destroy protected marine habitats, threaten protected marine wildlife, push local fishers out of the area, be a significant risk to navigation, interfere with Port Quin Bay Safe Anchorage and terminally affect a protected Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Crucially, the farm infrastructure could not survive the dynamic wave climate in the bay.
Myth-buster:
One thing we discovered in our research is that large scale seaweed aquaculture cannot boast the environmental advantages you may have read about in the press. Farming seaweed in this way does not sequester carbon, does not provide essential habitat for fin fish species and crustaceans, is not good for the environment, and is not 'sustainable'. The original applications would have meant 34,000 tonnes of concrete on the sea bed, covering up to 14,160m2 of critical prey habitat, 358 miles of plastic rope, and countless thousands of plastic cable ties.
There is definitely a future for seaweed aquaculture in the UK, but it does not lie with these applicants, with this proposal, in this location.
What happened next?
Local coastal communities, and the wider general public, rose up in defence of the bay, and objected in their hundreds across two further public consultations. The evidence from the public, the MMO, and their primary and statutory advisors (Environment Agency, Cefas, Natural England, Maritime and Coastguard Agency etc), proved that this seaweed scheme was completely unworkable, pushing lead applicants, Biome Algae Ltd, to withdraw their application in February 2025. In April 2025, the MMO comprehensively rejected the second application (Camel Fish Ltd).
We dared to hope it was all over.
But...
Teaming up again with Angela Mead of Biome Algae Ltd, Camel Fish Ltd are now appealing this rejection with the Planning Inspectorate (PINS). The consultation period for this appeal closed on 12th December, and the general public mobilised again and flooded the PINS inbox with objections to the proposal and appeal. According to the published guidelines, we can now expect an appeal case hearing at the end of January 2026.
We are devastated to still be fighting this speculative and spurious proposal.
The ask:
The public have the opportunity to be represented by a barrister at this hearing, who will be best placed to frame our argument to PINS in a legally appropriate manner.
The barrier to securing legal representation is cost. Of course.
A small number of very generous local individuals have donated money to a 'fighting fund', but further contributions are required. If you value the marine and coastal environment, support small boat fisheries and believe that the views of communities should be taken into account in planning decisions, please consider donating whatever you can spare to help Save Port Quin Bay.
If, after this campaign is successful, any funds are unspent, the remainder will be held in case of future issues. If we can be assured that the bay is safe from development forever, any excess will be distributed to local charities and causes.
When donating, please ensure that you reduce the 'tip' to Crowdfunder - we are already paying the platform for their services. Click on 'Enter custom tip' under the slider and reduce the amount to ZERO.
We do regret having to ask for your support, but we feel forced into this position by the determination of the developers.
We know that times are tough right now, and this is a particularly challenging time of year, but we only have this short time to prove the case on behalf of marine wildlife and the environment, so please help if you can.
Thank you.
Further reading:
To read more about this situation, and to take a look at the rejection document, 'MMO Decision Report', please go to https://saveourbays.org.uk/
As a taster...
In relation to the original applications:
National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisation said:
"This is a commercial application masquerading as a conservation project with an intent to displace established and successful businesses for the purpose of a speculative business model. This should not be at the expense of other, established industries such as commercial fishing, that are already contributing to local economies through direct sales, supply chain benefits and extensive employment"
The MMO said (amongst many other things):
"The assessment has shown that the proposed activities are not compliant with nine of the policies within the South Marine Plan. Areas of non-compliance include conflict with fisheries, environment, and impacts on tourism and recreation"
Cefas said:
"There is high uncertainty or a large risk to the environment"
Cefas (Fisheries) said:
"The Applicant makes conclusions throughout the document that, although may be valid, have not been supported by any published literature or appropriate evidence base"
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency said:
"The risk assessment does not suitably address vessels rerouting in poor weather and poor visibility"
Trinity House said:
"...we consider that the whole site would comprise a hazard to navigation"
The Royal Yachting Association said:
"The RYA objects to the issuing of marine licences for the above schemes"
The Environment Agency said:
"In the absence of acceptable assessment, we object to the marine works as submitted and recommend refusal of a marine licence on this basis"
Natural England said:
"Increased human activity in close proximity to the SSSI [Site of Special Scientific Interest] could disturb birds going to and from foraging grounds and the numbers of birds loafing and prospecting colonies. Increased lighting has the potential to impact fledglings and could also deter adults"
Cornwall National Landscape said:
"In the absence of substantive additional information with regard to the effects of these applications we continue to object to these proposed seaweed farms on the basis of the unacceptable harmful effects on the coastal landscape and seascape which forms the setting of this part of the designated landscape"
Funding method
Keep what you raise – this project will receive all pledges made