Congratulations, STCScotland and SIFT

After months in preparation and peer review the report commissioned by Salmon and Trout Conservation Scotland and SIFT is finally out and makes damning reading. To read it click this link:

Salmon and Trout Scotland

For years objectors have been trying to persuade local planning officers and committees that the claims made by the aquaculture industry, backed by Scottish Government Ministers such as Fergus Ewing, regarding jobs and other positive economic impacts are grossly exaggerated, but time and again we have been ignored and applicants have been allowed to make outrageous claims about the "benefits". We have been told, variously, that aquaculture accounts for 12,000 and more full time equivalent posts. On top of that, of course the jobs are always said to be in the most fragile areas economically.

In truth, relying on nothing other than the Scottish Government's own figures, in turn based on facts such as income tax and NI figures, the total directly employed seems to be no more than 2,600.

To hike this up to the numbers claimed it has been necessary to do a lot of constructive arithmetic. Anyone with the most basic understanding of economics knows that when jobs are created there is a multiplier effect; it's obvious that when people receive income they spend it, which in turn creates work for others to supply that demand.

We have consistently argued over the years, to planning officers, committees and others, that the industry has been claiming credit for every single job on the West coast, including public sector workers, our doctors, nurses, carers, and all involved in keeping our communities running, bins collected, roads clear, the police force etc. But they also include the numerous micro businesses, village shops, bed and breakfasts and craft shops, hotels, marinas and boatyards, canoeing, wild life tours, cruises, you name it! In short hundreds of small to medium enterprises whose very existence is threatened by the damage open cage aquaculture does to the environment and the landscape, the very things that they depend on. Remember, tourism and leisure make up the great bulk of our Scotland's private sector economy.

The report, which has been subject to rigorous peer review, demonstrates that in looking at the economic "benefits" the researchers appointed on behalf of government looked at aquaculture employment in isolation. No attempt was made to look at the negative impacts on other businesses.

There are two government studies, Imani from 2017 and Marsh from 2019. The Report shows that instead of adopting the cast iron government figures described above, the consultants accepted figures supplied by the fish farming industry itself.

The Imani report was commissioned and paid for by, among others, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Marine Scotland, the former quasi-governmental, the latter actually a branch of the civil service within Scottish Government. It is 100% clear from the briefest look at it that one of the main objects, perhaps the main one, was supporting the policy of doubling aquaculture capacity by 2030.

The Marsh report similarly looks based on guesswork rather than in depth analysis. It's an astonishingly short 4 pages.

In the past I have described this target as an "orphan policy", because when asked directly politicians have always said it came from the industry. True, it was backed by Food and Drink Scotland, but they are technically a non-governmental organisation backed by private and public entities with a Board picked from both sides. Now we know that people like Ben Hadfield of MOWI were speaking the truth when they have denied that. Well done, Ben!

Why is this important? Simply because a government policy with such massive, very obvious impacts both on the economy and on the environment should have in term of correct process the fullest Strategic Assessments into the negative effects of both.

The truth is now out and STCS and SIFT are to be congratulated for doing what government should have done long ago!