Fish Farming

Standard Note: SN/SC/924

Last updated: 10 December 2008
Author: Christopher Barclay
Section Science and Environment Section

This note covers some issues relating to fish farming, mostly salmon farming in Scotland, but
also cod and tuna farming.

Contents

1 The environmental effect of fish farming 2

1.1 Interbreeding with wild stock 2
1.2 Environmental progress in the Shetlands 3
1.3 Insecticides and farmed salmon 3
1.4 Can fish farming be based on a vegetarian diet? 4

2 The role of the Crown Estate 5

3 Competition from low cost imports and foreign ownership 8

4 Tuna farming 9

5 Cod Farming 9

6 The position in 2008 10

6.1 Increased salmon consumption 10
6.2 Scottish Government framework for fish farming 11

This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties

and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It
should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it
was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a
substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or
information is required.

This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available
online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the
content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public.
1 The environmental effect of fish farming
1.1 Interbreeding with wild stock
A review article in Nature in June 2000 noted the problem of the interaction of farmed salmon
with wild stock.

Introduction of non-indigenous organisms. In some cases, aquaculture affects stock of

wild and farmed fish through biological pollution. Atlantic salmon – the dominant
salmon species farmed – frequently escape from net pens. As much as 40% of
Atlantic salmon caught by fishermen in areas of the North Atlantic Ocean are of farmed
origin. In the north Pacific Ocean, over 255,000 Atlantic salmon have reportedly
escaped since the early 1980s and are caught by fishing vessels from Washington to
Alaska. Increasing evidence suggests that farm escapees may hybridize with and alter
the genetic makeup of wild populations of Atlantic salmon which are genetically
adapted to their natal spawning grounds. Such genetic alterations could exacerbate
the decline in many locally endangered populations of wild Atlantic salmon. 1

The Worldwide Fund for Nature issued a statement in 2003 challenging a Scottish Executive
claim that Scottish fish farming was sustainable. It included the following environmental
points:

A recent Irish study on interbreeding between wild and cultivated salmon shows that
interbred salmon have low survival rates, threatening our native salmon stocks, many
of which were genetically unique, with extinction. Executive records show that 367,000
salmon escaped in 2002 alone, and it is estimated that the number of fish farm
escapes in the North Atlantic is now equivalent to about 50% of the TOTAL number of
wild adult salmon in the sea. 2

On the other hand, research published in September 2003 suggests that fish farming is not
to blame for increases in sea lice affecting wild fish – a frequent accusation. A newspaper
described the work:

Dr Shona Marshall of the West Sutherland Fisheries Trust carried out tests on wild sea
trout post-smolts from 1998 to 2001 within the Laxford Bay area, which the fish swim
through before returning to the River Laxford. The site was chosen because the fish
farm located in the bay…rotates production around three different lochs in the area,
leaving the test area “fallow”, or with no farming activity, in some years…The results of
the study show that, even when there was no fish-farming activity in the bay, sea lice
abundance remained relatively constant on wild fish. 3

The research suggests that even when there were large numbers of sea lice in the cages,
there were not necessarily unusually large numbers of lice in the wild sea trout. That in turn
suggests that salmon farming is not causing lice infestations among wild stock. However,
that is only one study.

1
R.L.Naylor et al, “Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies”, Nature, Vol 405, 29 June 2000, pp 1017-1024
2
WWF Press Release, ’Sustainable aquaculture in Scotland is still a myth, 16 December 2003
3
“Research ‘clears’ fish farm”, Scotsman. 2 September 2003

2
1.2 Environmental progress in the Shetlands
An article in the Guardian in April 2003 stressed environmental progress made by the
industry in the Shetlands:

The industry believes it has made great strides in fighting off its environmental and
welfare critics. The cages have been moved into deep water to take advantage of the
high oxygen content of the water. Salmon thrive in choppy seas; they grow more
quickly. The quality of the harvested fish depends on lack of stress. Suction pipes are
used to bring fish aboard specially-constructed ships where the salmon are gradually
cooled until soporific, and then dispatched at a clinical and efficient killing station
without ever being handled.

The only environmental problem the industry concedes it has not tackled is the source
of its food. Currently the calculation of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is
that every tonne of food for farmed salmon needs four tonnes of wild fish to produce.
This is because 34% of feed is fish oil, which salmon need for health…in its defence,
the industry points out that the majority of industry fish meal goes not to the
aquaculture industry but to feed chickens and pigs, arguably the wrong use for an
increasing[ly] scarce resource. In addition, experimental feeding programmes are
taking place in the Shetlands using 50% vegetable oils from crops such as oil seed
rape – so far with success. 4

1.3 Insecticides and farmed salmon

The problem of sea lice is considerable because of the unnatural collection of enormous
numbers of salmon so close together. Fish farmers therefore need to be able to use
chemicals.

A PQ in December 2002 raised the question of possible human health problems resulting
from eating salmon that had been treated with insecticide:

Ms Blears: I have been asked to reply.

I am advised by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) that the Government have been
monitoring and releasing information on chemicals in food, including farmed salmon,
for over 10 years. Information on fish, including farmed salmon, has been published in
the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food's Food Surveillance Paper No. 31, and
Food Surveillance Information Sheets Nos. 71, 89, 105, 145, 184 and 191. The most
recent information has been published by the FSA in its Food Survey Information
Sheets Nos. 4/00, and 5/00, and the FSA Press Release of 10 May which issued
precautionary advice for certain population groups on eating shark, swordfish and
marlin. Copies of all these papers will be placed in the Library. The FSA is also aware
of a range of published studies that have been carried out both in the United Kingdom
and abroad. The FSA advises that consumers should eat at least two portions of fish a
week, one of which should be oily, as part of a healthy, balanced diet. The FSA has
however been asked about the risks and benefits of eating larger amounts of fish,
including oily fish such as salmon, and currently is seeking advice on this from its
independent experts. 5

A major report in 2005 concluded that the use of insecticides in salmon farming did not pose
environmental problems, as the Scottish Executive reported:

4
“Against the tide”, Guardian, 9 April 2003
5
HC Deb 9 December 2002 cc 23-4W

3
 A new report has concluded that veterinary medicines used to control sea lice in
salmon farms have no major effects on the environment.

The report found that:

• No major changes in the ecology of the sea lochs studied were observed
• If the veterinary medicines used during the study are having an impact on the
environment they are either difficult to separate from the natural variability of the
ecosystem, or below detectable limits

Veterinary Medicines Directorate, Defra and the Scottish Executive, together with the
Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage provided the
funds (£1.2 million) for a five-year investigation (1999-2004) of the environmental
effects of the use of sea lice treatments in salmon farming in Scottish sea lochs. 6

1.4 Can fish farming be based on a vegetarian diet?

A review article in Nature in June 2000 severely criticised the overall ecological effect of fish
farming. It pointed out that in most cases, apart from carp, the farmed fish are fed on large
quantities of wild fish.

Because of the high levels of fish meal and fish oil in aquaculture feeds, many species
require more fish biomass as inputs than the farmed fish produced. For the ten types
of fish most commonly farmed, an average of 1.9 kg of wild fish is required for every
kilogram of fish raised on compound feeds. Only three of the ten types of fish –
catfish, milkfish and carp – require less fish as inputs than is ultimately harvested.
(Marine molluscs and many filter-feeding carp are not fed compound feeds at all.) In
contrast, carnivorous species require 2.5-5 times as much fish biomass as feed as is
produced. 7

Salmon, trout and cod are carnivores. Their current diet is based on fish oil and fishmeal.
The rapid expansion of fish farming will exhaust this supply. If fish oil supply stays the same,
as it has for the last decade, then demand will outstrip supply by 2010. The same will
happen to fishmeal by 2050. In practice, prices would increase before then, but the result
would be almost equally serious for the industry. Feed companies have turned to larger fish
as a source of oil and fishmeal, with further disruption to natural stocks. Vegetarian options
are therefore very attractive, if they can be made to work. An article in Nature in November
2003 explained the problem:

Today, the options for vegetarian fish diets include soya beans, corn, rapeseed,
sunflower seeds, flaxseeds and wheat gluten. Some farmed salmon already get up to
half of their protein or oils from such ingredients, without their health or growth rates
suffering. But attempts to push diets past the half-vegetarian point tend to cause
serious digestion problems - fish suffer from irritated lower intestines and a depressed
immune system, and lose their ability to absorb key minerals such as zinc and iron.

Vegetarian diets cause taste change in salmon and reduce the omega-3 fatty-acid content of
the fish. However, that can be rectified by feeding fish on vegetarian diet for about two
years, then on a traditional fishy diet for the last three months. The use of fish oil would be
reduced by 85%. Many researchers believe that the problems of giving salmon an all
vegetarian diet will be solved in the next 5-10 years. 8

6
Scottish Executive Press Notice, Positive report on fish farming medicines, 11 April 2005
7
R.L.Naylor et al, “Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies”, Nature, Vol 405, 29 June 2000, pp 1017-1024
8
“Eat your veg”, Nature, November 2003 p 379

4
2 The role of the Crown Estate
Fish farms are normally in tidal waters and are therefore the responsibility of the Crown
Estate, rather than local planning authorities. That state of affairs has sometimes been
criticised because, apart from anything else, fish farms have a considerable effect on the
appearance of the coast. The Scottish Executive has proposed transferring the responsibility
for approving fish farms to local authorities. 9

In a debate in February 2003, Alistair Carmichael criticised the role of the Crown Estate for
imposing a tax on salmon farming:

Mr. Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland): ...From our perspective, the roots of
the difficulty lie in the terms of the Crown Estate Act 1961…The first provision of the
Act of which hon. Members should be aware is section 1(3), which provides:

"It shall be the general duty of the Commissioners, while maintaining the Crown
Estate as an estate in land . . . to maintain and enhance its value and the return
obtained from it, but with due regard to the requirements of good management."

The following subsection is interesting. It gives a power of direction to the Chancellor of

Exchequer or the Secretary of State for Scotland, or a combination of the two. As far
as I am aware, that power has never been exercised. That gives me cause for regret,
because it appears to have been narrowly construed. It is a power that can be
exercised having regard to subsection (3)—the general duty on the commissioners—
but that having regard is not exclusive. There would be scope, if the Government had
the political will, for a direction from the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Secretary
of State for Scotland, or the two combined, to use the power to alleviate some of the
worst effects of Crown Estate policy.

The more significant point is that section 3(1) provides that the right of the Crown
Estate Commissioners to

"sell, lease or otherwise dispose of any land . . . or any right or privilege over or in
relation to any such land"
is subject only to

"the best consideration in money or money's worth which in their opinion can
reasonably be obtained, having regard to all the circumstances of the case".

The Crown Estate's attitude to a number of issues is based on an unnecessarily

narrow construction of that subsection.

For example, rents for salmon farms are set not, like a normal rent for land, as a cost
per acre or per hectare but as a percentage of the turnover of the business. In my
experience, that is pretty well unique. The Crown Estate will take about 0.8 per cent. of
a salmon farm's turnover as a right. It is not exigible in profits, so it is a top-line cost of
the business. That is the Crown Estate Commissioners' figure. The industry,
particularly in my constituency, would argue that the figure is 1 per cent. or even
higher. However, it is a complex formula and I am prepared to give the commissioners
the benefit of the doubt.

We refer to it as a tax. I do not see what else we can regard it as. It borders on the
disingenuous to call it a right. I do not understand why we consider it necessary to tax
our own agriculture industry in that way. No other significant agricultural country—not

9
Scottish Executive News Release, Tougher Planning Regime proposed for Fish Farms, 26 July 2000

5
Norway, Ireland, Canada or Chile—has anything even slightly similar. Scottish Quality
Salmon estimates that that makes our salmon industry 15 per cent. less competitive
than those of other European Union countries, and that figure was supported by EU
research.

Scottish Quality Salmon is an industry body. It also estimates that 35 per cent. of the
industry's profits are taken in Crown Estate rents. Why should an industry that already
pays corporation tax and all the other taxes, and that provides jobs—some of which
are very good—in some of the most economically fragile peripheral communities in this
country, where such jobs are most needed, have to sustain such an extra burden?
What do we get in return? The only return that I can see is that I, my Member of the
Scottish Parliament colleague and a handful of councillors and industry representatives
get one meal every year in the Shetland hotel, at which occasion the chief executive
and a handful of commissioners come up and get roundly abused for the privilege of
feeding us for the evening—although it remains to be seen whether that will continue
now that the Scottish Parliament has outlawed blood sports.Why do the Government
continue to allow the Crown Estate Commissioners to charge rent based on turnover?
Does that place them in breach of their obligations under section 3(1) of the 1961 Act?
The level of the tax and its destination are unacceptable.

If rent is to be charged for use of the seabed it should benefit the islander coastal
communities concerned, and that should be something that they can set. That is a
long-term goal. Of more immediate concern, I wish to know whether the Minister will
use the power of direction given to the Chancellor of the Exchequer under the Act to
ease the immediate crisis in our aquaculture business by allowing the 30 per cent. cut
in rents that Scottish Quality Salmon and other industry bodies are seeking.

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Ruth Kelly) : I congratulate the hon.
Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Carmichael) on securing this debate and
enabling the House to throw some light on the activities of the Crown Estate. As the
hon. Gentleman rightly said, the role of the Crown Estate is defined by statute under
the Crown Estate Act 1961, which places a duty on the Crown Estate Commissioners
to

"maintain and enhance its value and the return obtained from it, but with due
regard to the requirement of good management."

That is an important consideration. The Crown Estate must comply with the
requirements placed upon it by Parliament under the Crown Estate Act. That includes
ensuring an acceptable return on its assets, while excluding any monopoly value. The
revenue obtained from the estate cannot be used to provide hidden subsidies for either
public or private purposes; nor can it be hypothecated or ring-fenced.

The management of the Crown Estate is a reserve function under the Scotland Act
1998. In discharging its management functions, the Crown Estate consults the Scottish
Executive, Scottish Natural Heritage, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency,
local authorities and other public bodies in Scotland. The land of the Crown Estate is
held in right of the Crown, but all the revenue that it raises—£163 million in 2001–02—
is passed directly to the Exchequer for the benefit of all United Kingdom taxpayers.

The portfolio is worth more than £4 billion; the Marine Estate provided net revenue of
£30.6 million in 2001–02, of which £4.8 million came from Scottish marine holdings.
About 40 per cent. of that came from fish farming. In this financial year, the figure will
be significantly less as a result of the salmon farm rent review implemented with effect
from 1 January 2003.

6
 The Crown Estate must operate within the framework of law and regulation established
by Parliament including, but not restricted to, the Crown Estate Act. It must not favour
particular projects, but it must approach business in an open and even-handed
manner. The Crown Estate has committed itself to the principles of commercialism,
integrity and sound stewardship.

…The Crown Estate is landlord to more than 550 fish farms located on its foreshore
and sea bed around the Scottish coast. It issues leases for fish farms, following a
recommendation from the local authority subsequent to consultation with the Scottish
Executive, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Scottish Natural Heritage and
the general public. Royal Assent to the Water Environment and Water Services
(Scotland) Bill, which has been debated on Third Reading in the Scottish Parliament,
will probably mean that planning responsibility for fish farms will pass from the Crown
Estate to local authorities, a fact that is welcomed by the Crown Estate.

The hon. Gentleman raised specifically the charge that approximates on an annual
rental basis to about 0.8 per cent. of turnover. The rent for salmon farms was agreed in
conjunction with the fish farming industry. It is based on production and it is linked to
the annual average selling price rising or falling in step with the market. The formula is
subject to five-yearly reviews, conducted in direct consultation with the industry. That
seems an appropriate method of determining the charge that is levied.

Since 1987, the Crown Estate has invested about £2 million in research projects
related to fish farming, which will help to improve environmental performance and to
ensure the long-term future and sustainability of that important industry.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned the support given in the Shetlands to the North Atlantic
Fisheries college, although I have heard that he is not particularly appreciative of that
support. If one adds that support to the provision of a gas chromatograph, two student
bursaries and the establishment and running costs of a Benthic survey unit, there is
significant support for the industry. Elsewhere in the hon. Gentleman's constituency,
another current meter has been provided to fish farmers on Orkney. Funding for further
projects in the northern isles has been committed for the coming financial year.

The hon. Gentleman asks why the Crown Estate should have the power to determine
how resources are used to support the industry and what sort of research should be
supported. I point out to him that the Crown Estate is advised by a fish farming
resources committee, on which environmental interests and business interests are
represented. The best possible advice is therefore taken on how to use the money to
best effect.

The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the power of direction over the Crown Estate, but
I remind him that the power of direction can be used only with regard to the
commissioner's duties. It is not such a wide-ranging power as he seems to envisage. 10

A PQ in July 2006 noted what the Crown Estate was contributing to the industry:

John Healey: The Crown Estate has a three year programme of measures to support
the Scottish salmon industry with investment of £600,000. The Crown Estate is also
supporting the aquaculture industry through its Marine Stewardship Programme with
£100,000 annual contributions to the Scottish Aquaculture Research Forum over the

10
HC Deb 11 February 2003 cc 245-250WH

7
 same period. In addition, the Crown Estate supports some individual research
projects. 11

3 Competition from low cost imports and foreign ownership

Protection against the dumping of Norwegian salmon at prices below cost has been a
serious problem. EU controls were introduced and then removed in December 2004, after
an objection from Denmark. Anti-dumping duties were introduced on 27 April 2005 but
replaced on 4 July 2005 by a minimum import price set at €2.81 per kilo (whole fish
equivalent). 12 The Scottish Executive reported:

The Commission has decided to apply a minimum import price (MIP) and a tariff rate
quota (TRQ). The MIP will be phased in incrementally from current market prices to
the minimum sustainable level for both EU and Norwegian salmon growers. The MIP
will eventually reflect the Norwegian cost of production. The TRQ element of the
definitive safeguard measure is designed to allow for market growth of 10 per cent
annually… The definitive safeguard measures…should remain in force until August 13,
2008. 13

In January 2006, the European Commission published a draft regulation imposing a definitive
anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of
farmed salmon originating in Norway (Cons Doc 5087/06). 14

An article in October 2003 deplored the state of the Scottish fish farming industry:

We have allowed most of our own industry to slip into foreign hands and now control
less than 20%. Fish-farming has become part of Scotland’s “screwdriver economy”
with decisions over its future made in Bergen or Oslo rather than Edinburgh or even
Brussels. Despite the fact that aquaculture is one of the fastest growing industries in
the world, we have established no international lead in its science or technology. We
have no central institute of aquaculture, we import most of the feed and all of the
equipment for the industry - we cannot even manufacture our own salmon cages.

The article noted that Norway saw aquaculture as the successor to oil in its economy and
was using oil funds to buy up fish-farming interests across the globe, so that it now controls
77% of the world’s salmon farming. 15

A PQ in May 2008 showed that concerns were continuing:

Mr. Angus MacNeil (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP): Salmon farming is a big employer
in my constituency. There are concerns that the minimum import price for salmon
might be under threat. What efforts are being made to maintain the minimum import
price for salmon, particularly at a European level?

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and

Regulatory Reform (Mr. Gareth Thomas): The hon. Gentleman may know that anti-
dumping duties have been imposed. A review of anti-dumping duties is currently being
undertaken. We have made clear our concerns about continued dumping affecting the

11
HC Deb 20 July 2006 c621W
12
HC Deb 14 October 2005 c633W
13
Scottish Executive Press Notice, Salmon safeguard measures, 4 February 2005
14

http://10.160.3.10:81/PIMS/Static%20Files/Extended%20File%20Scan%20Files/EUROPEAN_SCRUTINY/Eu
ropean%20Document/ES%2027277.pdf
15
“Ministers must take firm stand against Norse fish-farm invaders”, Scotsman, 19 October 2003

8
 Scottish salmon industry. We have had discussions directly with the Scottish Executive
and, crucially, made joint representations to the European Commission, in particular to
the Trade Commissioner. 16

4 Tuna farming
Japan eats large quantities of bluefish tuna, thus putting the species at risk. Tuna farming
was originally seen as a solution. Tuna are captured in the wild and towed to a bay where
they are fed so they grow to a large size before being killed and eaten. That has been a
tremendous success for the tuna farmers who have brought prosperity to some rundown
communities. However, the farming appears to be threatening stocks of tuna and other fish:

The WWF says Japanese imports have risen by 12% over the past three years. The
spike in tuna farming threatens to destroy the already overfished wild tuna in the
Mediterranean, the WWF warned, noting that the practice is not subject to stringent
controls…Furthermore, with the tuna being a carnivorous fish, its voracious appetite
meant that other fish stocks had to be heavily fished to feed it. While it takes three
tons of wild fish to produce one ton of salmon and five tons of wild fish to produce one
ton of cod, it takes a massive 20 tons of wild fish to fatten up just one ton of tuna for
market…Yet the European Union continues to fund the expansion of tuna farms in the
Mediterranean. 17

An article in Nature in September 2004 listed several concerns about tuna farms off the USA
west coast. First, extensive harvesting of sardines for feeding the tuna might deplete stocks.
Second, tuna farm staff may shoot sea lions trying to eat tuna on the edge of the pen. Third,
there are fears of disease spread. In Australia, a herpes virus spread rapidly near tuna
farms, causing extensive destruction of fish and sea birds. It may have originated from
frozen pilchards imported to feed the tuna, although there is no proof. Other viruses might
spread in the same way. 18

5 Cod Farming
Cod farming is a recent development, with obvious attractions in view of the severe depletion
of the stock of wild cod around the UK. However, there are fears that cod farming might lead
to further industrial fishing, with consequential damage to the aquatic food chain. The
Government position was stated in reply to a PQ in November 2003:

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs (1) if she will make a statement about the future of cod farming;
(2) how many cod farms have been proposed to be built in the UK;
(3) if she will make a statement on the health aspects of eating farmed cod;
(4) if she will make a statement about the effects of cod farming on natural fish stocks.

Mr. Bradshaw: The Government's policy on aquaculture is to encourage the

development of viable, competitive and sustainable enterprises (including cod farming)
provided that this can be done within a framework which safeguards public health and
also protects the health and welfare of farmed and wild stocks.

At present there are six farming enterprises on growing cod on seven sites in Scotland.
In general, the English coastline is unsuitable for marine cages, and the alternative
(enclosed water re-circulation systems) is capital-intensive.

16
HC Deb 22 May 2008 c394
17
“Caught in a trap: Tuna face a new threat”, The Independent, 9 June 2004
18
Rex Dalton, “Fishing for trouble”, Nature, 30 September 2004 pp502-4

9
 While cod-farming on this relatively modest scale may well meet a niche market
demand, and there is potentially a vast market for farmed cod, it is not clear that
significant expansion in cod is economically viable, given the cost of inputs and the
price obtainable for final output.

The Food Standards Agency advise that there are health benefits to consumers in
eating at least two portions of fish a week as part of a healthy diet, at least one of
which should be oily. We have no reason to believe that farmed cod should not
contribute to a healthy diet as does cod from the wild. 19

A PQ in December 2003 dealt with feed and the effect on other fishing:

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
how much food, by weight, is required to produce one kilo of marketable farmed cod;
how much raw marine resource, by weight, is required to make one kilo of food; where
that food is sourced from; and what the content of that food is.

Mr. Bradshaw: This Department does not collect data on feed usage and composition
from the limited number of enterprises engaged in cod farming in the UK. However, we
estimate that between 1.2kg and 1.4kg of feed is needed to produce 1kg of farmed cod
of a marketable size.

We do not have information on the weight of the raw marine resource used in feed for
farmed cod. The quantity involved will vary depending on the proportion of fishmeal
used in the different grades of dry fish feed produced for cod at various stages of
growth. Cod, like other farmed piscivorous species are unlikely to consume more
natural marine resources through feed than their wild counterparts would consume in
the natural environment.

The fish used for aquaculture feed are generally small, bony pelagic species sourced
from non food grade fisheries, usually off the coasts of Peru and Chile, and in the
North Atlantic, North Sea and Baltic Sea. We understand that feed for farmed cod
includes protein and oils derived from marine sources, carbohydrate, starch, minerals
and vitamins. 20

6 The position in 2008

6.1 Increased salmon consumption
An article in the Times noted some better news for salmon farmers:

Consumption by British households of Scottish farmed salmon has risen by 22 per cent
over the past two years. (…) Consumers seem increasingly won over by the health
arguments in favour of oily fish. Scottish aquaculture, valued in excess of Pounds
400million in 2006, is now second only to the beef sector (Pounds 467million) and
ahead of the sheep, pig and commercial fishing sectors.

In 1980 only 9 per cent of fish consumed came from aquaculture. Now it is 43 per cent.
A report in 2006 by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation said that aquaculture is

19
HC Deb 19 November 2003 cc 884-5W
20
HC Deb 16 December 2003 cc 822-3W

10
 the only way to meet the surging demand for seafood, and fish in general has been the
fastest growing protein in the UK over the past eight years, up 64 per cent in spend.

The research showed people aged 35 to 64 were leading the move to salmon at the
evening meal. The annual survey of Scottish salmon production, published by the
Scottish government agency Fisheries Research Services this week, anticipates
modest growth, from 129,930 tonnes in 2007 to approximately 136,000 tonnes in
2008. 21

6.2 Scottish Government framework for fish farming

In August 2008, the Scottish Government published a policy document on fish farming:

A fresh start for Scotland's aquaculture industry has today been mapped out by
Minister for Environment Michael Russell. The Strategic Framework for Scottish
Aquaculture outlines five key areas for development to ensure a sustainable and
profitable industry. It aims to achieve:

• Healthier farmed fish

• An improved system for new developments

• Less escapes from farms

• Better marketing of farmed fish

• Finance for new developments

Flexible ways of working and a new direction for the Ministerial Working Group on
Aquaculture are also being proposed. The Framework has been developed in
partnership with the sector and will now be subject to a full public consultation which
will run until November 2008. 22

21
“Farmed salmon leaps in popularity as health message hooks consumers”, Times, 10 November 2008
22
Scottish Government Press Release, Fresh start for fish farming, 13/08/2008

11