NASCO 2019

“With S&TC’s Chairman, CEO, Head of Science and Scottish Director actively involved in NASCO, we are playing a genuinely influential role within international wild Atlantic salmon conservation politics”

The 2019 NASCO meeting was held in Tromsø, Norway, this year and was preceded by a 2-day Symposium for the International Year of the Salmon - Managing the Atlantic salmon in a rapidly changing environment.

S&TC’s Head of Science, Dr Janina Gray, gave a presentation on behalf of the NGOs, covering the importance of using science to support policy making in restoring Atlantic salmon stocks for conservation, cultural, food and recreation purposes.  The presentation was very well received by the 160 delegates and Janina’s main call to action was a challenge to the NASCO governments to politically commit the necessary policies and resources to protect and restore salmon stocks right across their North Atlantic range.

Perhaps the three most important recommendations coming out from the Symposium were that:

  1. The primary objective of salmon management across all NASCO Parties and Jurisdictions must be to produce the highest number of healthy wild salmon smolts possible from all relevant river systems;
  2. We have to change our mindset from purely managing wild salmon stocks to actively conserving them, otherwise extinctions will surely follow;
  3. Wild salmon do not recognise country boundaries and we have to think in terms of protecting the species on a global scale.  For example, fish heading from Spain, Portugal, France, Ireland and the UK, and from USA and Canada, all run the risk of being impacted by open-net salmon farming in other jurisdictions.  NASCO is ideally placed to reach a consensus as to how salmon farming should be operated and regulated to protect salmon across their entire range.

At a Special Session during the actual NASCO meeting, S&TC CEO, Paul Knight, who co-chairs the NGOs, gave a statement urging the Parties and Jurisdictions to undertake a progressive transition from a largely stock management to a protection/conservation regime for wild salmon.

His clear message was that we must aim for full wild smolt production by actioning measures to combat the stressors over which we have potential control – open-net salmon farming, water quality and quantity, intensive agriculture, hydroelectricity, barriers to migration, predation etc.

This will give salmon the best possible chance of surviving their marine phase, where there is far less that we can do to conserve them, except minimise coastal and high seas exploitation and by-catch.

In the questions that accompanied the Special Session, S&TC Chairman, Bill Hicks, received assurance that the annual process whereby NASCO jurisdictions report progress on their salmon management and conservation measures, would be more challenging to governments in future.  This will include NASCO representatives having to defend their actions publicly against questioning from the NGOs, which will enable us to better hold our respective governments to account over wild salmon conservation.

S&TC Scottish Director, Andrew Graham-Stewart, also gave a statement, in which he highlighted the continuing lack of commitment by those NASCO jurisdictions with open-net salmon farming to take the necessary and urgent measures, in line with the clear NASCO guidelines, to address the negative impacts of salmon farming on wild stocks.

His statement elicited several responses from the parties including a commitment from the senior Scottish Government representative who gave an assurance that a significant tightening of regulation of salmon farms is imminent.  This was consistent with the statement delivered to the Scottish Parliament on June 5 by Cabinet Secretary for the Rural Economy, Fergus Ewing, outlining the first steps towards delivering the recommendations from the Parliamentary Committee Inquiries last year, both of which reported that the status quo was no longer an option for the way in which salmon farming is operated or regulated in Scotland.

As well as the NGO statement, the NASCO Council was presented with a list of recommendations from the Symposium.  NASCO President, Jóannes Hansen from the Faroe Islands, confirmed that the Heads of Delegation would discuss the way forward for the forum in the autumn, and that the NGOs would be involved in discussing how NASCO would operate in the future.

So, at the end of an unusually upbeat NASCO meeting, there is the promise of beneficial change for wild salmon conservation across the North Atlantic.  And with S&TC’s Chairman, CEO, Head of Science and Scottish Director actively involved in NASCO, we are playing a genuinely influential role within international wild Atlantic salmon conservation politics, besides all that we do to restore wild stocks within UK river systems.

The RiverFly Census presents the conclusions and policy recommendations from three years of unprecedented species-level research and analysis across 12 rivers from southern chalk streams to the north’s Eden and Coquet.

The scope of the analysis is staggering: we (or rather, our independent scientist, Dr Nick Everall and his team) have sampled 34,000 river-dwelling invertebrates from more than 480 different species. This massive data set of aquatic “wee beasties” has provided hard evidence on the decline of riverfly life and tells a story of the pollution stresses our rivers face. By the Environment Agency’s own reckoning, only 14 % of our rivers are healthy and we reckon it is worse than that.

FURTHER ENQUIRIES

Corin Smith | Comms

comms@salmon-trout.org (+44 7463576892)

BBC Panorama: Salmon Farming Exposed

“We applaud Panorama’s focus on the abject failure of the regulators in Scotland to carry out their responsibilities."

Andrew Graham-Stewart, Director of Salmon & Trout Conservation Scotland

For example, the Scottish Government’s Fish Health Inspectorate, that polices farms for parasites and diseases, has in the last five years served only two enforcement notices under the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Act 2007, relating to the failure to control sea lice on fish farms.

Furthermore, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency has not, in the last five years, served a single enforcement notice for any failure to comply with Controlled Activities Regulations licences and there have been no prosecutions.

This is taking ‘light touch regulation’ to extremes – a consequence, there can be little doubt, of political direction from above.”

You can view the full BBC Panorama investigation here:

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0005hc1

- Andrew Graham-Stewart, Scottish Director 

For Scottish Enquiries contact: director@salmon-troutscotland.org

Header photo credit: BBC Panorama

The Shetland Factor

Many believe salmon farming is an issue exclusive to wild fish in the west Highlands and Hebrides. However, controlling sea lice on farms in Shetland is just as important as our Scottish Director, Andrew Graham-Stewart explains...

The official figures for rod catches of salmon in Scotland during 2018 were published last week. That they were the lowest since official records began was hardly a surprise. There has been a downward trend for several years and last year’s depressing figures were exacerbated and indeed partly explained by extreme conditions; on the majority of rivers most of the summer was unfishable as flows became trickles in the extended drought and temperatures soared. Incidentally it is worth noting that the season was not a universal write-off; despite the conditions, catches on the North Highland rivers were reasonably buoyant (albeit condensed into short periods) and the run registered by the fish counter on the Helmsdale was one of the best for years.

Looking at 'farm by farm' sea lice data

Back in autumn 2017, on the basis of data obtained under FOI (its release by Scottish Government was only forthcoming after our successful appeal to the Information Commissioner), we were able to analyse, for the first time, weekly sea lice numbers on a farm by farm basis; prior to this we only had access to regional monthly averages.

Between November 2016 and August 2017, the period for which the data was forthcoming, the worst performing company in the Scottish Islands and overall worst performing company in Scotland was Grieg Seafood Shetland Ltd. For months on end its Shetland farms’ figures were massively above the industry’s code of good practice trigger threshold for treatment; some of the numbers were eye-watering – in one week on one farm the average number of adult female sea lice per fish was a staggering 29.

I commented at the time:

“Grieg Seafood’s lamentable record exemplifies the very widespread failure to control sea lice in Shetland. It is no wonder that mature wild sea trout have been wiped out in these islands.”

What this means for wild smolts

In the last 18 months there has been little improvement in sea lice control by salmon farms on Shetland, where over 20% of Scotland’s tonnage is concentrated. It remains a hotbed of lice production, with the farms consistently pumping out billions of sea lice larvae into the wider environment. What this means is that any wild salmon smolts passing within 20 miles (studies show that elevated levels of sea lice emanating from a farm may be found up to a distance of 31 km) either side of Shetland are highly vulnerable to picking up lethal infestations of the deadly parasites.

There is scant knowledge of the migration route(s) taken by smolts from Scottish east and north coast rivers. But a cursory glance at a map suggests that it is a reasonable supposition that they will pass close to Shetland as they head north towards the feeding grounds of the North Norwegian Sea.

There is a tendency amongst those who manage and/or fish on these rivers, including the Big Four, to view salmon farming as only being an issue for wild fish in the west Highlands and Hebrides. In numerous conversations with east and north coast river managers over the last two years I have raised the scenario that sea lice from Shetland farms may well be impacting their smolt survival. On reflection (most had not considered the possibility) all have agreed that this could easily be a significant factor.

Indeed, from a wild fish perspective, the control of sea lice on farms may be just as important in Shetland (and indeed Orkney), with the possible implications for east and north coast smolts, as it is in the west Highlands and Hebrides.

- Andrew Graham-Stewart, Scottish Director 

For Scottish Enquiries contact: director@salmon-troutscotland.org

Header photo credit: Eva Thorstad

We all have a responsibility to save the ‘King of Fish’

The publication of new Environment Agency byelaws banning the killing of salmon in the North East drift and coastal nets was very welcome news earlier this year and brought to a close a campaign by fisheries organisations that lasted some 30 years.

Scotland banned drift netting in 1962 and closed down its coastal nets in 2016, so most UK salmon are now able to reach their rivers of birth unhindered by home-water netting. It was a tremendous way to begin the International Year of the Salmon. However, the same is not true of salmon feeding off the West Coast of Greenland, an area where many of the UK’s multi-sea-winter fish go to fatten up. 

Getting the quotas right

The North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO) was originally established more than 30 years ago to set quotas for Greenland and the Faroe Islands, who between them caught nearly 4,000 tonnes of salmon at the height of their respective commercial fishing industries (Greenland in the mid 1970s and the Faroes early 1980s).  The Faroe Islands have not fished for salmon since 2000, although they reserve the right to do so if the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) ever report again that there is enough of a surplus of fish in the North Atlantic to exploit.

Greenland is much more complicated. For many years, NASCO gave the Greenlanders a subsistence quota of around 20 tonnes of salmon – fish that could be caught and either sold in the local open-air markets or kept for food by the fishermen.  Commercial fishing was not allowed, and export was banned.  Private funds were even given from around the North Atlantic countries with recreational fishing to the Greenlanders to help them re-equip and target different species.

However, monitoring and enforcement of salmon fishing by the Greenland Government was only really tightened some five years ago, when it became clear that the actual salmon catch was veering towards 100 tonnes a year.  To be fair, it is a thankless task trying to oversee any coastal activity in Greenland, as the West Coast communities are so disparate – there is no road connection between them, with travel limited to those with access to either boat or plane.  However, when Government officials started to phone round the fishing community and ask for catch statistics, alarm bells were rung.

The current situation

In 2015, Greenland accepted a quota of 45 tonnes agreed at NASCO.  Unfortunately, some people with little knowledge of the background ridiculed NASCO for the size of the quota, when in realistic terms, it was actually halving the amount of fish that was now known to have been caught in previous years.  Coupled to the new quota was a new management and regulatory system adopted by the Greenland Government which put much greater emphasis on monitoring and reporting.  In 2018, the quota was reduced to 30 tonnes.

The bad news is that Greenland has just reported a catch of 40 tonnes for 2018!  However, rather than a return to the bad days, at least the government has a handle on the fishery now and, if it abides by the NASCO agreement, the 10-tonne excess will be taken off the quota for this season, which is comforting news for our MSW (Multi Sea Winter) fish.

What this means closer to home...

All this regulation and government support at Greenland and the Faroe Islands means that UK governments have an extra responsibility to protect salmon stocks at home.  Good for Scotland and England in taking decisive action over coastal netting, but we still have serious issues to address – open-net salmon farming, agricultural impact on water quality, habitat degradation, water abstraction, barriers to migration, predation – and for that we need a political commitment throughout the UK which is sadly lacking at the moment.

I have some sympathy for Greenlanders who generally have a far better grasp of what ‘sustainable exploitation’ means than we ever have – they still derive much of their protein from natural resources and realise how important it is to manage those stocks effectively.  So when an angler lands a salmon in the UK and has to return it to the water because of byelaws or fishery rules, rather than curse the regulators, spare a thought for the Greenlanders and Faroese and their sacrifice in the name of conservation.

Better still, understand that, as Sir David Attenborough said in our recent video, if we are not to lose the King of Fish for ever, we all have to play our part, in whatever way we can, to help Atlantic salmon through their present crisis. The International Year of the Salmon gives us the opportunity to focus on that very stark warning, and act now!

- Paul Knight, CEO

Scottish Government inertia marks anniversary of Scottish Parliament’s Environment Committee’s report into salmon farming

Scottish Government inertia marks anniversary of Scottish Parliament's Environment Committee's report into salmon farming

Industry allowed to persist with business as usual a year after Government was told 'the status quo is not an option'

One year on from the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform (ECCLR) Committee’s report on the Environmental Impacts of Salmon Farming, the first part of the 2018 Scottish Parliament Inquiry into the industry, Salmon and Trout Conservation Scotland (S&TCS) is concerned that the report is being allowed to gather dust by both Scottish Government and the industry.

Andrew Graham-Stewart, Director of S&TCS, said:

“A year ago, the ECCLR Committee, could not have been clearer that any expansion of the industry ‘must be on the basis of a precautionary approach and must be based on resolving the environmental problems’ and that ‘the status quo is not an option’. It is obvious that almost nothing has changed and we fear that the Scottish Government’s game-plan is yet more of the prevarication that has allowed the industry to develop without meaningful regulation and at the expense of the coastal environment and those species, including migratory fish, which rely on healthy coastal ecosystems. Consequently, environmental damage is continuing and indeed increasing unchecked. Scottish Government’s completely unconditional support for the salmon farming industry must end.”

The 2018 Parliamentary Inquiry into salmon farming, as conducted by the ECCLR and REC Committees, was triggered by S&TCS' formal Petition to the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee in 2016.

Guy Linley-Adams, Solicitor for S&TCS, commented:

“The ECCLR Committee’s comprehensive report underlined why urgent action was required to protect wild salmon and sea trout. However, Scottish Government has not yet grasped the nettle and moved to legislate in order to improve markedly the protection of wild salmon and sea trout from the negative impacts of salmon farming.”

 

SSPO still failing to publish farm by farm sea lice data in as close to real time as possible

On transparency, the ECCLR Committee’s report was adamant that the industry should publish weekly data on sea lice figures on a farm by farm basis in as close to real time as possible, together with all historic data “from the time records are available”, this to be done
by the end of April 2018.

The Scottish Salmon Producers’ Organisation has not honoured this deadline, nor is it publishing current farm by farm sea lice data in as close as possible to real time, as the Committee required. In contrast it is only publishing monthly sea lice averages per farm more than three months in arrears and it is to the Scottish Government’s shame that they have not amended secondary legislation to force transparency on this most important of issues.

S&TCS briefing as Scottish Government debate the future of salmon farming

TODAY: Scottish parliament to debate the Rural Economy and Connectivity (REC) committee report on salmon farming

Legislative impact is expected to follow on from today's debate, Wednesday 6th February 2019, for which S&TCS have contributed the following briefing:

S&TCS briefing for MSPs for salmon farming debate Feb 2019

STCS Briefing Addendum - SG's response to REC Report Feb 2019

S&TCS salmon farming debate briefing

S&TCS concerns concentrate on the proven negative effects of salmon and rainbow trout farming at sea on wild salmonids - both Atlantic salmon and sea trout. It has been clear for many years that Scotland’s performance, particularly on sea lice, falls very far short of the internationally agreed NASCO goals.

As a bare minimum S&TCS wishes to see the following five changes in Scotland, all of which were supported by both REC and ECCLR Committees:

  1. The development and introduction of full closed containment farming.
  2. The clear identification of a Scottish public authority charged with the statutory function to protect wild fish from the negative interactions of fish farming.
  3. No expansion of the industry while wild fish interactions remain uncontrolled.
  4. Relocation of existing sensitive sites.
  5. Full transparency and publication of sea lice, escapes, mortalities and disease information.

The Scottish Government response is in danger of allowing the “status quo”, in terms of the regulation and legislation of salmon farms (and transparency in the way that the industry operates), to persist for the foreseeable future.

This would be in stark contrast to what the ECCLR and REC Committees have both advocated after exhaustive examination and consideration. Both Committees identified major shortcomings in the way that the industry is permitted to operate. Action to remedy matters, rather than further prolonged discussion, must now be the priority.

Read the S&TCS briefing in full:

S&TCS briefing for MSPs for salmon farming debate Feb 2019

STCS Briefing Addendum - SG's response to REC Report Feb 2019

Background: 2018 Rec Committee report

The REC committee report was published in November 2018, following the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform (ECCLR) committee report.

Read more: S&TCS warmly welcomes the Rural Economy and Connectivity (REC) Committee’s report on salmon farming

Read more: S&TCS applauds Environment Committee report into environmental impacts of salmon farming

Both 2018 Parliamentary inquires into salmon farming, as conducted by the ECCLR and REC Committees, were triggered by S&TCS’ formal Petition to the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee in 2016.

The 148-page REC report found that urgent action was needed to improve the regulation of the Scottish salmon farming industry and to address fish health and environmental challenges. Commenting on the REC report in November, Andrew Graham-Stewart, Director of S&TCS, said:

We applaud the REC Committee’s report, which cuts through many years of Scottish Government and industry spin and prevarication.

The onus is now on Scottish Government to act without delay to implement the Report’s recommendations, giving wild fish much needed protection from sea lice and diseases emanating from salmon farms”.

S&TCS look to the Scottish Government to take action today.

Using data to protect wild fish: River Coquet hydropower

River Coquet Hydropower

With the feed-in-tariffs for hydropower ending in March after little activity over the past couple of years, the beginning of 2019 has seen a flurry of applications for new hydro schemes.

For us, this has once again highlighted the importance of our Riverfly Census data to provide evidence, not just anecdote, on the state of our rivers.  

We recently used data from the Census in our response to a hydropower application on the river Coquet.

On this important salmon river, the Census results, which are collected at a higher resolution and frequency than the Environment Agency’s own data, indicate some phosphate, sediment and pesticide pressures already impacting the reach in question.

This, coupled with the Coquet salmon currently classified as ‘probably at risk’ and seatrout ‘at risk,’ surely means we should take a precautionary approach to such developments?

The recent closure of the north east drift nets will be a very important step to improving salmon stocks in this area, but this is by no means a silver bullet.

We must use every opportunity to remove in-river barriers to migration, both upstream and downstream, such as the weir mentioned in this application, as well as improving water quality and salmon habitat too.

The power of the Riverfly Census has led us to develop SMARTRivers – taking the Riverfly Census out to local rivers by training volunteers to sample and analyse aquatic invertebrates to species level, to provide the evidence to drive change. For more information on how you can get involved click here.

2018: A year in review

What have we achieved this year?

2018 has been our biggest year yet! So where has your support got us, and what have we done for wild fish protection and conservation? Our CEO's Year In Review summaries our influence, accomplishments and campaigns over the past 12 months. 

With the help of our many donors, members and grant-making Trusts, S&TC has had a successful year in influencing a number of wins for wild salmon and trout. The below is a quick summary; however you can download the full review here.

Accomplishments:

  • Salmon farming - we were the major catalyst in achieving TWO game-changing Scottish inquiries into salmon farming impacts on wild fish and environment:
    • ECCLR – they conducted the first Inquiry and their Report included the one-liner: the status quo is no longer an option.
    • REC - their Autumn Report was highly critical of the way salmon farming is operated and regulated and presented 65 recommendations for improvement, including most of our main asks.
  • NASCO - we work internationally on wild salmon issues through NASCO, our CEO being co-chair of the accredited NGOs which gives us unprecedented influence. Amongst other issues, we have used NASCO to influence netting closures and pressurise Scottish salmon farming.
  • Riverfly Census - 3 years and 20 rivers later, we have professional and actionable evidence of various pollutants impacting river health, nationally and locally.
    • Census results have shown up the alarmingly poor condition of some of our most high-profile rivers, particularly from sediment and phosphate, and we co-authored a peer-reviewed paper showing the lethal impact of those two stressors on mayflies.
    • The full Riverfly Census report is currently being compiled but has already influenced new invertebrate species and abundance targets for chalkstreams. The Test and Itchen report is now available.
  • Living Rivers - we've been sampling daily phosphate and chemical levels on local chalkstreams, highlighting and challenging some appalling ecological conditions, specifically:
    • Using a case study on the Upper Itchen at Alresford Salad’s washing plant to fight for the elimination of toxic chemical discharges into SAC rivers.
  • Other S&TC policy work - There has been plenty of other work this year, including but definitely not limited to:
    • Water abstraction reform.
    • Agricultural post-Brexit policy.
    • Our seat on the EA’s Water Leaders’ Group, which covers all environmental water issues.
    • Our seat on the National Drought Group, where we have represented wild fisheries since 2011.

Next Steps:

  • Salmon farming - drive the REC Committee’s recommendations through Government so that they are acted upon rather than ignored.  In particular:
    • Scottish Government to adopt legal responsibility to protect wild salmon and sea trout from the impacts of salmon farming.
    • An independent agency to regulate salmon farming against sea lice trigger levels that protect wild fish, with the sanction of forced harvest on persistent offenders.
    • A moratorium on establishing/expanding farms in sensitive locations and movement of existing farms away from migration routes.
    • Incentives for companies to move into closed containment production.
  • Netting - we are concerned that sea trout will still be exploited in some of the north east coastal nets and we will be seeking more action in 2019 to protect sea trout.
  • SMARTrivers - Our new project, based on training and utilising high resolution citizen science to understand and improve wild fish water quality.
  • Living Rivers - We will continue to fight for the protection of the Upper Itchen and have major chemical sampling plans for other rivers in 2019.
  • Much more - stay tuned for our 2019 plans, in January.

Why you should go salmon-free this Christmas

A Christmas favourite it may be; but there is nothing festive nor joyous about farmed salmon.

Salmon is considered by many to be a Christmas staple, its murky journey from net-pen to plate concealed behind tinsel-clad wrapping and slick marketing.

Two parliamentary inquiries have this year confirmed the need for rapid change in salmon farming, which is causing widespread environmental destruction and the devastation of wild fish. We have campaigned for these changes for years; but what can be done until this happens...?

And for the uninitiated, what are the issues with farmed salmon? Our CEO, Paul Knight, explains why farmed salmon is best avoided - at Christmas, and until the industry changes...

-

-

Why you should go salmon-free this Christmas

This year’s reports from two Scottish Parliamentary Committees - Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform (ECCLR), and Rural Economy and Connectivity (REC) – following their inquiries into salmon farming, are both unequivocal; we have to adopt a far more precautionary approach to salmon farming to stop it damaging wild salmon and sea trout populations.

Quite apart from the many millions of farmed salmon dying in their cages every year through disease, parasites and the negative effects of both physical and chemical treatments for sea lice, the stark fact is that politicians from all Scottish political parties agree that Scotland’s already beleaguered wild migratory fish stocks need to be protected from the impacts of open-net salmon farming on Scotland’s west coast and Islands.

These reports vindicate Salmon & Trout Conservation’s strong campaigning over many years – the ECCLR and REC inquiries only came about because of our official Petition to Scottish Parliament in 2016 – and confirm what most of us have known for years. The challenge for us now is to drive through the Committees’ recommendations so that Scottish Government introduces, as a matter of urgency, far stronger regulation of the salmon farming industry.

This includes more sensitive siting of farms, well away from wild salmon and sea trout migration routes. One of S&TC’s key objectives received prominence in the REC Committee report - the incentivisation of companies to invest in closed containment units that physically and biologically separate farmed salmon from the natural environment and wild fish.

However, that all takes time. So what can we do?

Take a stand for wild fish

What we, as consumers, can do right now is to drive home the message to salmon producers by refusing to buy any farmed salmon products this Christmas (or indeed at any time until the industry becomes environmentally sustainable).

Forget ‘organic’ salmon (here's why), or any other marketing gimmick that tries to tell you these fish are farmed responsibly.

Read more: Organic Farmed Salmon - Let's Get Real

As it stands today, all open-net salmon farming can cause problems. None are truly environmentally sustainable.

❌ There is always the very real risk that any farm can suffer from too many sea lice parasites, which then release huge numbers of sea lice larvae into sea lochs, where they attack wild fish.

❌ Any farm can also suffer human error or storm damage that allows large numbers of farmed salmon to escape and breed with wild salmon and dilute natural gene pools.

❌ And then there is the fouling of the sea bed around cages...

❌ And those millions of dead salmon that never make it to the market because disease or chemical treatment, or just plain bad husbandry, kill them first.

❌ And more...

Urgent action now required

As the Scottish Parliamentary Committees have now identified, the Scottish Government has to act fast and decisively to save the worst parts of the industry from itself and, in doing so, save wild fish. Action now help ensure that wild salmon and sea trout are genuinely protected in Scotland.

Until then, we can send a clear message to salmon producers, just as Scottish Parliamentary Committee members have this year - current salmon farming practices are just not acceptable anymore, and the industry must evolve quickly if it is to win back the public’s confidence to buy its products again.

-

-

So, this Christmas (and until standards improve) take a stand for wild fish by taking a hard pass on any farmed salmon. Use the power you have - the power of the mighty Pound.

S&TCS warmly welcomes the Rural Economy Committee’s report on salmon farming

S&TCS warmly welcomes the Rural Economy Committee’s report on salmon farming

Scottish Government must now act quickly to put in place greater protection for wild salmon and sea trout.

Salmon and Trout Conservation Scotland (S&TCS) has warmly welcomed the Rural Economy and Connectivity (REC) Committee’s report on salmon farming, published today.

The report builds on the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform (ECCLR) Committee’s report published in March.

Guy Linley-Adams, Solicitor for S&TCS, commented:

“This Report is a strong vindication of the campaign S&TCS has spearheaded for some years now, and the arguments we have been putting forward, often in the face of sharp criticism from both the industry and Scottish Government alike.

We are pleased to see that the REC Committee has recognised that the law is currently insufficient to protect wild salmon and sea trout from the damaging impacts of salmon farming.

We now look to Scottish Government to grasp the nettle and move quickly to legislate to improve markedly the protection of wild salmon and sea trout from the negative impacts of salmon farming.”

Key conclusions and recommendations in the REC Committee’s report include:
  • “….if the industry is to grow, the Committee considers it to be essential that it addresses and identifies solutions to the environmental and fish health challenges it faces as a priority” (Recommendation 1)
  • “….urgent and meaningful action needs to be taken to address regulatory deficiencies as well as fish health and environmental issues before the industry can expand” (Recommendation 2)
  • Sea lice triggers to be “…challenging” and Government urged to “set a threshold that is comparable with the highest international industry standards” (Recommendation 15)
  • “…a move away from a voluntary approach to compliance and reporting with regard to sea lice infestation” (Recommendation 16)
  • In relation to breaches of sea lice levels, “enforcement action… has not been sufficiently robust to date. It is therefore of the view that if the revised compliance policy is to be effective it must be robust, enforceable and include appropriate penalties” (Recommendation 17)
  • Sea lice data in real time to be published in real-time, made mandatory and “the data provided should be that which is required to inform the regulatory and enforcement regimes, as opposed to that which the industry itself takes it upon itself to produce” (Recommendations 19 to 21).
  • “the Committee is….of the view that a precautionary approach should be taken which will seek to minimise the potential risk to wild salmon stocks wherever possible” (Recommendation 40)
  • “the Committee suggests that the siting of salmon farms is key to managing any potential risk to wild salmon stocks and ensuring that the sector is managed responsibly” (Recommendation 41)
  • on the issue that none of the existing regulatory bodies currently has responsibility for the impact of salmon farms on wild salmon stocks, “the Committee believes that clarity must be provided by the Scottish Government as to how this apparent regulatory gap will be filled and which agency will assume responsibility for its management”. (Recommendation 44)
  • “The Committee shares the view of the ECCLR Committee that the siting of farms in the vicinity of known migratory routes for wild salmon must be avoided” (Recommendation 45)
  • “The Committee is of the view that a…precautionary approach must be taken in Scotland to assist in mitigating any potential impact of sea lice infestation on wild salmon. It therefore recommends that there should be an immediate and proactive shift towards siting new farms in more suitable areas away from migratory routes and that this should be highlighted in the strategic guidance on the siting of salmon farms”. (Recommendation 46)
Andrew Graham-Stewart, Director of S&TCS, said:

“Scottish Government has a clear duty to safeguard the coastal environment and those species, including wild salmon and sea trout, that depend upon healthy coastal ecosystems.

We applaud the REC Committee’s report, which cuts through many years of Scottish Government and industry spin and prevarication. The onus is now on Scottish Government to act without delay to implement the Report’s recommendations, giving wild fish much needed protection from sea lice and diseases emanating from salmon farms”.

This year’s Parliamentary inquiry into salmon farming, as conducted by the ECCLR and REC Committees, was triggered by S&TCS’ formal Petition to the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee in 2016.