It doesn't really matter what the RA was established for, and if Ol' mate deliberately violated it then yes, he deserves the pineapple.
What makes an RA established for environmental protective reasons any less important than an RA established to keep you from being shot down by a live firing range or the RA over Sydney Harbour??
But what was he doing so low, so far out - and did he have the required life jackets and/or live rafts required for flight beyond gliding distance from land? Seems there could be a bit more than just a simple 'inadvertent' RA violation??