DOCSLIB.ORG

The Control of Sea Lice in Fish

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Control of Sea Lice in Fish THE CONTROL OF SEA LICE ON FISH FARMS IN SCOTLAND 2013-2015 A REPORT FOR SALMON AND TROUT CONSERVATION SCOTLAND DECEMBER 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Fisheries scientists are increasingly firm in their conclusions that sea lice produced on fish-farms harm wild salmonids, both at an individual and at a population level, making the proper control of sea-lice on fish-farms essential to protect wild fish. Although analysis of control of sea-lice on Scottish fish-farms is severely hampered by the lack of farm-specific sea lice data, publicly available data for 2013 to 2015 shows that the number of Scottish fish-farming regions failing to keep adult female sea lice numbers below the CoGP threshold is on an upward trend. The industry- wide problem with sea lice is increasing and is certainly not under control. The proportion of the total Scottish farms salmon production exceeding CoGP thresholds shows a similar upward trend, with regions representing 60% of Scottish production being over the CoGP threshold of 0.5 adult female lice per fish in May 2015, at the peak of the wild smolt run. There is strong evidence that sea lice numbers on fish farms rise during the second year of production and, in much of Scotland, average adult female sea lice numbers per farmed fish appear to be linked to the cumulative biomass of farmed fish held on the farms. There is evidence of the considerable failure in some regions of available chemical sea lice treatments to limit sea lice numbers on farmed fish to below CoGP thresholds, strongly suggesting that resistance and tolerance to these treatments is becoming widespread. A number of regions appear to have experienced sea lice numbers persistently above CoGP thresholds, despite the use of wrasse as cleaner fish on some farms. There is some evidence of a failure by some operators to treat for sea lice on farmed fish despite sea lice numbers being over CoGP thresholds, contrary to CoGP requirements, and of the failure by fish-farmers to treat sea lice near the end of production cycles, both suggesting that little consideration is being given to the consequent negative effects on wild salmonids. Where there is evidence of early harvest or culling out of farmed fish, this appears only to be associated with unacceptable damage being caused to the farmed fish, causing either commercial losses or animal welfare issues for the farmed fish, rather than this occurring in order to protect wild fish. Action by Scottish Government is required urgently to address the sea lice issue as it affects wild fish. The major barrier to proper scrutiny of the fish farms - the lack of published farm- specific sea lice data - needs to be removed and further information concerning newer control methods for sea lice should be recorded and published to ensure that a complete picture is obtained of the sea lice control methods used. The voluntary CoGP should be made a statutory code, as provided for in the 2007 Act, and an upper tier sea lice threshold should be introduced, above which an immediate cull or harvest of farmed fish is mandated. It should not be possible for fish-farmers, where sea lice numbers have effectively gone out of control on their farms, to assert that they remain in compliance with the CoGP merely because they have instigated treatment, regardless of its efficacy in reducing lice numbers. 1 The Scottish Government should amend legislation with the express purpose of protecting wild fish from potential damage caused by fish-farms, with inspectors given a legal duty to control sea lice on fish-farms expressly in order to protect wild fish populations. Those farms consistently failing to control sea lice should be identified for closure and / or relocation. In parallel, Scottish Government should focus on alternative more sustainable production methods with the ultimate objective of moving to full closed containment of farmed salmon production in Scotland to eliminate the biological interaction between farmed and wild fish. 2 Contents Page 1. The threat to wild salmonids from sea lice emanating from fish-farms 4 2. Sea lice controls on fish-farms – legal and voluntary 8 3. How do fish-farms seek to control and treat sea lice? 10 4. Available data on sea lice on Scottish fish-farms between 2013 and 2015 12 5. Analysis of sea lice control on Scottish salmon farms 2014 to 2015 14 5.1 Inchard to Kirkaig North 16 5.2 Badachro to Applecross 18 5.3 Loch Long and Croe 21 5.4 Fyne 23 5.5 Isle of Lewis West 26 5.6 Harris 29 5.7 The Uists North 32 5.8 The Uists South 34 6. Discussion and conclusions 38 7. Recommendations 40 Annexes 42 3 1. The threat to wild salmonids from sea lice emanating from fish-farms Over many years, there has been considerable debate over the magnitude of the negative effects of sea lice, produced by salmon farms, upon wild salmonids. Despite this, the marine-cage salmon farming industry has accepted, for at least a decade, that the control of gravid adult female sea lice on farmed fish within salmon farms is essential, at least in part to minimise the impact of sea lice on wild salmonids. For example, the Strategic Framework for Scottish Aquaculture produced by the Scottish Executive in 2003, identified sea lice infestation as a significant factor which could impact upon the future sustainability of both aquaculture and wild fisheries. As Figure 1 shows, sea lice have both a free-swimming and a fixed parasitic stage in their life cycle. As they grow throughout these stages, they continue to molt. While salmon farming is conducted in the open sea, with fish held in nets suspended from floating cages, the risk to wild fish from large numbers of juvenile lice leaving the farms will remain. The sea lice life cycle comprises many stages, but during its planktonic stages, juvenile sea lice can be dispersed very long distances. Indeed, modelling scenarios suggest that sea lice can be dispersed up to 30km from fish-farms1. In effect, this means that the majority of the coastal waters of the west coast and western isles of Scotland - and the wild salmonids populations they contain - are potentially affected by sea lice emanating from Scottish salmon farms. An average sized salmon-farm can hold over half a million farmed fish. Even if just a single adult female louse is present on each fish, this would constitute an enormous production of juvenile sea lice. An adult female louse produces a pair of egg strings about every 20 days depending on temperature (and produces several pairs over its lifetime) with about 150 eggs on each string. This would mean roughly 150 million juvenile lice being released every 20 days by the adult female lice from such a farm of half a million fish. 1 NKG Salama, CM Collins, JG Fraser, J Dunn, CC Pert, AG Murray and B Rabe (2012) Development and assessment of a biophysical dispersal model for sea lice Journal of Fish Diseases Special Issue: Papers from the 9th International Sea Lice Conference Bergen, 20–23rd May 2012 Volume 36, Issue 3, pages 323–337, March 2013 4 If, as has been seen in 2013 to 2015, fish-farming regions on the Scottish west coast are consistently over CoGP thresholds for a whole year, this implies the production of tens, even hundreds of billions of mobile free-swimming stage lice. A report for the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Norway’s leading institution for applied ecological research, summarises the threat this poses to wild salmonids: “When large numbers of farmed salmon are introduced to the marine environment in open net cage salmon farms, three things are virtually inevitable for these fish. They will become hosts to sea lice since these occur naturally on wild host species in the vicinity of most farms; they will become part of a dynamic host‐parasite system involving wild hosts, because they can produce large numbers of infective larvae in a restricted spatial area if gravid females are allowed to develop; and because they carry sea lice, and because some of these fish may escape from the farms, the dispersal of parasites is likely to be even more widespread on occasion. Given the above, it may be concluded that it is next to impossible to (1) avoid infection of farmed fish, all of which go into the pens as clean smolts, and (2) also subsequently avoid infection of wild fish that are found in the vicinity (“infective field”) of an open cage farm2.” While adult wild salmon are perfectly adapted to coping with a few sea lice, and background levels of these parasites occur naturally in the sea, the negative impact of too many sea lice on wild salmonids (salmon and sea trout) is now widely accepted by fisheries scientists including the Scottish Government’s own Marine Scotland Science (MSS)3. A burden in excess of 13 pre-adult sea lice is known to compromise severely the survival of juvenile migratory salmonids. Sea lice feed by grazing on the surface of the fish and eating the mucous and skin and so large numbers of sea lice soon cause the loss of fins, severe scarring, secondary infections and, in time, death. Sea trout, which tend to remain in coastal waters, can pick up huge burdens of sea lice near salmon farms. As well as causing premature mortality, infestation at sub- lethal levels can trigger early returning behaviour in sea trout, with the fish moving back into freshwater prematurely, to rid themselves of sea lice.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Anke-Beate Stahl
    Anke-Beate Stahl Norse in the Place-nam.es of Barra The Barra group lies off the west coast of Scotland and forms the southernmost extremity of the Outer Hebrides. The islands between Barra Head and the Sound of Barra, hereafter referred to as the Barra group, cover an area approximately 32 km in length and 23 km in width. In addition to Barra and Vatersay, nowadays the only inhabited islands of the group, there stretches to the south a further seven islands, the largest of which are Sandray, Pabbay, Mingulay and Bemeray. A number of islands of differing sizes are scattered to the north-east of Barra, and the number of skerries and rocks varies with the tidal level. Barra's physical appearance is dominated by a chain of hills which cuts through the island from north-east to south-west, with the peaks of Heaval, Hartaval and An Sgala Mor all rising above 330 m. These mountains separate the rocky and indented east coast from the machair plains of the west. The chain of hills is continued in the islands south of Barra. Due to strong winter and spring gales the shore is subject to marine erosion, resulting in a ragged coastline with narrow inlets, caves and natural arches. Archaeological finds suggest that farming was established on Barra by 3000 BC, but as there is no linguistic evidence of a pre-Norse place names stratum the Norse immigration during the ninth century provides the earliest onomastic evidence. The Celtic cross-slab of Kilbar with its Norse ornaments and inscription is the first traceable source of any language spoken on Barra: IEptir porgerdu Steinars dottur es kross sja reistr', IAfter Porgero, Steinar's daughter, is this cross erected'(Close­ Brooks and Stevenson 1982:43).
    [Show full text]
  • Dossier of Chemical Use on Scottish Salmon Farms (2008-2011)
    Dossier of Chemical Use on Scottish Salmon Farms (2008-2011) Based on data obtained from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency via Freedom of Information in July 2012 (available in full online here and read SEPA's data re-use statement online here ). More details online via FishyLeaks Summary: Total chemical use (Cypermethrin, Azamethiphos, Teflubenzuron, Emamectin benzoate & Deltamethrin) on Scottish salmon farms increased by 110% between 2008 and 2011 2008: 188076.07g 2009: 342847.8462g 2010: 373757.8495g 2011: 394630.5414g The alarming rise in chemical use is five times more than the percentage increase in salmon farming production: whilst Scottish farmed salmon production steadily increased by 22% between 2008 and 2011 (up from 128,606 tonnes to 157,385 tonnes) the use of toxic chemicals increased by a shocking 110% (up from 188076.07g to 394630.5414g). In terms of total chemical use (2008-2011), Azamethiphos accounts for over half (55%) with Emamectin benzoate (19%), Teflubenzuron (18%), Deltamethrin (5%) and Cypermethrin (3%). The relative composition of chemical use has changed since 2008 – but the use of Azamethiphos has always remained the largest component. As Cypermethrin use has declined the use of Teflubenzuron has increased to be the 2nd largest in 2011: Almost twice every day for the last four years (2008 to 2011), toxic chemicals were used on salmon farms across Scotland. Chemicals were used on 2,756 occasions with Emamectin benzoate used 1,028 times; Deltamethrin 914; Azamethiphos 487; Cypermethrin 315 and Teflubenzuron
    [Show full text]
  • Shetland Mainland North (Potentially Vulnerable Area 04/01)
    Shetland Mainland North (Potentially Vulnerable Area 04/01) Local Plan District Local authority Main catchment Shetland Shetland Islands Council Shetland coastal Summary of flooding impacts Summary of flooding impacts flooding of Summary At risk of flooding • <10 residential properties • <10 non-residential properties • £47,000 Annual Average Damages (damages by flood source shown left) Summary of objectives to manage flooding Objectives have been set by SEPA and agreed with flood risk management authorities. These are the aims for managing local flood risk. The objectives have been grouped in three main ways: by reducing risk, avoiding increasing risk or accepting risk by maintaining current levels of management. Objectives Many organisations, such as Scottish Water and energy companies, actively maintain and manage their own assets including their risk from flooding. Where known, these actions are described here. Scottish Natural Heritage and Historic Environment Scotland work with site owners to manage flooding where appropriate at designated environmental and/or cultural heritage sites. These actions are not detailed further in the Flood Risk Management Strategies. Summary of actions to manage flooding The actions below have been selected to manage flood risk. Flood Natural flood New flood Community Property level Site protection protection management warning flood action protection plans scheme/works works groups scheme Actions Flood Natural flood Maintain flood Awareness Surface water Emergency protection management warning raising plan/study plans/response study study Maintain flood Strategic Flood Planning Self help Maintenance protection mapping and forecasting policies scheme modelling Shetland Local Plan District Section 2 20 Shetland Mainland North (Potentially Vulnerable Area 04/01) Local Plan District Local authority Main catchment Shetland Shetland Islands Council Shetland coastal Background This Potentially Vulnerable Area is There are several communities located in the north of Mainland including Voe, Mossbank, Brae and Shetland (shown below).
    [Show full text]
  • Socio-Economic Baseline Reviews for Offshore Renewables in Scottish Waters
    RPA. Marine Scotland Socio-economic Baseline Reviews for Offshore Renewables in Scottish Waters Volume 1: Main Text Report R.1905 September 2012 RPA. Marine Scotland Socio-economic Baseline Reviews for Offshore Renewables in Scottish Waters Volume 2: Figures Report R.1905 September 2012 Marine Scotland Socio-economic Baseline Reviews for Offshore Renewables in Scottish Waters Date: September 2012 Project Ref: R4032/3 Report No: R.1905 © ABP Marine Environmental Research Ltd Version Details of Change Authorised By Date 1 Working Copy C E Brown 02.12.11 2 Final C E Brown 07.02.12 3 Final C E Brown 26.04.12 4 Final C E Brown 28.06.12 5 Final C E Brown 24.09.12 Document Authorisation Signature Date Project Manager: C E Brown Quality Manager: H Roberts Project Director: S C Hull ABP Marine Environmental Research Ltd Quayside Suite, Medina Chambers Town Quay Tel: +44(0)23 8071 1840 SOUTHAMPTON Fax: +44(0)23 8071 1841 Hampshire Web: www.abpmer.co.uk SO14 2AQ Email: [email protected] ABPmer is certified by: All images copyright ABPmer apart from front cover (wave, anemone, bird) and policy & management (rockpool) Andy Pearson www.oceansedgephotography.co.uk Socio-economic Baseline Reviews for Offshore Renewables in Scottish Waters Summary ABP Marine Environmental Research Ltd (ABPmer) and RPA were commissioned by Marine Scotland to prepare a baseline socio-economic review to inform impact assessments of future sectoral plans for offshore wind and wave and tidal energy in Scottish Territorial Waters and waters offshore of Scotland (hereafter „Scottish Waters‟). This report provides a national overview of socio-economic activities together with regional baseline reviews covering the six Scottish Offshore Renewable Energy Regions (SORERs).
    [Show full text]
  • Out and About Around Shetland
    Out and About Shetland Areas to visit Some things to see and do Beaches to visit Best places to eat out The white wife, Hermaness, Norwick beach, Easting Unst and Yell Boat Haven, Bobby’s bus beach, West Sandwick Victoria’s Tea Room and LJ’s Diner shelter and Viking Longship and Breckon Sands Brae swimming pool, Voxter Beach at Lunna, Vidlin, Brae and trees, Wigwams, Ronas Hill, Frankie's, Hillswick Hotel, Mid Brae and Fethaland Beach, Back North Mainland Stones of Stofast, Bell Tower Busta House Sand at Lunna and Hams of Roe Kergord trees, Bonhoga Tresta Beach, Raewick Central and the Bonhoga, The Cake Fridge and Braewick Gallery, Michaels Wood, Da beach and Sandsound Westside Café Gairdins at Sand, Gruting beach The Steak House, Island Larder, Isleburgh, The Museum, Playpark, go The Noodle Bar, Peerie Shop Café, Shetland shopping, Aa Fired Up, Sands of Sound and Lerwick, and Lerwick Hotel, Magnos, Fjara, Mareel, Clickimin, Lerwick Bains beach Skippidock, The Dowry, The Fort Chippy, The Library and The Knab Great Wall, The Golden Coach and Saffron Scalloway pool, Hamnavoe Scalloway and lighthouse, Smuggler’s cave, Meal Beach and Minn Burra cake fridge, The Cornerstone and The Burra The Ootpost and Trondra Beach Haaf Farm Sumburgh Lighthouse, West Voe Beach, Jarlshof, Sandwick Leisure Mackenzie’s Farm shop, cake fridge at The South End Levenwick beach, St Centre, playpark and Red Sandwick playpark and Sumburgh Lighthouse Ninians Isle and Spiggie pool of Virkie https://www.shetland.org/visit for more things to see and do Things to do on
    [Show full text]
  • Soteag Ornithological Monitoring Programme
    SOTEAG ORNITHOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAMME 2016 REPORT Martin Heubeck and Mick Mellor, Aberdeen Institute of Coastal Science and Management, University of Aberdeen. January 2017 CONTENTS Page 2016 Executive Summary 2 1. Monitoring of cliff-breeding seabirds 1.1. Weather during the 2016 seabird breeding season 3 1.2a. Northern Fulmar Fulmarus glacialis: Population counts 4 1.2b. Northern Fulmar Fulmarus glacialis: Breeding success 5 1.3a. European Shag Phalacrocorax aristotelis: Population counts 6 1.3b. European Shag Phalacrocorax aristotelis: Breeding success 7 1.4a. Black-legged Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla: Population counts 9 1.4b. Black-legged Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla: Breeding success 10 1.5a. Common Guillemot Uria aalge: Population counts 13 1.5b. Common Guillemot Uria aalge: Breeding success, chick diet and weights at Sumburgh Head 14 1.5c. Common Guillemot Uria aalge: Breeding success at Burravoe, Yell 20 1.6a. Razorbill Alca torda: Population counts 21 1.6b. Razorbill Alca torda: Breeding success at Sumburgh Head 22 2. Pre-breeding season census counts of Black Guillemots Cepphus grylle 23 3. Moulting Common Eiders Somateria mollissima in Yell Sound and Sullom Voe 27 4. Winter counts of seaduck and diving seabirds 28 4.1. Hascosay, Bluemull and Colgrave Sounds (HBC), and South Unst. 28 4.2. Bressay Sound and north Bressay 30 4.3. Pool of Virkie to Bay of Quendale 31 4.4. Burra, Trondra, South Havra, the Scalloway islands and Weisdale Voe 32 4.5. Whiteness Voe to Skelda Voe, West Mainland 34 5. Beached Bird Surveys 5.1. Changes in coverage 35 5.2. Incidence of oiling 35 5.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Odd Rocks in the Outer Hebrides” Michael Spencer Sheetlines, 114 (April 2019), Pp8-15 Stable URL
    Sheetlines The journal of THE CHARLES CLOSE SOCIETY for the Study of Ordnance Survey Maps “Odd rocks in the Outer Hebrides” Michael Spencer Sheetlines, 114 (April 2019), pp8-15 Stable URL: www.charlesclosesociety.org/files/OddrocksinOuterHebrides.pdf This article is provided for personal, non-commercial use only. Please contact the Society regarding any other use of this work. Published by THE CHARLES CLOSE SOCIETY for the Study of Ordnance Survey Maps www.CharlesCloseSociety.org The Charles Close Society was founded in 1980 to bring together all those with an interest in the maps and history of the Ordnance Survey of Great Britain and its counterparts in the island of Ireland. The Society takes its name from Colonel Sir Charles Arden-Close, OS Director General from 1911 to 1922, and initiator of many of the maps now sought after by collectors. The Society publishes a wide range of books and booklets on historic OS map series and its journal, Sheetlines, is recognised internationally for its specialist articles on Ordnance Survey-related topics. 8 Odd rocks in the Outer Hebrides Michael Spencer Certain rocks and clusters of rocks exist off the west coast of Scotland that are not shown consistently at all scales on the map. Before pointing the finger at the OS, we should perhaps decide what we want the map to show. And as usual, with any question relating to the sea, we have to start with the tides. 1. Tides It is well known that the diurnal variation in the height of the tide is a result of the gravitational fields of the sun and the moon, their effects moderated by the motion of the earth in these fields.
    [Show full text]
  • STD Code Book for 1984 Based on Haddenham & Long Crendon Issue 4, 1984
    STD Code Book for 1984 Based on Haddenham & Long Crendon Issue 4, 1984 01 London 0207 Burnopfield 0200 Clitheroe 0207 Consett 0200 5 Gisburn 0207 Dipton 0200 6 Slaidburn 0207 Ebchester 0200 7 Bolton-by-Bowland 0207 Edmundbyers 0200 8 Dunsop Bridge 0207 Lanchester (Co Durham) 0202 Bournemouth 0207 Rowlands Gill 0202 Broadstone 0207 Stanley (Co Durham) 0202 Canford Cliffs 0208 Bodmin 0202 Christchurch (Dorset) 0208 Lanivet 0202 Ferndown 0208 81 Wadebridge 0202 Lytchett Minster 0208 82 Cardinham 0202 Parkstone 0208 84 St Mabyn 0202 Poole 0208 86 Trebetherick 0202 Verwood 0208 88 Port Isaac 0202 Wimborne (Dorset) 0209 Camborne 0203 Bedworth 0209 Porthtowan 0203 Chapel End 0209 Portreath 0203 Coventry 0209 Praze 0203 Nuneaton 0209 Redruth 0203 Royal Show 0209 St Day 0203 Wolston 0209 Stithians 0203 33 Keresley (Coventry) 021 Birmingham 0204 Bolton 0220 23 Histon 0204 Farnworth 0220 26 Comberton 0204 Horwich (Lancs) 0220 29 West Wratting 0204 Turton 0220 5 Teversham 0204 81 Belmont Village 0221 22 Limpley Stoke 0204 88 Tottington 0221 4 Trowbridge (4 & 5 fig nos) 0205 Boston (Lincs) 0221 6 Bradford-on-Avon 0205 73 Langrick 0221 7 Saltford (4 fig nos) 0205 78 Stickney 0222 Caerphilly 0205 79 Hubbert's Bridge 0222 Cardiff 0205 84 New Leake 0222 Dinas Powys 0205 85 Fosdyke 0222 Penarth 0205 86 Sutterton 0222 Pentyrch 0206 Colchester 0222 Radyr (Sth Glam) 0206 Great Bentley 0222 Senghenydd 0206 Nayland (Colchester) 0222 Sully 0206 West Mersea 0222 Taffs Well 0206 22 Wivenhoe 0223 Cambridge 0206 28 Rowhedge 0224 Aberdeen 0206 30 Brightlingsea 0224
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule-3.Pdf (PDF File, 3.1
    Schedule 3 to the Notification in Part I of Annex 11 Relevant Regions Forecasting Region 1 – Highland and Islands Exch ID Name CSS District ARIEL Code Part 1141 Postcode Code NSATB Achiltibuie NS WSACH Achnamara WS NSASN Achnasheen NS NSASC Achnashellach NS NSANS Alness NS NSALT Altnaharra NS WSAPP Appin WS NSAPP Applecross NS NSAGY Ardgay NS NSAGR Ardgour NS NSAVR Ardvasar NS NSARI Arisaig NS WSARO Aros WS NSASS Assynt NS NSALB Aultbea NS NSALG Aultguish NS NSAVI Aviemore NS NSBAC Back NS NSBAD Badachro NS NSBLL Balallan NS NSBFR Balfour NS NSBCS Ballachulish NS NSBMC Balmacara NS NSBTS Baltasound NS WSBAV Balvicar WS WSBAB Barbreck WS NSBRK Barrock NS NSBVS Barvas NS NSBAY Bayhead NS NSBEA Beauly NS NSBEN Benbecula NS NSBRN Berneray NS NSBER Berriedale NS NSBET Bettyhill NS NSBIG Bigton NS NSBIR Birsay NS NSBIX Bixter NS NSBOG Boat Of Garten NS WSBON Bonawe WS NSBNS Bornish NS Exch ID Name CSS District ARIEL Code Part 1141 Postcode Code NSBRV Borve NS WSBOW Bowmore WS NSBRA Brae NS NSBSY Bressay NS NSBFD Broadford NS NSBRR Brora NS NSBVO Burravoe NS NSBRY Burray NS WSCAI Cairndow WS NSCGM Cairngorm NS NSCAL Callanish NS WSCAP Campbeltown WS NSCAN Cannich NS NSCAR Carbost NS NSCWY Carloway NS NSCRN Carnan NS WSCAD Carradale WS NSCRB Carrbridge NS NSCBY Castlebay NS NSCTW Castletown NS WSCLA Clachan WS WSCOL Coll WS WSCOY Colonsay WS WSCOE Connel WS
    [Show full text]
  • 1005096 Shetland Times.Pdf
    APPENDIX 2 CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION Please complete this certificate by providing the following details, sign and send it, along with pages of the newspapers that contained the advertisements, to SEPA either by email to registrydingwall(cDsepa.org. uk or in writing to the following address: Registry Department, SEPA, Registry Department, SEPA, Graesser House, Fodderty Way, Dingwall Business Park, Dingwall, IV15 9XB no later than 8 August 2018.. Publications containing advertisement Name of newspaper i Date of publication Edinburgh Gazette 13' July 2018 Shetland Times 13' h July 2018 Declaration ' I hereby certify that notices advertising applications under the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) ( Scotland) Regulations 2011 to vary water use licences, reference numbers CAR/ U1005096 and 1004032, have been published in the newspapers and on the respective dates given above and that pages of the relevant newspapers containing the advertisements are attached. Signature Date 20. 07. 18 Print name Christopher Webb On behalf of Cooke Aquaculture Scotland state corporate body, if applicable) The Shetland Times | Friday, 13th July, 2018 | 29 NOTICESPUBLICPUBLIC NOTICES Water Environment And Water Services ( Scotland) Act MARINE ( SCOTLAND) ACT 2010 2003. Water Environment ( Controlled Activities) ( Scotland) INSTALLATION OF FINFISH FARMS, Regulations 2011 HOGAN AND HOLM OF GRUTING, Applications for variation of authorisations. GRUTING VOE, SHETLAND Marine cage sh farm, Hogan, Gruting Voe, Walls, Shetland. Notice is hereby given that Cooke Aquaculture Scotland has Marine cage sh farm, Holm of Gruting, Gruting Voe, Walls, Shetland applied to the Scottish Ministers of the Scottish Government, Education Maintenance Allowance under Part 4 of the Marine ( Scotland) Act 2010, in respect of An application has been made to the Scottish Environment installation of nsh farms at: Protection Agency (SEPA) by Cooke Aquaculture Scotland Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Scottish Sanitary Survey Report
    Scottish Sanitary Survey Report yyy Sanitary Survey Report East Burwick SI-583-1060-08 October 2014 East Burwick Sanitary Report Title Survey Report Scottish Sanitary Survey Project Name Programme Food Standards Agency in Client/Customer Scotland Cefas Project Reference C6316C Document Number C6316C_2014_7 Revision V1.0 Date 27/10/2014 Revision History Revision Date Pages revised Reason for revision number 0.1 05/09/2014 - Draft report for consultation Correction of typographical 1.0 27/10/2014 1, 27 errors noted in consultation Name Position Date Jessica Larkham, Frank Scottish Sanitary Author Cox, Liefy Hendrikz, 27/10/2014 Survey Team Michelle Price-Hayward Principal Shellfish Checked Ron Lee 28/10/2014 Hygiene Scientist Principal Shellfish Approved Ron Lee 28/10/2014 Hygiene Scientist This report was produced by Cefas for its Customer, FSAS, for the specific purpose of providing a sanitary survey as per the Customer’s requirements. Although every effort has been made to ensure the information contained herein is as complete as possible, there may be additional information that was either not available or not discovered during the survey. Cefas accepts no liability for any costs, liabilities or losses arising as a result of the use of or reliance upon the contents of this report by any person other than its Customer. Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science, Weymouth Laboratory, Barrack Road, The Nothe, Weymouth DT4 8UB. Tel 01305 206 600 www.cefas.defra.gov.uk East Burwick Sanitary Survey Report V1.0 27/10/2014 Page i of 120 Report Distribution – East Burwick Date Name Agency Joyce Carr Scottish Government David Denoon SEPA Douglas Sinclair SEPA Hazel MacLeod SEPA Fiona Garner Scottish Water Alex Adrian Crown Estate Dawn Manson Local Authority Sean Williamson HMMH (Scotland) Ltd Michael Tait Harvester Partner Organisations The hydrographic assessment and the shoreline survey and its associated report were undertaken by Shetland Seafood Quality Control, Scalloway.
    [Show full text]
  • Inspections of Marine Salmon Farms in Scotland Carried out by the Fish Health Inspectorate During 2009 and 2010 – Sea-Lice and Containment Issues
    Inspections of marine salmon farms in Scotland carried out by the Fish Health Inspectorate during 2009 and 2010 – sea-lice and containment issues Guy Linley-Adams Solicitor to the Salmon &Trout Association Aquaculture Campaign [email protected] March 2011 Executive Summary 1. Fish Health Inspectorate reports of inspections of marine salmon farms from 2009 and 2010 were obtained pursuant to the EC Directive on Public Access to Environmental Information (2003/4/EC) as implemented in Scotland by the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004. 2. All inspections of salmon farms are pre-arranged with the fish-farms, up to 7-10 days in advance. Unannounced inspections should be introduced to the inspection regime immediately. 3. A significant number of fish-farms inspected by the Fish Health Inspectorate between 2009 and 2010 are recorded as having sea-lice levels above the thresholds recommended in the industry’s own Code of Good Practice for Scottish Finfish Aquaculture (“the Code”) during the period for which records were inspected. 4. The thresholds in the Code are themselves not necessarily sufficiently stringent to protect wild salmonids from juvenile sea-lice emanating from fish-farms. 5. There is a lacuna in Scottish law which makes it impossible for the public to know for how long sea-lice levels were above thresholds on each fish-farm and the relative severity of sea-lice infestation, a situation that does not exist in Norway where the fish-farming industry has to report weekly sea-lice count data to state authorities, to which the general public then has a right of access.
    [Show full text]