Seòmar agus comataidhean

Ben Hadfield, you talked about the compromising of fish health. Professor Martin also talked about breaking the life cycle of sea lice.

SEPA is rolling out the regulatory framework, and we will not see that full roll-out until 2027. I have learned a lot today about how things are changing because of the climate and other aspects. Do you believe that, as things develop, some of the regulatory framework will adapt to take into account the issues that we are seeing and include things such as measures to break the life cycle of sea lice, as well as what salmon farms are doing?

I do not know whether anyone can answer this question, but do you believe that it is right that new farms should not be granted authorisation, particularly if they are not reaching the standards? What are your views on the sea lice numbers in those places that are not getting on top of the problem?

I think that it was Ralph Bickerdike who talked about freshwater treatment. No, it was Ben Hadfield—you look relieved, Ralph. Between weeks 36 and 37, when that freshwater treatment occurred, is it normal for the mortality rate to increase? It doubled in that circumstance, although it was only from 0.24 to 0.55 per cent, I think. Overall, in the industry, what kind of percentage are we looking at?

Roughly how many salmon would you put through the wellboat? Given your commercial interests, you would want as many to survive as possible, but I presume that work has been done on the process. It just seems reactive to me rather than the preventative, proactive agenda that Kimberley McKinnell was talking about. What survival rate do you want from the process? What can you expect when you carry it out?

Okay. I just have one more small question for David Brown.

A lot of comparisons have been made today with livestock farming. Quite frankly, I understand livestock farming more than I understand aquaculture, because I grew up on a farm. However, I was wondering about the fish health inspectorate’s reference to a farm management statement. What is that?

I am sorry, David. In relation to the farm that the committee visited, the fish health inspectorate was asked:

“Did any of these inspections identify any cause for concern or further regulatory action?”

The letter says:

“The inspection ... identified that to ensure compliance ... the farm management statement required to contain provision for the review of the document and the arrangements for sensitivity testing in relation to treatments for parasite management.”

When there is an issue, what is the process and what happens regarding the farm management statement?

By whom?

I understand that, but what about the salmon farms that you mentioned where there is a no-deterioration policy? Do you not believe that that, for them, is a standstill policy, which does nothing to support the objectives of improving the environment?

My questions are about sea lice regulatory reform and wild salmon interactions overall. In a previous committee session, WildFish expressed concern about the reliability of the sea lice count data. How often do you carry out sea lice monitoring? How reliable is that data? Will you comment on the assertion that there is a big gap in the data when it comes to sea lice reporting?

Okay. We had a very long discussion on the gill health situation, which seems to be a huge problem. In a previous evidence session, Professor Martin said that, in such circumstances, the treatments that all the witnesses have spoken about could not be used to treat sea lice, and that secondary infection would therefore become the reason for mortality.

Do you think that we are now overly focused on sea lice and that we should be looking at the issues with gill health? I do not want to suggest that there should be more reporting, but how is gill health reported? Are issues with gill health overtaking the issues of sea lice?