1. Sustainable Aquaculture Project
Dublin Castle 10 – 11 April 2014
Douglas Sinclair – SEPA
Aquaculture Regulation and Scotland’s Aquaculture Database

2. Quick outline What we do in Scotland – licensing;
Protection at different levels – waterbody scale, near field;
Footprints and mixing zones;
Monitoring, Inspection and Data Returns;
Scotland’s Aquaculture Database;
Shellfish Waters Protected Areas.

3. What we do - first principles
Scotland applies regulatory control with a variety of aims but, two main purposes
Overarching protection of the waterbody – the far field
Protection of the environment in the vicinity of the farm – the near field
Licensing regime enshrines protection in the far field to ensure environmental quality at “waterbody” scale and,
Protection at near field to ensure impacts not too intense in the vicinity of the farm.
Within the policy approach used by SEPA, there is an acceptance that there will be environmental impacts, sometimes moderate to severe,
But these intense impacts will be limited in area or temporal extent
Overarching controls ensure that the status of the waterbody is protected.

4. Illustration of near field and far field protection
Zone A Near field
Zone B Far field
“Waterbody scale”

5. Far field protection
An assessment of cumulative effects at a waterbody scale is embedded in the licensing process for fish farms;
Set out in the “Locational Guidelines” a system operated by Marine Scotland;

6. Far field protection

7. Far field protection
An assessment of cumulative effects at a waterbody scale, a measure of carrying capacity, is embedded in the licensing process for fish farms;
Set out in the “Locational Guidelines” operated by Marine Scotland (MS);
Integrates an assessment of water column effects and benthic impacts from all farms within a waterbody into an index and a Categorisation – 1, 2 or 3, with increasing prospects for development;
SEPA seeks consultation response guidance from MS and will not authorise farms where they would lead to a drop in Category from 2 to 1;
Locational Guidelines standards not a precise fit with WFD standards but close enough to contribute to SEPA’s own assessment as required;
For example, there are a small number of waterbodies where the benthic index indicates that approaching 5% of the waterbody area
might be impacted by fish farms…..

8. Near field protection
Different drivers here, the main aim being to maintain a functioning community of seabed animals to process waste and limit the area impacted by medicine residues;
Basic principles involve the use of local tidal and bathymetric data to drive computer models to predict impacts;
Our aim is then to set relevant, site-specific conditions to ensure environmental protection;
The approach embeds the principle of a mixing zone – Allowable Zone of Effects (AZE) or the footprint around the farm;
Within the AZE some exceedance of environmental standards is accepted, but;
At the AZE boundary, standards must be met.

9. Near field protection - monitoring
Monitoring undertaken on pre-determined transect
Grey zone represents AZE or farm footprint
Stations close to farm plus reference

10. Near field protection - monitoring

11. Near field protection
The concept of the AZE or farm footprint analogous to a mixing zone is a fundamental premise;
Allowing impacts within the AZE, requiring standards to be met at the boundary;
Industry returns, inspections, monitoring (self- and some SEPA audit) and records audits undertaken to assess compliance;
Compliance reported and published with options for action as required.

12. Public reporting – Scotland’s Aquaculture
The various Agencies involved in aquaculture regulation in Scotland decided in 2009 to develop a shared data resource
Builds on the spirit of open-ness already demonstrated by SEPA – CAS, SPRI etc
The aim is to give public access to most of the information on the aquaculture sector held by public bodies
It seeks to provide transparency, ease of access and accountability for members of the public and
A strategic overview of the industry, facilitating planning, development and growth for the sector.
The resource went live on 1st October 2013.
aquaculture.scotland.gov.uk; What’s in there?

13. Public reporting – Scotland’s Aquaculture

14. What is delivered?
A searchable interactive map showing fish farms alongside geographic features with relevant data layers such as licences, leases, shellfish harvesting areas and site performance.
The ability to navigate from a ‘dot on a map’ to ‘More Info’ by clicking through to detailed records about an aquaculture site held in the Aquaculture Database.
It is also possible to search directly through datasets without the use of the map.
This is not rocket science but its very hard to do well
This is real, this now, and its up to all of us to show we are much better than the rest, perhaps best in class?

15. This is not rocket science but its very hard to do well
This is real, this now, and its up to all of us to show we are much better than the rest, perhaps best in class?

16. This is not rocket science but its very hard to do well
This is real, this now, and its up to all of us to show we are much better than the rest, perhaps best in class?

19. Public reporting – Scotland’s Aquaculture
Has the database been successful?
It has achieved its aims of giving free and easy access to information on the aquaculture sector;
It received a glowing appraisal from Scotland’s “Information Commissioner”;
It has seen a good deal of use, for example, for March 2014 alone it achieved:
c1200 visitors from around 35 countries viewing an average of 7 pages per visit;
For a public body website, not bad?

20. Shellfish Waters Protection
The shellfish sector often seems to have a much lower profile, certainly in Scotland but it is nonetheless important and in terms of WFD is certainly topical;
The fall of the SWD (2006/113/EC) in October last year necessitated the development of an alternative approach to protection;
In Scotland it was determined that these would be afforded WFD “Protected Area” status by means of primary legislation;
And the opportunity would be taken to align the standards used in protection of the waters and the spatial boundaries of protected areas;
With those designed to ensure consumer protection in the EC Hygiene Regulations.

21. Shellfish Waters Protection
Thus, the approach was simplified, based on faecal bacteria;
Same standards as Hygiene Regulations:
Good <230 E.coli/100g; Sufficient ; Not Sufficient >4600
Dropping chemical determinands – salinity?? colour?? etc;
Other pollutants will still be picked up in routine WFD monitoring programmes to assess ecological status of coastal waters;

22. Shellfish Waters Protection
Scheme allows more discretion to undertake a cost benefit analysis and to set differential quality targets across a SWPA if required;
It also integrates protection into RBMP allowing a prioritisation for investment amongst competing interests as well as public engagement – AAG;
And, encourages the benefits of closer working between Agencies - FSA(S) and SEPA.

23. Questions????