Chamber and committees

The salmon farming industry would suggest that there is a disproportionate focus on aquaculture and, specifically, on salmon farming in relation to the decline of wild salmon. You have made it clear today that quite a number of different factors are affecting the population of Atlantic salmon. Are we in this situation because salmon farming is an easy target? Is it the case that, actually, if we want to address the issues with wild salmon, we need to be realistic, look at all the challenges, not focus too much—as some would suggest that this committee is doing—on aquaculture specifically and consider the other issues that the species is facing?

We heard from some witnesses who were almost back-patting and saying that there was no overlap. That does not tie up with an holistic approach or joined-up thinking; it sounds very much like silo working. Is that one of the issues? If SEPA, NatureScot and whoever are not working together and have no overlap, does that mean that they are not taking an holistic approach?

You touched on the fact that there is a discrepancy between what you understand to be the number of escapes in fresh water and those that are reported. However, there is a legal obligation to report escapes. What is your understanding of what happens when the regulatory body investigates a river board or trust when farmed salmon are found in fresh water but no report of an escape has been made by local fish farms, despite their being aware that it took place?

Thank you. John, as this is a follow-up inquiry, my first question is pretty obvious. What is your broad assessment of progress on implementing the recommendations of the reports of the Rural Environment and Connectivity Committee and the salmon interactions working group?

Before we move on, it is clear that this topic can be very polarising. There needs to be a balance between commercial interests and the huge importance of the wild salmon population. In your report, you say that

“developing a professional and collaborative working relationship”

in that is really important. That does not appear to be working at the moment. Have you any ideas about how the arguments could become less polarised in the future?

Last week, we heard that one remit and two tasks of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency were to facilitate that better engagement. From what we can see, that has completely failed. Is SEPA on the wrong route to establishing better collaboration? In two or three years, will we find that we are still discussing the polarised arguments and that that professional and collaborative working relationship has not been achieved?

I understand that the aquaculture industry is looking at some sort of genetic modification that would mean that farmed salmon would be sterile and would be unable to breed with wild salmon. Are you aware of that? Is enough progress being made on that front or could more be done?

Beatrice Wishart has some questions on our final theme, which is consenting and planning.

I call Emma Roddick.

Thank you, John. It has been a hugely helpful evidence session. I wish you a safe flight back to Shetland. Thank you for taking the journey down to join us in person—it is very much appreciated. I suspend the meeting for 10 minutes to allow for a change of witnesses.