A marine biologist who snatched a lobster from a restaurant tank and threw it into the sea has been exposed as an environmental hypocrite, having previously embarked on a round-the-world journey in a gas-guzzling four-by-four. Emma Smart, 47, stormed into Catch at the Old Fish Market in Weymouth, Dorset, last year, believing she was saving the crustacean from being eaten.
Lobster Rescue Turns Fatal
Smart, a self-proclaimed eco-warrior, entered the restaurant and seized the lobster before taking it to the nearby harbour. Witnesses described her throwing the animal into the water "like a cricket ball." However, restaurant owner Sean Cooper condemned her actions as "ignorant," explaining that the sudden temperature change from the warm tank to the cold sea likely proved fatal for the creature.
The lobster was not destined for the menu but was one of two pets named Ronnie and Reggie, kept by the Michelin Guide eatery to educate children. The remaining lobster died shortly after its companion was removed, possibly from loneliness, according to Mr Cooper.
Legal Consequences and Restraining Order
Smart appeared at Bournemouth Crown Court, where she admitted one count of causing criminal damage to the animal. She received an eight-month conditional discharge and a three-year restraining order, banning her from coming within ten metres of the restaurant. Mr Cooper expressed deep disappointment that she avoided jail, calling the outcome "very hard to accept."
Past Global Travel Undermines Green Credentials
In a twist that undermines her environmental stance, it has been revealed that Smart and her husband, Andy Smith, once attempted to circumnavigate the globe by road in 800 days. Their vehicle was a 1994 Toyota Hilux Surf, nicknamed "Bee-Bee," an old, fuel-inefficient diesel model. The couple documented their journey on a website and podcast called "Around the World in 800 Days."
Their ambitious trip, planned over 18 months, aimed to cover 50 countries with an estimated fuel cost of £20,000. They set off in 2012, driving through Scandinavia to the Arctic Circle, across Russia to Mongolia, and planned to continue to Australia and the Americas. However, the journey faced multiple setbacks, including family illnesses and vehicle breakdowns, requiring several attempts over four years.
Environmental Impact and Defence
By the end of their travels, the couple had driven approximately 80,975 miles in their diesel-powered car. Mr Smith defended their decision on social media, stating that they chose to drive to visit remote natural places before they disappear, arguing it wasn't feasible with an electric car in 2011. He claimed their carbon dioxide emissions were 60% lower while travelling compared to life at home and emphasised that systemic change, not individual actions, is key to addressing climate issues.
History of Activism and Arrests
Smart is a seasoned environmental campaigner with a history of arrests. In 2021, she was jailed for four months alongside eight other activists for blocking highways in London as part of Insulate Britain protests. She was also arrested in 2022 after confronting Sir David Attenborough at the same Catch restaurant, calling on him to support imprisoned climate activists.
Her husband, Mr Smith, an artist and musician, has also been active in protests, including being detained under the Terrorism Act for participating in a rally supporting Palestine Action. Smart has previously worked as a protest campaign manager for naturalist Chris Packham and co-founded the rewilding group Wild Card.
Restaurant's Environmental Stance
Mr Cooper highlighted the irony of Smart's targeting, noting that Catch has been recognised by the Sustainable Restaurant Association as a world leader in sustainable fish and seafood sourcing. He stated, "The values she claims to hold are, in large part, the values we live by," describing her actions as "misguided."
Smart, who now lives in west Wales, continues to advocate for climate action, but this incident has sparked debate about the consistency of her environmental commitments. The case underscores the complexities of activism, where well-intentioned deeds can have unintended consequences and past choices may clash with present ideals.
