Chamber and committees

On that basis, that would be right. When salmon farmers put out juvenile fish they treat them before they do so because they are particularly susceptible to disease when they move out, including being susceptible to sea lice, because their skin is particularly thin and liable to be affected by them. Is that not right?

Okay. Salmon Scotland says on its website that it must control sea lice for the simple reason that, if it does not, other infections will come in and, because the sea lice have disturbed the balance of the salmon’s skin, another infection will kill them.

Anecdotally, one of the reasons why the fish farm at Loch Ewe has moved is that some sea trout that were returning were smolt sea trout that had gone out to sea and were coming back before they had spent any time at sea because they had absolutely no fins left on them. The fins were destroyed. They were effectively dying in the river trying to get back into fresh water because, for some reason, they knew that fresh water would get rid of the lice. Do you accept that there could be a serious problem?

I am sorry, convener—can I follow up on that particular matter?

If you are going to give us data in six months’ time, you might have some thoughts on how things are progressing at the moment. Is AMR of concern?

I would love to see it, if you could send it to me.

As I did during the REC Committee’s inquiry in the previous session, I will make a full declaration of my interests. I am a partner in a salmon fishery on the east coast of Scotland that employs three full-time employees and provides numerous other jobs for people in the area through the tenants we bring in. The fishery generates income, and all those details can be found in my entry in the register of members’ interests.

The reason why I do not think that my taking part in today’s meeting represents a conflict of interest is that there are, I believe, no fish farms that affect salmon fisheries on the east coast. All the fish farms are located on the west coast, and the salmon from the River Spey, which is where I have my interest, migrate up the east coast and then head north, so they cannot be affected by those fish farms. However, there should be no doubt that I have an interest in wild fisheries management, which I have been undertaking for about 45 years.

I think that one of my questions could best be dealt with by letter. I am slightly concerned that I do not understand the difference between the RSPCA and the RSPCA Assured scheme. The articles of association say that the RSPCA can appoint the chair of the assurance scheme and members of the trustees, and that they share the uses. It might be helpful for that to be clarified, because I am confused by that. I do not want to argue about it.

The RECC report made 65 recommendations, 64 of which I stand by and one of them I do not stand by. Recommendation 3 stated:

“The Committee notes calls for a moratorium on new salmon farm development and expansion of existing sites, it considers that there is insufficient evidence to support this.”

Was the committee wrong or right? A yes or a no will do. I will ask each member of the panel.

But fish can build up AMR.

Sorry, but can the diseases that affect fish pick up AMR, or are you saying—