Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries and Oceans
Issue 12 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Thursday, June 12, 2014
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met this day at 8:30 a.m. to study the regulation of aquaculture, current challenges and future prospects for the industry in Canada.
Senator Fabian Manning (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: I'd like to call the meeting to order and welcome you to the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans as we continue our study into aquaculture's future challenges and opportunities within Canada. We have special guests from across the pond this morning. I want to welcome you. I want to ask the senators to introduce themselves first.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Good morning. I'm Senator Lovelace Nicholas from New Brunswick.
Senator Poirier: Good morning, Senator Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick.
Senator Hubley: Good morning, Senator Elizabeth Hubley from Prince Edward Island.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Carolyn Stewart Olsen, senator from New Brunswick.
Senator McInnis: Tom McInnis, senator from Nova Scotia, or New Scotland.
Senator Wells: David Wells from Newfoundland and Labrador.
The Chair: My name is Fabian Manning. I'm chair of the committee and I'm also from Newfoundland and Labrador.
I would ask you to introduce yourselves. I understand you have some opening remarks that you would like to make, and then we'll go to questions from our senators. The floor is yours.
Willie Cowan, Head of Performance and Aquaculture, Marine Scotland: Good morning. My name is Willie Cowan and I head up the division in Marine Scotland that looks after, amongst other things, aquaculture and recreational fisheries. I am the government's principal adviser on both aquaculture and recreational fisheries, including wild salmonids. It's my job to ensure that both of these sectors thrive together.
Paul Haddon, Aquaculture Policy Manager, Marine Scotland: I'm Paul Haddon. I work in Willies' team. I head up one of his teams specializing in aquaculture and on Scotland's strategy for growing aquaculture sustainably.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I understand you have some opening statements you would like to make.
Mr. Cowan: Thank you to the standing committee for the invitation to speak today. I'll refer to many documents in the short opening statement, and we've sent, through web links, all of them to you, so they're available.
As an introduction, overall, the Scottish government aims to create a more successful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish through increasing sustainable economic growth, while protecting biodiversity. That's the overarching aim of the government.
Our mission in Marine Scotland is to manage Scotland's seas for prosperity and environmental sustainability. This contributes to the government's overall purpose of sustainable economic growth and the achievement of a shared vision of clean, healthy, safe, productive, biologically diverse marine and coastal environments, which are managed to meet the long-term needs of people and nature.
Our forthcoming National Marine Plan is a major component of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, and that will set out a national strategy ensuring sustainable economic growth of marine industries while taking into account environmental protection, and setting out policies with economic, social and marine ecosystem objectives.
Aquaculture is an increasingly important industry for Scotland, helping to sustain economic growth in rural, coastal and island communities of the north and west. It provides long-term, quality, well-paid employment, and has fantastic opportunities for future growth to deliver broader community benefits. It also contributes towards local and international food security challenges.
Our aquaculture industry involves the farming or culturing of fish, molluscs, crustaceans and some seaweed. The industry is dominated by Atlantic salmon farming, which is our most valuable food export, but we also farm significant quantities of rainbow trout and blue mussels. The Scottish government is fully supportive of the sustainable growth of aquaculture with due regard for the wider marine environment and, crucially, alongside a thriving recreational fisheries sector.
The Scottish government is investing, through its higher education funds, £11 million into the Scottish Aquaculture Innovation Centre over the next five years, and that will be match funded by industry. It will be based at Stirling University and will sit alongside the world renowned agriculture institute at that institution. It is designed to support the Scottish government's economic strategy by stimulating sustainable structural changes through linking academia and industry, and help develop and refocus relevant aspects of Scotland's research capability towards innovative problem-solving research.
The Scottish government supports Scotland's aquaculture industry to achieve its sustainable growth targets, again with due regard to the marine environment, by 2020, and this will be reflected in the National Marine Plan that will be published shortly. If these targets are met — they are to increase production to 210,000 tonnes of marine finfish and 13,000 tonnes of shellfish — this could mean a turnover value of over £2 billion to the Scottish economy and would support 10,000 jobs. You can see it's crucial to the economy as a whole, but particularly to fragile rural areas.
In terms of value to the economy, a recently published independent report highlighted that Scotland's aquaculture industry currently contributes up to £1.4 billion to the Scottish economy and supports around 8,000 jobs. The economic benefits from the industry are wide-ranging and are felt across the whole of Scotland through the supply chain.
The report also considers the holistic impact of aquaculture production on the fabric and well-being of four highland and island communities, finding a positive impact on social, financial, human and physical capital. It also highlights the importance of the sector relating to employment and income, which, in turn, helps strengthen community structures, such as schools, ferry services and youth employment.
The report highlights that significant improvements have been made relating to the environmental impact of the industry and that it compares favourably against other animal production industries.
To put it in a global and European context, aquaculture is the world's fasting-growing food-producing sector at around 6 to 8 per cent per annum over the past 10 years, accounting for over half of the world's fish supply for human consumption. Various UN reports put that rising to, I think, two thirds by around 2030. Aquaculture is growing and it needs to continue to grow to feed the rising population.
Scotland is the world's third largest farmed Atlantic salmon producer and the European Union's biggest, with 93 per cent of total production in the EU.
Under the auspices of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy, the European Union is committed to further growth of aquaculture, and within this context EU member states have been tasked with producing multi-annual national plans for the period 2014 to 2020. We have completed this for Scotland as part of the U.K. plan.
Moving now to how government relates to and encourages and facilitates growth, the Scottish government established a Ministerial Group for Sustainable Aquaculture in 2013 to support and facilitate planned sustainable growth. The group is chaired by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and includes representation from industry, wild fish interests, environmental NGOs, local planning authorities, local enterprise agencies, the Crown Estate and our regulatory bodies. The group is reported to by seven subgroups, which include Science & Research, Containment, Wellboats, Interactions between wild fish and farmed fish, Fish Health & Welfare, Shellfish, and Capacity. Regular updates from these working groups are published on the Scottish government's website.
Key outputs from the MGSA include a soon-to-be published national aquaculture research strategy defining medium to long-term research requirements — that's 5 to 20 years out — developing Scottish technical standards for fish farm equipment and associated staff training recommendations; developing standards for wellboats, including tracking, valve status and sea lice filtration; the establishment of interactions of work streams, with initial focus on improving dialogue at the local level between farmers and wild fish managers; standards for the use of cleaner fish, such as wrasse and lumpsuckers, which is a lovely name, but we can come back to that later; and for mortality reporting and disposal.
Finally, there's a group looking at barriers to capacity and sustainable growth. It is considering streamlining regulations and consenting in order to ensure that red tape is cut to the minimum level possible. But, clearly, aquaculture growth is fully dependent on being sustainable in the broadest sense.
Turning now to regulation, Scotland has a global reputation as a land synonymous with production of food and drink of the highest quality, raised to the highest standards of welfare and food hygiene, both on land and in our pristine Scottish waters. We also have a robust regulatory framework in place that is appropriate and strikes the right balance between growing the aquaculture sector and protecting the marine environment on which the aquaculture sector depends.
All fish farms in Scotland have to meet strict environmental guidelines, monitored by the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, with the aim of ensuring that the environmental impacts from the industry are assessed and managed safely. Before operators can make discharges of any kind, including sea lice medicines, they must obtain a water environment regulations certificate from SEPA.
Scotland's aquaculture stocks are internationally recognized as having a high health status. All fish farming businesses are authorized by Marine Scotland, and Marine Scotland's Fish Health Inspectorate carries out assessments for disease control, sea lice management and containment measures.
In addition to regulatory regimes, there is the industry's own accredited Code of Good Practice for Finfish Aquaculture, which aims to ensure adherence by the industry to standards set down within the code.
Turning now to transparency and reporting of the industry, Scotland's aquaculture website was launched in 2013 and makes aquaculture regulatory information accessible through an easy-to-use data search tool and interactive map. Reported escapes are published on this website, and Marine Scotland's Fish Health Inspectorate proactively publishes operational activity on the same website.
In summary, the Scottish government is committed to the sustainable growth of aquaculture and the development of wild fisheries. It is not an either/or situation; it is both together. That's not to suggest at all that this is trouble-free or easy; it is not. But we encourage a collaborative approach from all, as witnessed by the broad range of stakeholders represented on the Ministerial Group for Sustainable Aquaculture.
I think that's enough from me in terms of scene-setting. Paul and I are happy to discuss with you anything that you would like to have further information about.
The Chair: Thank you.
We have been joined by a couple of additional senators since we began our meeting. I'll ask them to introduce themselves before we take any questions.
Senator Raine: Good morning. I'm Senator Nancy Greene Raine from the West Coast, British Columbia.
Senator Beyak: Good morning, gentlemen. I'm Senator Lynn Beyak from Dryden, northwestern Ontario.
Senator Enverga: Senator Tobias Enverga from Ontario.
The Chair: Thank you, senators. We'll begin our questions with the deputy chair of our committee, Senator Hubley.
Senator Hubley: Welcome, and thank you very much for your presentation. It's exciting for us in Canada to be looking at aquaculture, and we have had the opportunity to visit both our West Coast and our East Coast. Our study continues, but we're at that stage.
You've referenced the Scottish government several times. One of the issues that we have heard is the regulatory system that affects the aquaculture industry here in Canada. Is there a department within the Scottish government that is responsible for aquaculture?
Mr. Cowan: Yes. The department or the group that I work for, Marine Scotland, is responsible for aquaculture and indeed for wild salmonid fisheries, too. That's part of my own job.
Senator Hubley: Is it somewhat separate from the other fisheries that are taking place in Scotland? Is it a separate department that looks after aquaculture?
Mr. Cowan: No, it's the same department. Marine Scotland, as an organization, is responsible for sea fisheries, aquaculture and wild salmonid fisheries, all in the same organization. I look after aquaculture and wild salmonid fisheries, and a colleague of mine looks after sea fishery interests. Within Marine Scotland, we have the policy-makers, the scientists and the compliance officers all in the same place.
Senator Hubley: I think that answers my question.
As you had mentioned in your presentation, you suggested that a robust regulatory framework is in place, and you're able to strike the appropriate balance between the growing aquaculture sector and I believe the environment. Has that been a challenge to Scotland?
Mr. Cowan: It is a continuing challenge because, as you have a similar situation in Canada, there are people who support the aquaculture industry and people who don't. Trying to balance the two competing interests is challenging and continues to be challenging. That is why we've taken the approach both of having a single senior official trying to balance out both of these interests on behalf of the minister and indeed taking a collaborative approach to involving the wild fish interests and the environmental NGOs in our Ministerial Group for Sustainable Aquaculture. We're aiming to bring everybody together to discuss the way forward and to discuss and resolve concerns. We will never make everybody happy all of the time, but we focus on a collaborative approach and ensuring that everybody at least has the opportunity to take part.
Senator Wells: Thank you very much, gentlemen, for your presentation. It's very interesting. I've been to the west coast of Scotland and visited some of your aquaculture sites and your research stations out there; it's fascinating to see.
I want to talk a little bit about the application process. As Senator Hubley mentioned, we've spent a bit of time on the regulatory aspect of aquaculture here in Canada, and we're interested to hear how it works in Scotland. With respect to the application process, is it coordinated through Marine Scotland, or are there other Scottish departments involved in that process?
Mr. Cowan: There are other departments and agencies involved in the process. Marine Scotland is responsible for the fish health aspect, so fish health and disease, and for monitoring compliance with regulation. SEPA, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, is responsible for monitoring and ensuring that discharges from fish farms are appropriate and for taking action if they're found not to be. Crucially, the decision-making process in terms of the siting of farms is made by our local authorities, similar to your municipal authorities. So it's a multi-layered approach.
That's one of the areas that we're trying to streamline through our Ministerial Group for Sustainable Aquaculture because the roles and responsibilities are clear-cut at a national and local level. Nevertheless, some people in the industry I think quite rightly feel that it takes too long to go through the whole process from finding a site, to having it licensed, to having it operating in the water.
Senator Wells: For a finfish site, if everything goes well, how long would that process take from site selection and application to having fish in the water?
Mr. Cowan: Probably somewhere between 18 months and two years. Depending on the complexity and the sensitivity of the site in question and the local reaction to it, it can sometimes take longer.
Senator Poirier: Thank you, gentlemen, for being here. I have a couple of questions.
During our study, right from the beginning industry has been voicing clearly to us their opinion on the importance of having a national aquaculture act. Do you have one? Have you received the same demand from industry? If yes, did it simplify the process and make it more profitable for the industry there?
Mr. Cowan: We do have a national statutory framework. The Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Act 2007 is the primary source of the framework. That was augmented by the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Act 2013. That provides a national framework from which the aquaculture industry operates. We continue to have discussions with the industry, as government and every type of industry have, about the level of regulation. In general terms, the industry recognizes the benefits of having a national approach as opposed to regulations possibly being put in place by different levels of local government.
Senator Poirier: The committee has also been told by industry that access to capital is difficult for new businesses wanting to begin aquaculture activities. How would you classify the access to financial capital in your area for people wanting to start?
Mr. Cowan: It is a particularly difficult issue because of the high capital cost of starting up afresh. For a newcomer to the market to start up a fish farm, they're probably looking at £5 million to £10 million being spent, with no return on that money for three or four years. It's very difficult for new starts to come in, especially salmon farming. That's probably why some our industry is dominated by multinationals who have that economy of scale and can bring investment to the industry and the country.
We are conscious of the difficulty of new starts not only in finfish aquaculture but also in shellfish aquaculture, which in Scotland is still quite artisanal. Finfish aquaculture is professionally run by major international companies on the whole. Shellfish aquaculture is still quite artisanal, and we're trying to move that up a level. One of the issues with moving it up a level is ensuring access to financing because of the lead time between the investment and any return on the investment. That is still an area of difficulty for us.
Senator Raine: Because we're not familiar with it, could you explain the role of the royal trust?
Mr. Cowan: The Crown Estate?
Senator Raine: Yes, the Crown Estate. Is that a source of financing?
Mr. Cowan: No. The Crown Estate essentially holds ownership of the seabed on behalf of the Crown. Before a fish farm can operate, it requires a seabed lease from the Crown Estate; and they have to pay rent on that lease. Thereafter, they have to get planning permission and the various other permissions for discharges from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency. The Crown Estate essentially manages the seabed and leases it to aquaculture interests.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Welcome here today.
You said that you had fantastic opportunities for future growth. You didn't mention any Aboriginal people in your country. Are they involved in aquaculture? If so, is it on land or in water?
Mr. Cowan: We don't really have the same First Nation populations as you have in Canada. The aquaculture industry is largely based in the Highlands and Islands, especially the Western Isles, Orkney and Shetland. There are opportunities for people there to work in the industry. They are a significant employer, but we don't have the First Nation situation that you have in Canada.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: You said you have a market in aquaculture. Where is your market? Do you market in other countries?
Mr. Cowan: Yes. We export around 60 per cent of aquaculture production in Scotland. Our exports are worth somewhere approaching £400 million a year. I believe we export to 66 countries worldwide, with the U.S.A. and France being significant customers. Increasingly, the Far East is opening up too.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Is it more feasible to export or is it better to keep it in your country?
Mr. Cowan: That's where the balance arises between the various demands and policies of government. Being a market-led industry, the industry will go where they get the best return on their investment. Increasingly, some of the Far East markets are going to pay significantly more for fresh fish than the U.K. market. That is one of the balances for government between keeping the best food for consumption within Scotland, with all the health benefits that brings, while looking out as an international exporter and competitor for the benefits that exporting to other countries can bring. As I say, we export the majority of our production and increasingly the Far East is becoming a major market.
Senator McInnis: Good morning. I don't think you mentioned it, but I read that your legislation requires fish farms to be located within specific areas and that they operate under farm management agreements; is that true?
Mr. Cowan: Yes.
Senator McInnis: I want to ask you about the management agreements, how they're monitored and their content. It sounded to me, when you were speaking, that if I were a prospective investor in this, I could predetermine myself and set up a farm and apply. In reading this, I took it that there were predetermined sites where farm management agreements would be put in place; is that correct?
Mr. Cowan: Both of those things are correct, but they mesh in different ways. Within Scotland, there are about 80 or so farm management areas just now.
The farm management agreements are relatively new. They came into force following the 2013 act, so we're in the process of implementing them now. Essentially, if you operate in a farm management area or you want to bring a new farm into an existing farm management area, you have to enter into a farm management agreement. That is an agreement between all the farmers in an area to operate in a way that synchronizes their operations so they stock at the same time, they treat at the same time and they harvest at the same time, to reduce the chances of cross infection from farms if they're operating on different cycles.
Senator McInnis: So it's not retroactive? It's all new applications?
Mr. Cowan: Any fish farm that is in operation will have to have a farm management agreement in place. It is monitored by our Fish Health Inspectorate. You have a range of responsibilities, including ensuring that sea lice are at an appropriate level. As part of the risk-based monitoring exercise that the Fish Heath Inspectorate carries out, they will look at farm management agreements as they go around the country and ensure that they are in place and that they're in place for all the farms within an area. In due course, once there is a pattern of cycles, we expect the farmers in any particular area to take account of the experience of the previous cycle when they're making up the farm management agreement for the next cycle. We have to have a farm management agreement or in some circumstances a farm management statement, but that has to be refreshed at least every two years. It's about an 18- to 21-month cycle in the sea for farmed salmon. The idea of the legislation is that at the end of every cycle, the farmers will look at what has happened in the previous cycle and will consider whether any changes are required to the farm management agreement for that area to make their operations more efficient or their environmental impact more limited.
Senator McInnis: How is it policed? How do you monitor that they are meeting the terms of the agreement?
Mr. Cowan: The Marine Scotland Fish Health Inspectorate will visit farms on a risk management basis. When they visit the farm, they have a range of issues that they will look at, one of them being the farm management agreement.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Thank you, gentlemen. This is very interesting. I just have a few questions on your regulations.
Does your agency handle everything? I'm speaking about environmental and fish. You say you do the fish health. Is it all centralized and streamlined into one agency that monitors all aspects of fish farming?
Mr. Cowan: No. Different organizations within the broader government framework have different responsibilities. Primarily, Marine Scotland and our Fish Health Inspectorate are interested in fish health and disease, including sea lice. Our environmental protection agency licences and then monitors discharges from fish farms and the effect on the marine environment from those discharges. There are different responsibilities depending where the statutory cut-off sits. For example, in relation to discharges, much of the water-related statutory framework has a European label as opposed to a Scottish or U.K. label. So we have European obligations that we have to meet, and the environmental protection agency is a designated agency for those obligations.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Do you find all of the agencies together to be an impediment in some ways, like a lot of bureaucracy? If it were centralized under one agency, would that make everything faster? I'm asking this because you sound a lot like Canada in how things are run. Developmentally, we are a bit behind but still moving in this direction. I'll give you an example. How long are your licences issued for regarding, say, a shellfish farm?
Mr. Cowan: The principal determinant of the length of a particular operation begins with the lease from the Crown Estate. The farmer will get a lease for 10, 15 or 20 years, and that's the principal determinant. Once they have planning permission, planning permission is for life. If they operate their farm effectively and within environmental limits and within the various regulatory obligations, there is no close time on it. They simply continue to operate.
Senator Stewart Olsen: The licences are issued by the municipality; is that correct?
Mr. Cowan: The planning permission is issued by the municipality. The discharge regulations come from our environmental agency.
To answer your question, we encourage a collaborative approach to regulation across government. We're trying to get to a position where one farm does not get a different regulator coming to visit them on sequential days. As to whether you could have a single organization responsible for everything, I think the industry might quite like to see that but, practically speaking, I'm not sure how easy that would be.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Are your licences issued in conjunction with the farm management agreement or inspections? Do they hinge on these farm management agreements?
Mr. Cowan: No, because you can have a licence and not actually use it. You have to get all your permissions in order to put fish in the water, but once you put fish in the water, you have to have a farm management agreement or statement.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Thank you very much.
Senator Beyak: Thank you very much, gentlemen. My roots are in Scotland, but I've never been there and I'm hoping to visit one day.
You mentioned that you had a new agency in 2013 that's chaired by the Minister of the Environment and has seven working groups reporting to it. In Canada, we face quite a challenge with the social aspect of aquaculture and selling it to the public, mostly on environmental concerns. Could you elaborate a little more on how you deal with that challenge and if it has been successful?
Mr. Cowan: Yes. If you look at aquaculture across the world and salmon aquaculture in Canada, Norway and Scotland in particular, particular sections of society are opposed to it for various reasons. That can be environmental, in terms of perceived or actual impact, but it also can be someone who has bought a house in a remote part of Scotland and does not want a fish farm outside their front door.
The approach that we are encouraging on a municipal level and an industry level is to emphasize from the beginning what the benefits are of having an aquaculture facility in your local area. We're not quite there yet, but what we want to develop is a system where there is a direct community benefit from the activity that is taking place in the local area. We want the local jobs, obviously, and the social cohesion that these jobs bring. But I think we and the industry recognize that if we're asking people in remote areas to essentially have an activity in their area, it's only fair that there should be some community benefit flowing back to the community from having that activity. So we continue to work across that piece, in terms of encouraging our point of view of aquaculture and the reasons behind our policy for sustainable growth. But we're also working with the local municipalities and the industry in terms of developing a community benefit charter, which essentially says in return for operating in this area, this is what we promise to bring to the area for you.
Senator Beyak: Thank you very much. That sounds like a good plan. We face the same challenges here.
Senator Raine: Just looking at the map of where aquaculture is located in Scotland, it's pretty much on the southern and western coasts. Is there a reason why there are no farms on the east coast, or very few?
Mr. Cowan: We've got a presumption against finfish farming on the east coast because that's where 80 per cent of our wild salmon stocks are. So it's a presumption against finfish farming to protect the majority of our migratory fish.
Senator Raine: Is Marine Scotland monitoring the health of the wild fish as well as the farmed fish where there are fish farms?
Mr. Cowan: The responsibility for managing wild fisheries rests with local salmon fishery boards, so they're responsible at a local level for managing their fishery and for engaging with the farmers on any potential interaction.
Marine Scotland, at a national level, has oversight of that. What we are doing, for example, is trying to close information and evidence gaps. There is evidence from different parts of the world — Canada, Ireland, Norway — about actual and potential impacts on wild fish from salmon farming. We don't have that evidence in particular to the Scottish context, so we're in the process of letting a major contract in partnership with the industry to look specifically and to what extent there are actual impacts between wild and farmed fish. That's a project that will run out probably over the next two years or so.
We are acutely conscious that there are claims of negative impacts on wild fish, which our science doesn't yet confirm or deny. We need to get closer to an actual answer within the Scottish context, and we're working on that.
Senator Raine: Would it be helpful to do a collaborative research project on issues like that with the East Coast and West Coast of Canada?
Mr. Cowan: I think our academics and scientists do work closely together, and having access to different research projects is helpful for everybody. But our main difference is simply the geography and geology of different countries, where the west coast of Scotland is very different from the west coast of Norway and, indeed, the conditions that occur in Ireland. While it's interesting to look across research, I'm not sure that joint research projects looking at that impact in a specific area of two countries necessarily adds anything to the mix.
Senator Raine: I understand.
Mr. Cowan: Our scientists do work collaboratively worldwide.
Senator Raine: I understand that of course on the West Coast of Canada we don't have native Atlantic salmon. We're farming a species that doesn't exist in nature on the West Coast, so it's a different situation.
Mr. Cowan: Indeed.
Senator Raine: I would think it could be very positive.
You say that you're very transparent and open with all the details of the industry on the website. Do you post in real-time any discovery of disease so it is known almost immediately by everybody who has an interest that some disease organism has been tested for and found there? We've had complaints that there is a lag time before the discovery of a problem and the release to the public in Canada.
Mr. Cowan: Our situation is that there are certain diseases and infections that are called "notifiable diseases." They exist in statutes, so if you discover one of these diseases through routine monitoring, there are things that you must do. There are other diseases that are less serious, and they're not then notifiable, so the same stringent obligations don't exist.
For example, ISA is a notifiable disease. It's a very serious disease for any salmon-producing country, so that's notifiable. Certain procedures would kick into place if that was discovered. Anemic gill disease, for example, is not a notifiable disease, so the individual farmers could choose to treat that on an individual basis.
What we most definitely encourage is the sharing of that information with the salmon producers' own organization, the Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation and, indeed, scientists. Although gill disease as an example is not notifiable, it can still have a huge impact on the industry as a whole if it spreads up the coast, so we do encourage absolute openness within the industry and the local fishery managers in terms of disease management.
Senator Wells: I have a supplementary to Senator Greene Raine's question regarding separation of the east and west coast, the wild fishery being reserved for the east coast and aquaculture not being reserved for the west coast but that's where it occurs. Just to be clear, are there definitive data or reports that suggest that or is the separation a precautionary move?
Mr. Cowan: It's a precautionary move.
Senator Wells: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Cowan: As I said earlier, we recognize that we have evidence and data gaps on the west coast as regards actual and potential impacts, and we are working to fill those gaps. In the meantime, it's a long-standing presumption against finfish aquaculture on the east coast. That's where 80 per cent of our wild stocks are.
Senator Wells: I have your website here. I'm looking at the map and obviously the west coast seems ideally suited to aquaculture sites with all the protected bays, coves and channels.
Mr. Cowan: Yes.
Senator Enverga: Thank you for the presentation. As you know, Canada is trying to develop a policy in regard to aquaculture and we've been talking to a representative of Norway. Norway and Scotland are on the top of the list of the best aquaculture industries in the world. Is there some sort of a European Union policy that we should be aware of, because a free trade agreement between Europe and Canada will soon come to reality? Is there something we should be aware of with regard to aquaculture in the regulations from the European Union?
Mr. Cowan: The latest development in terms of the European Union is the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, which was agreed in 2013 and which is about to begin implementation.
Up until now, the Common Fisheries Policy has pretty much focused on sea fisheries and the wild catch sector. A major change for the period of time between 2014 and 2020 is that the European Union now has a stated policy on growing aquaculture across the European Union. Therefore, it places obligations on member states to have annual plans setting out how they will go about this.
As I mentioned in my opening remarks, we've contributed to the U.K.'s annual plan, which has been submitted in draft form to the European Union. From our perspective, it was relatively straightforward because we have already had a decade of policy on growing aquaculture, so we essentially set down what we were already doing. Many other countries in the EU have not been as progressive with aquaculture, and the EU is now asking them specifically what they are going to do to grow aquaculture.
Senator Enverga: Are there standards that you could share with us as we develop our own aquaculture industry in Canada? Are there standards that we could comply with the European Union regulations?
Mr. Cowan: I think the issue about standards is complicated greatly by the species that are farmed in different parts of the EU. For example, Scotland has the vast majority of salmon farming because we're in the north and we have colder waters.
When you get down south around about Spain and France and into the Mediterranean, they have completely different species of fish farming and the regulations differ depending on the species.
Senator Enverga: I hope you will share with us any changes.
For a more specific question, I understand you have wild and farmed salmon. Have you compared their contaminant levels and the quality of each one? Are there any differences at all between your farmed and your wild salmon?
Mr. Cowan: The farmed salmon obviously have been grown over a couple of decades specifically for farming, so they have their own characteristics. They are the same species, but they have their own characteristics.
If you know your fish, you'll be able to tell the difference between farmed salmon and wild salmon, but genetically speaking, they are pretty much the same, and we don't have any issues about contaminant within farmed fish.
Senator Enverga: With wild salmon, am I right about the mercury levels?
Mr. Cowan: We're not aware of any particular issues around mercury or any other heavy metals within our farmed or our wild fisheries.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: We were in Newfoundland recently and there was mention of poaching. Is there such a thing happening in any of the aquaculture farming areas in Scotland?
Mr. Cowan: Poaching of farmed salmon?
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Yes.
Mr. Cowan: I wouldn't rule it out, but I don't think it's a particular issue. We certainly still do have an issue of the poaching of wild fish, wild salmon and sea trout. We had an incident only last week where a net with over 50 large fish was found, and they were all dead. So we certainly still have an issue with wild fish poaching, and we are determined to cut that out.
One of the ways we are about to do that is to introduce a carcass tagging scheme, so any wild salmon that is caught and placed on the open market will have to be tagged. We're hoping that by having a carcass tagging scheme, which will be coordinated by Marine Scotland, we'll be able to reduce the number of illegal fish that enter the market.
Senator Wells: I want to go back to the question of social licence that Senator Beyak brought up. Is there a requirement for aquaculture companies to conduct public consultations and that sort of thing within the community during their application process?
Mr. Cowan: Yes. There are consultation requirements within the planning system. What the industry is increasingly being encouraged to do is to undertake pre-application consultation, so they essentially begin discussions and negotiations with the local community before anything formal actually happens.
One of our companies has indicated, and has actually carried out in practice, that if a local community doesn't want them in the area, they will simply go somewhere else. They're taking the stance of wanting to be accepted in an area, and they will do all they can to be accepted and to be a good neighbour and a good contributor to the local community. But if a local area — for example, a particular island — says, "We don't want fish farming here," then that company will go somewhere else.
We agree with pre-consultation. We're increasingly encouraging the industry to be more proactive in that pre- consultation in terms of trying to iron out potential issues before the formal planning application begins. If there are unresolved issues at the beginning of the formal process, then the formal process will simply take longer to complete.
Senator Wells: Thank you for that. Here in Canada we have local opposition, as you said, people who have cottages and who don't want to see an aquaculture site in their view, but we also have a fairly robust movement against aquaculture in general. I understand the smaller local issue. Do you also have a robust group of people who are, in general, against aquaculture?
Mr. Cowan: Yes, we have one or two specific groups. We have an outfit that calls itself Protect Wild Scotland, whose principal is a Mr. Don Staniford, which Canada has had particular interactions with in the past, including a court case that was found against him in terms of his operations in opposing aquaculture.
The Salmon and Trout Association of the U.K. and of Scotland also has particular issues at the national level with aquaculture. Broadly speaking, some environmental NGOs continue to express some concern about potential interactions, but they are much more open to having an engagement on evidence as opposed to some of the other groups who don't really want to go with evidence; they simply don't like aquaculture and want to stop it at any cost.
Senator Wells: Thank you very much. That's really interesting.
Senator Poirier: I have three very short questions. First, how long has the aquaculture industry been active in Scotland?
Mr. Cowan: In terms of salmon farming?
Senator Poirier: Yes.
Mr. Cowan: Around 40 years.
Senator Poirier: Can you tell me today what percentage of employment opportunities are attached to the aquaculture industry in Scotland?
Mr. Cowan: I couldn't tell you what percentage of the overall economy is related to aquaculture, but the study I referred to in my opening remarks indicates that there are around 8,000 jobs in Scotland, mostly in rural areas.
Senator Poirier: At what rate do you anticipate that to grow over the next 10 years or so?
Mr. Cowan: We're looking at an annual growth of between 4 per cent and 5 per cent.
Senator Poirier: Is that per year or in 10 years?
Mr. Cowan: Per year.
Senator Poirier: Because aquaculture is farming, there seems to be a lot of discussion about where it should be within government. In Canada, the aquaculture business is under the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Some people feel it would be better parked in the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food since it is farming. What is the situation there and where does it belong in Scotland?
Mr. Cowan: We have a Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Environment. He has overall responsibility for farming for fisheries and for aquaculture. We have a split between the cabinet secretary and a junior minister of state, whereby the cabinet secretary has day-to-day responsibility for farming and fishing, and the minister has responsibility for aquaculture and recreational fisheries; but it's all within the same reporting structure.
Senator Hubley: My question is along the same line as Senator Poirier's about the 8,000 jobs. Are most jobs within the aquaculture industry — the technicians and processing plant workers — mainly filled by people from Scotland? Do you use some workers who come from away, to use an Island term?
Mr. Cowan: The fish farm operations are primarily local people; but we've got quite a fluid population, and people are moving. The Highlands and Islands, after a period of depopulation, are beginning to repopulate. People are moving back to the Highlands and Islands, which is obviously a good thing.
Some of our fish processing facilities utilize labour from other parts of the European Union.
Senator Hubley: Are there any spinoff industries in Scotland from the aquaculture industry either in the development or production of equipment?
Mr. Cowan: Yes. We have a number of equipment manufacturers in Scotland. Most of the equipment for aquaculture is now sourced within Scotland. As a government, we're trying to ensure maximum value is extracted from the full chain. We want the farmers here. We want the equipment manufacturers here. We want the processing to be done here. We want the added value to be done here. We're trying to generate a position where the maximum value of the whole activity can be carried out within Scotland.
Senator Raine: I have a question about your wild salmon off the east and west sides of Scotland. Do they originate naturally from your streams or is there enhancement through hatcheries? We know that the wild salmon in Alaska, for the most part, is what they call "ranched salmon," where they are raised from hatcheries to a certain level and then released into the sea, and they return to the place where they were released. The genetic stock is changing in those salmon. How wild are your wild salmon? Are they different from each stream where they originate?
Mr. Cowan: In short, yes. We don't have ranching in Scotland at all. There is ongoing debate about the benefits of stocking. We have identifiable genetically different fish from different rivers. A very small number of rivers have been stocking fish quite regularly for a period of time, which has encouraged uplift in the health of the population.
As I say, there's a debate ongoing within the wild fisheries sector about the benefits of stocking, but we don't ranch at all. Certainly, our stocking activity is nowhere near the level of the ranching activity in Canada.
Senator Raine: We know that a big part of the health of wild fisheries is habitat protection and the engagement of local people in an effort to make sure that the habitat is healthy and protected. Is this happening in Scotland with the local people?
Mr. Cowan: Absolutely. As I mentioned earlier, the day-to-day management of wild fisheries is the responsibility of local salmon fishery boards. They manage fisheries in the broadest context, including environmental improvements. There are about 42 of them around Scotland. We also have about 25 river and fisheries trusts. Those are charitable organizations whose primary role is to improve the habitat and the environment within which wild fish flourish.
Ministers have instructed an independent review of the management of wild fisheries in Scotland, which is under way just now. It's being led by the former Chair of the Board of Scottish National Heritage. Within that context, there's a huge amount of good local activity within the local rivers. We want to build on that and enhance that local engagement. We certainly don't want to stop it.
Senator Raine: Do the local salmon fisheries boards have input into the decision on the siting of aquaculture farms?
Mr. Cowan: They are able to provide a comment on the planning application consultation.
Senator Raine: Is there a specific role for their input?
Mr. Cowan: They are able to provide input to the public consultation in the same way as anybody else applying process can do.
Through our National Marine Plan that I talked about earlier, we're moving toward a series of regional marine plans that will be laid at a local level. We anticipate that local municipalities responsible for the areas in question will develop an overarching spatial plan for the marine area. That spatial plan will be the subject of consultation with all stakeholders in the area.
At the moment, the aquaculture industry is able to identify areas that they think are good for their operations. In the future, we anticipate that there will be a regional plan that will say, "We, the people within the regional marine planning authority, think this area is best for aquaculture, this area is best for fisheries, this area is best for recreation," and then it will build up in a more strategically planned way.
Senator Raine: That raises a question. You said earlier that when people apply for licences, they get a fairly long- term licence from the Crown Estate. Would those be recalled should the new plan decide that it's not suitable or it's not desirable for aquaculture?
Mr. Cowan: I think the new plan will predominantly be about where future growth happens as opposed to trying to relocate existing activity.
Senator McInnis: Your operations are all marine based. Do you have any closed containment land base? That's question one.
Question two: I'm intrigued by your Ministerial Group for Sustainable Aquaculture. I note that there are seven working groups you mentioned in your opening remarks, one of which is interactions. Can you explain what that is? Is that public interaction? You mentioned earlier as well that there is, as is the case here, some opposition to it. Are they part of that interaction? Are they part of feeding into the ministerial group?
Mr. Cowan: On the issue of closed containment, first of all, we don't have closed containment for the growing of market-size fish. All of that's done in the marine environment. We do have and are increasing the volume of closed containment for the production of smolts. At the minute, some smolts are produced in hatcheries and then go into fresh water before going into the marine environment. One of the major companies last year opened up a £16 million worldwide state-of-the-art facility, and that is closed containment. The smolts develop from egg through "smoltification" and go straight into the marine environment without going into the open fresh water environment.
We have had interest a couple of times from people wanting to develop grow-out closed containment facilities, but they've not really come to anything as yet. From the government's perspective, we're happy with both. If someone can make closed containment work economically, fine. We want to grow the sector, and we'll encourage growth in the sector, be it on land or in the sea.
The interactions working group is primarily a working group to improve interactions between the wild fish managers and the farm managers. It's about encouraging a dialogue between these people at a local level so that people understand what's going on in the wild fish population and what can be done to help and support the development of that population and, from the wild fisheries' perspective, for them to understand and be reassured that the operation of a fish farm within their area is happening within the rules and within an environment of sustainability. Again, it's trying to encourage a collaborative approach at a local level and building, I think as one of your colleagues was mentioning, the social licence earlier. We're trying to say to people that aquaculture is here to stay. Wild fisheries are here to stay. We want them both to grow and to prosper, but to do that we need to work collaboratively because we're all in the same space.
Senator Enverga: With regard to government assistance to aquaculture, marketing and distribution, how do you do this? Is it corporate or government assisted?
Mr. Cowan: It depends on the size of the company involved. The European Fisheries Fund enables government support to go to sea fisheries and to aquaculture and to processing, but the support is limited to small- and medium- sized enterprises. By and large, the major salmon producers are excluded from direct support because of the size, but smaller salmon producers and shellfish producers can be supported.
In addition, we support, through our development agencies, the marketing of food and drink generally, and salmon is our biggest food export. We spend, through our development agencies, a considerable amount of resources developing food and drink generally, but salmon specifically, worldwide.
The Chair: That concludes our questions, gentlemen. I certainly want to thank you on behalf of the committee members for taking the time to join us this morning. It's been a very informative session. As we look at the challenges and opportunities here in Canada, they seem to be very similar to the challenges and opportunities you face in Scotland, certainly from the questions and answers we had here this morning. We're looking forward to visiting your fine country sometime this fall and learning more about the aquaculture industry in Scotland.
Mr. Cowan: You're very welcome. Should you be in Scotland, we'd be delighted to meet up with you and continue the discussion.
The Chair: Have a great day.
(The committee continued in camera.)