FUTURE & CONCLUSIONS
CONTAINMENT SPECIAL
Final thoughts CONTAINMENT: LESSONS TO BE LEARNT By Malcolm Dickson
he main conclusion to be drawn from this special edition of Fish Farmer is that containment is being taken very seriously by all stakeholders in the Scottish aquaculture sector. The industry’s critics will no doubt point to past records, but the high level of invest- ment in new equipment, the training pro- grammes and improved reporting procedures indicate that these can be safely consigned to history.
T
Salmon, trout and halibut farmers are now clearly focused on achieving zero escapes. Of course there are challenges, but during the course of compiling this document no-one said that these could not be overcome. With the correct equipment and attentive management, fish escapes can undoubtedly be eliminated.
Advantages
Of course the industry stands to benefit in many ways from its focus on preventing fish escapes. Not only does it demonstrate a sense of responsibility and maturity, it also brings more certainty to financial forecasting; if a fish farm stocks 2 million smolts and counts its mortalities, it can predict exactly how many fish will be harvested. A zero tolerance approach to escapes will also enhance the awareness of staff and management to other critical issues on farms.
ABOVE: CRANES MUST BE USED WITH CARE
OPPOSITE PAGE: WELLBOATS OFFER ADVANTAGES WHEN HANDLED CORRECTLY
96
Looking to the future, one of the recommen- dations of the SARF containment report was that there should be technical standards for Scottish fish farms, in the same way that Nor- way has developed its NYTEK standards. The first step in this process is already underway, with a SARF study being carried out by Thistle Environmental Partnership on a ‘Scottish Tech- nical Standard for Marine and Freshwater Fish Farm Installations’. The initial study, which will be completed later this year, will make recommendations for appropriate standards, but the development of those standards will be a longer term proc- ess. The SARF call for proposals indicates that adherence to a Scottish standard is likely to be a requirement for all fish farm businesses
1. The percentage of fish lost during a production cycle.
2. The maximum number of escape episodes (involving 200 or more fish).
3. Evidence of compliance with national regulations and technical standards.
4. Evidence of escape prevention planning.
The goals for the last three points are ‘zero’, ‘yes’ and ‘yes’, respectively and these goals are both achievable and measurable. How- ever, the draft standard for the first point is ‘no more than 0.1% more than the documented accuracy of the counting machines or count- ing method used’, which may or may not be workable. There is an obvious need for more accurate fish counters in the future. This only emphasises the fact that, although great progress on containment has been made in the Scottish aquaculture industry over the last few years, this is only the start of a process that will continue and become standard prac- tice in the future. The importance and scale of the underlying issues have been clearly recognised, now workable solutions need to be devised and implemented. Technology has also improved greatly in
www.fishfarmer-magazine.com
operating in Scotland and that it will require future legislation followed by an agreed lead- in time for all operators to comply. As described earlier in this publication, the Scottish fish farming industry has organised a number of training sessions and workshops that focus on containment. These activities must be extended to cover everyone involved in handling live fish – from new entrants to the most experienced site managers.
Another key aspect will relate to the way that standards are set and verified by certifica- tion bodies. The WWF Salmon Dialogue draft standards highlight the inaccuracy of count- ing machines used on fish farms. The draft standard, which will probably translate into an Aquaculture Stewardship Council standard, has four indicators on escapes:
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