SEVEN fish farming companies have been accused by the Scottish Government’s green watchdog of breaking the law by failing to provide information on fish numbers.
The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) told The Ferret that it is “actively considering the appropriate action in response to this failure”. Sepa has a range of enforcement powers, including fines and initiating prosecutions.
Companies were asked to give numbers of salmon and trout, and the sea lice that can infest them, across Scotland. Sepa said it needed the information in order to introduce new controls in March 2025 to try and stop lice from spreading to wild salmon and killing them.
Companies have argued that detailed information on fish numbers at individual farms before they are harvested is “commercially confidential”. They suggested that Sepa’s request could breach competition law.
Campaigners, however, described the situation as “deeply concerning”, and accused salmon firms of trying to “browbeat” Sepa. They called for tougher regulation and greater transparency.
The refusal of companies to provide the information was revealed by Sepa in response to a freedom of information request by The Ferret. Some files had to be kept secret, Sepa said because they were “related to a current investigation into non-compliances with information notices we have served”.
In response to further questioning, Sepa explained that it had served legal notices in January 2024 requiring nine salmon and trout farming companies to provide numbers of fish and lice. Initially, none of them “fully complied”, though one has now provided the information and Sepa was assessing whether a second had also done so.
“Seven operators have not submitted the information requested”, said a Sepa spokesperson. “Action taken in response to the failure to provide the required information will be in accordance with Sepa’s enforcement policy and guidance.”
Sepa has declined to name any of the companies. Most of them are multinationals which rear salmon at more than 200 farms scattered along Scotland’s west coast and around its islands.
“We required information to be provided on the weekly average number of adult female sea lice per fish and the weekly estimated number of fish at each fish farm for weeks 12 to 44 from 2018-2023,” said Sepa’s head of ecology, Peter Pollard.
“This information was needed to improve assessments of risk from sea lice from fish farms to wild salmon under the regulatory framework and the setting of permit conditions that will bring existing farms into regulation under the framework from March 2025.”
Pollard added: “Though required to comply with these notices by law, no operator fully complied with the information notices. Information was typically not provided for the week 23 to 44 period and for estimated numbers of fish at farms where that cohort of fish had not yet been harvested.
“Sepa is actively considering the appropriate action in response to this failure.”
Sepa accepted that the farmed fish numbers provided in response to the notices were “commercially sensitive”. It had therefore decided not to publish the information on its public register.
Publication on the register was one of the reasons why salmon companies were concerned about providing the information. Their concerns were detailed in a three-page letter on March 15, 2024 from Salmon Scotland, which represents seven salmon farming companies.
The letter, which was released by Sepa under freedom of information law, said that companies had “serious concerns around the scope of the information notices and their compatibility with Sepa’s legal obligations”. It was signed by Salmon Scotland’s chief executive and former LibDem minister, Tavish Scott.
“In particular, it is not at all clear why the provision of data outside of the salmon migratory period is relevant or otherwise has a causal link to the objectives of monitoring the impact on wild fish activity,” Scott argued.
Disclosure of real-time information on salmon numbers at individual farms “would risk facilitating (tacitly or otherwise) co-ordination amongst producers – a potential breach of chapter one of the Competition Act 1998”, he continued.
The information could enable access to the number and size of the fish to be harvested at each farm. This was “highly sensitive and strategic information, disclosure of which would prejudice to an unreasonable degree our members’ commercial interests”, Scott wrote.
“It is imperative that Sepa does not act in a way, nor compels our members to act in a way, which jeopardises our members’ compliance with law … Our members take compliance with their legal obligations seriously and continue to have material concerns around Sepa’s purported approach to handling this information.”
Scott (below) added: “We would urge Sepa to take its legal obligations seriously. Our members will of course evaluate this point in considering any response they make to the information notices.”
Other correspondence in 74 files released by Sepa shows a series of clashes with Scott in 2023 and 2024 over the new sea lice controls. The files have all been published on Sepa’s freedom of information disclosure log.
Over a weekend in May 2023, Scott had an email exchange with Sepa’s chief executive, Nicole Paterson. He said he was “extremely disappointed” about the way in which Sepa had briefed the BBC about the forthcoming publication of lice control measures.
On November 23, 2023 Scott wrote to Sepa saying he was “very disappointed” at the way a joint meeting about the lice controls had been conducted earlier that month.
Sepa treated the letter as a formal complaint, which prompted Scott to say that he was “really disappointed” at such “Sepa handling”. He pointed out that it “conveniently” prevented his letter from being referred to Sepa’s governing board.
On February 19, 2024, Scott emailed Paterson and others, again saying he was “very disappointed”. This time the problem was that Sepa had treated a letter from Salmon Scotland asking questions about lice controls as a freedom of information request, and delayed responding.
This was “highly frustrating”, Scott said. He was concerned that, coupled with his November 2023 letter being treated as a formal complaint, the industry’s approach could be “misunderstood” by campaigners.
He wrote: “Sepa’s actions in these two examples are not helpful to developing a positive relationship. I hope you can appreciate the potential negative optics of these situations to external stakeholders.”
The Ferret reported in April 2024 that Salmon Scotland also privately lobbied Scottish ministers to block or delay plans for the lice controls during 2023. We disclosed in September 2024 that Salmon Scotland was still concerned about a formal complaint it made about Sepa’s regulation in 2019.
The campaign group, WildFish, accused the salmon industry of refusing to comply with the law. “This is a deeply concerning situation whereby a highly polluting and damaging industry operating in Scottish waters seems to believe it is above the law,” said the group’s Scotland director, Rachel Mulrenan.
“It’s yet another example of how a decade of unconditional Scottish Government support for the Scottish salmon farming industry has fostered an environment in which the industry feels it can browbeat the regulator into submission.”
Mulrenan also questioned Sepa’s ability to properly regulate “environmentally damaging” industries. “Why has no enforcement action been taken against the salmon farmers?” she asked.
According to the Scottish Greens, consumers deserved transparency about how food is farmed. There were “serious concerns” about animal welfare in the salmon industry, said the party’s spokesperson for rural affairs, Ariane Burgess MSP.
“There must be more oversight and transparency of the industry to ensure that the highest standards are being upheld and that nobody is operating outside of the laws.”
A spokesperson for Salmon Scotland said: “A trade body is responsible for making the case of member businesses to regulators and that is what we do. It is not news that we engage with Sepa. It is our job.”
The Ferret is an editorially independent, not-for-profit co-operative run by its journalists and subscribers. You can find it at https://theferret.scot/ and can subscribe for £5 a month here: https://theferret.scot/subscribe/
