CONTAINMENT SPECIAL
SARF 054
Taking the lid off containment breaches: the rationale behind commissioning the SARF report
By Dr Mark James
n March 2009, the Scottish Aquac- ulture Research Forum (SARF), commissioned an investiga- tion and assessment of escape incidents in Scottish finfish farming – as an attempt to shed more light on the un- derlying causes of escapes. Although the number of escape incidents and their severity varied from year to year and had been recorded in Government statistics, it was clear that we needed to gain a much more detailed understanding of the factors that resulted in containment breaches. The causes of escapes are, more often than not, multifactorial and may be site or equipment specific. Available evidence was, at that time, insufficient to tease out the key factors that we would have to resolve if we were to provide some objective solutions and significantly and consistently minimise escapes.
I
The main objectives of the project (SARF054), which was undertaken by Thistle Environmental Partnership, were:
• To identify and assess the contributory causes of a representative number of previ- ously reported escape incidents in Scotland. • To identify the pros and cons of finfish protocols (industry and generic codes of practice, management systems, standards and regulation) in use in Scotland and worldwide in regard to their effectiveness in generating secure containment and preventing escapes. • To identify the pros and cons of the operational practices of Scottish and se- lected Norwegian finfish farmers from the perspective of their effectiveness in regard to generating secure containment and preventing escapes. • To assess whether there are existing or emerging aquaculture technologies and practices from Scotland and elsewhere in the world which, if adopted in Scotland, may help reduce escapes.
www.fishfarmer-magazine.com
The scope of the project was focused on Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout, since these are the key farmed species in Scotland. The project included both freshwater and sea wa- ter, although there was a greater emphasis on the latter to reflect the greater number of breaches of containment from the marine environment. The approach taken by Thistle was to under- take a review of existing data and then engage in detailed consultations with the industry through site visits in Scot- land and Norway. The results were compiled into a final report consisting of two volumes which are available on the SARF website -
www.sarf.org.uk/Project%20Final%20Report s/SARF054%20-%20Volume1.pdf
www.sarf.org.uk/Project%20Final%20Report s/SARF054%20-%20Volume2.pdf
Results
The results of this project have been semi- nal in informing the development of industry guidance on containment and have helped to inform Government policy in this area. The data and subsequent recommendations led to a follow-on project (SARF073) which will provide the platform for a Scottish technical standard for marine and freshwater fish farm installations. Due to end in August 2011, this project, which is also conducted by Thistle Environmental, will deliver a basis for estab- lishing regulation to ensure that we are able to further minimise breaches of containment by being in a position to specify the minimum technical standards required for any given installation. The project is funded by SARF and Marine Scotland and overseen by a steering group drawn from the Improved Contain- ment Working Group, led by Steve Bracken of Marine Harvest. A series of workshops are planned in Shetland, Inverness and Oban to bring together key stakeholders to ensure that the proposed standards are fit for purpose in Scotland.
Assessment Of Protocols And Development Of Best Practice Contingency Guidance To Improve Stock Containment At Cage And Land-Based Sites Volume 1: Report
SARF054
A REPORT COMMISSIONED BY SARF AND PREPARED BY
Thistle Environmental Partnership July 2010
THE RESULTS HAVE BEEN SEMINAL IN INFORMING INDUSTRY GUIDANCE
17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100