A Tory bid to halt environmental restrictions on fishing has been rejected by MSPs following a heated debate inside and outside the Scottish Parliament.

Eggs were thrown as fishermen protested outside Holyrood while the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee debated prohibitions on fishing in marine protected areas (MPAs).

Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead has been called "The Devil incarnate" and accused of being the "in the pay of American multinational conservationists" online, according to one former government minister.

Mike Russell, a former environment minister and SNP MSP for Argyll and Bute, called for composure on both sides as he defended Conservative MSP Jamie McGrigor's right to object to the restrictions.

Mr McGrigor, honorary president of the Clyde Fishermen's Association, used his position on the committee to lodge wrecking amendments amid fears the restrictions could "wipe out scallop dredging" and prompt legal action.

He was backed by fellow Tory MSP Alex Fergusson who warned of "severe economic disadvantage to the scalloping sector".

Mr McGrigor's proposal to annul the fishing orders - which will restrict bottom-towed fishing in 13 sites to be protected, including Loch Sween, South Arran, Upper Loch Fyne and St Kilda - was defeated by seven votes to two.

Mr McGrigor warned the Scottish Government could be in breach of the law as the consultation on the MPAs "was not served on the interested parties".

He said: "I'm told that for scallop dredging it could actually wipe it all out within two or three years."

Mr Fergusson said he has been told that "the order may be challengeable through the courts".

"I have no doubt at all that there is going to be severe economic disadvantage to the scalloping sector," he added.

The Scottish Government said the draft MPA was made available to those who responded to the consultation, such as the Clyde Fishermen's Association, and emails were sent to fisheries monitoring organisations and conservation groups.

Mr Lochhead said: "As far as I'm concerned we have done everything that we should have done."

He acknowledged that some fishing vessels could see a cut in revenue of up to 20%, but said the overall impact on the sector is only expected to be around 2.4%.

"The 137 vessels that fish there gross £19.2 million," he said.

"I accept that there are some vessels within that where the percentage of their income could be much higher than 2.4%. It could be up to 20% or 10% in some cases."

He pledged to monitor the economic impact of the MPA.

He added: "The very modest impact of the South Arran MPA on the income of scallop dredgers - I cannot see that wiping out the industry.

"I know this is controversial, and I know there are very tough debates because we're trying to balance conservation with economic impact, but I think we have to have a sense of realism about the figures and phrases that we are using.

"There is no danger of the scallop sector being wiped out by the South Arran MPA."

He added: "The marine features and species that we are speaking about do not have voice. The environment does not have a voice. That is why Parliament put through legislation so that we have to give some kind of voice to the environment."

Mr Russell said: "How have we got ourselves into this mess?

"Eggs are being thrown outside, and we're having a debate which, according to the Cabinet Secretary, will cause a very small degree of financial damage and Jamie McGrigor is talking about Armageddon."

He acknowledged that the consultation was "badly managed" leading to misinformation being spread amongst the communities.

He added: "I disagree with Jamie McGrigor on this, but his actions are not 'shameful' as was said in a press release from Coast last weekend.

"He is quite entitled to come to this committee and argue his case.

"Equally, I have known the Cabinet Secretary as man and boy and he is not 'The Devil incarnate', he is not 'in the pay of American multinational conservationists', but that material is all over the internet and elsewhere.

"So we have to step back from this and say there are methods of dealing with conflicts between traditional and ongoing use of natural resources and the demands of conservation."