Challenge 11.1

What is the problem, and how does it affect the Challenge Sponsor organisation, service users and/or People of Scotland?

The Scottish Marine Pen Fish Farming industry provides vital employment to some of Scotland’s remote coastal and island communities. However, without advancements in new methods to measure ecological condition, some of the UK’s most valued and fragile habitats may be put at risk. Habitats such as maerl, horse mussels, flame shells and northern sea fan are sensitive to organic matter released from fish farms, yet SEPA has no proven method to measure impacts on these habitats.

The methods that SEPA currently use for predicting and measuring impacts of deposition have been developed for soft sediments typical in sheltered sea lochs. We use hydrodynamic models to predict where the organic matter will be deposited on the seabed, but the models are calibrated for soft sediments and not for hard substrata or maerl where sediment resuspension rates differ. Thus, we cannot accurately predict the amount of sediment that is being deposited on these habitats.

SEPA’s traditional method of measuring benthic impact only works on soft sediments typically found in sheltered sea lochs, where it is possible to take a grab sample and calculate a metric (the Infaunal Quality Index), which is based on the composition of the fauna within the sediment. This is not possible on seabeds with cobbles, boulders or bedrock and we do not wish to take a grab on sensitive habitats that are a priority for conservation. A robust, remote sampling method for these habitats has not been agreed and accredited.

SEPA has been encouraging fish farms to develop in energetic environments, where effluent is dispersed and loading of organic matter on the seabed results in levels of enrichment and smothering considered acceptable to meet environmental compliance. However, locating a fish farm in a more dispersive environment, means it is more likely to coincide with sensitive habitats. One such habitat is maerl, which is often found in locations desirable for fish farms, but it is recognised as one of the UK’s most important marine habitats of conservation interest.

SEPA needs a robust method whereby we can measure the effects of fish farm effluent on hard and mixed substrata and sensitive marine habitats to ensure that it is operating within acceptable limits. The fish farming industry would also welcome a solution as meeting environmental compliance standards, would result in a higher valued product.

The main outcomes of this challenge would be the production of:

• A piloted method that could potentially be used by SEPA and operators to measure environmental compliance by fish farms sited on or near to rocky or protected seabed types

• A tool to enable the use of the method

• Guidance to enable the implementation of that tool and method

How will we know the Challenge has been solved?

• When we have a practical method that both fish farm operators and SEPA, as the regulator, can use to determine effects of MPFFs on the ecological communities on the seabed and determine whether those effects are within acceptable limits.

• The method(s) of sampling should work on hard or mixed substrata, including bedrock, stony reef, cobbles and maerl but may also be applicable to other marine habitats, such as horse mussel beds.

• A quantitative element would be beneficial to determine whether effects are within acceptable limits.

• The science should be sufficiently robust to enable legal precedence and provide SEPA with the confidence to apply the methodology to inform regulatory decisions.

• We can license appropriately and control impact.

Who are the end users likely to be?

The primary users of this method or tool would be SEPA's scientists responsible for monitoring environmental compliance, our officials responsible for permitting fish farms and the fish farm operators and environmental consultancies during the post-operation environmental surveys. Depending on the solution developed, it may also be applicable to other international regulators and operators where there are comparable impacts or conditions.

Has the Challenge Sponsor attempted to solve this problem before?

SEPA has been part of several collaborative projects that have attempted to address the problem. We have made substantial progress towards understanding effects of fish farm effluent on seabed habitats and being able to quantify them, but we do not yet have a solution. We have been addressing new or recently varied fish farms where there is a quantifiable baseline of seabed habitats and older fish farms, in which there is no baseline.  

All methods outlined below require further field trials together with quantitative and statistical methods to measure spatial and temporal change.

Development of photogrammetry: SEPA has been working with Tritonia on SAIC and SIF funded projects to demonstrate use of 3D photogrammetry. They aim to use photogrammetry models to quickly and precisely measure habitat characteristics on an area of seabed and compare these to the same area post-operation of the fish farm. 

Environmental Pressure Gradients: SEPA’s Marine Ecology Unit has been working to understand spatial change along environmental pressure gradients using visual techniques and comparison to reference sites. This is useful but it is difficult to provide an equivalent unimpacted reference site in heterogeneous environments, as is often the case in sites with hard or mixed substrate sites. High levels of variability within these environments means it is necessary to take account of patchiness within habitats. Further work could address production of metrics or indices to measure ecological quality in relation to fish farm effluent.

Improving Baseline Survey techniques: We have been working on a SAIC funded project to develop artificial intelligence (AI) for use in marine surveys, SEA-AI, focusing on maerl, horse mussels and northern sea fan. We require further training of the AI to recognise other priority habitat types. SAMS has recently secured a PhD to develop the AI to recognise percent cover of live maerl. This will enable precise quantification of maerl condition from underwater video, reducing analysis time and subjectivity.

Sediment Profile Imaging (SPI): We have investigated use of SPI on maerl beds but have not been able to trial this technique on Scottish fish farms yet. It should be noted that maerl beds in Scotland may be in a mixed rocky and soft sediment environment with kelp and seaweed communities. Thus, SPI may not be suitable for all sites with maerl.

Are there any interdependencies or blockers?

Implementation of a method provided by this challenge would result in new regulatory requirements for achieving environmental compliance. This will have a cost to implement together with the royalties for using the tool provided by this challenge. The new method of sampling may be required in addition to the current method required for soft sediments, unless the tool can be demonstrated to work irrespective of habitat type.

Will a solution need to integrate with any existing systems / equipment?

The solution would need to be usable within SEPA’s secure computing environment and that of industry.

Is this part of an existing service?

Yes, SEPA is one of a number of organisations regulating finfish aquaculture in Scotland. SEPA’s job is to protect the marine environment for the people of Scotland, and we do this by ensuring that the aquaculture industry meets environmental standards.

Any technologies or features the Challenge Sponsor wishes to explore or avoid?

The technology should be affordable to fish farm operators and to the regulator and safe to implement.

Visual techniques, e.g. ROV or 3D photogrammetry, do provide a means by which it is possible to see signs of fish farm impacts on epibiota. These could be further developed to produce a metric(s).

Although SCUBA could be used to provide evidence of environmental effects, we would prefer to avoid SCUBA-based solutions for compliance monitoring due to health and safety concerns when diving around fish farms and high costs associated with it.

What is the commercial opportunity beyond a CivTech contract?

Both SEPA as the regulator and fish farm operators would require the product implemented through this challenge. The operators must routinely submit self-monitoring reports to SEPA. SEPA conducts quality checks on the self-monitoring and carries out its own marine survey programme to perform comparative assessments thereby allowing SEPA to track compliance.

A tool to measure ecological condition may also be of interest to regulators of other industries who are required to carry out post-environmental monitoring, together with the regulators who assess those impacts, such as the Scottish Government’s Marine Directorate Licensing Operations Team and the English Marine Management Organisation.

Who are the stakeholders?

• SEPA

• NatureScot

• Fish farm operators and environmental consultants contracted on their behalf

• Communities where fish farms are located

• Marine Alliance for Science and Technology for Scotland (MASTS) and the academic & research community

• UK, EU and global regulators and industry

Who’s in the Challenge Sponsor team?

• Katriona Lundberg

• Dr Marion Harrald

• Dr Sandy Downie

• Dr Janet Khan

What is the policy background to the Challenge?

The Scottish salmon sector has an ambitious strategy to double their annual contribution to Scotland’s economy by 2030 (Scotland Food and Drink (2016), Aquaculture Growth to 2030: A Strategic Plan for farming Scotland’s seas), but increasingly there is concern about the environmental consequences of fish farm operations (Scottish Government RAIC report, which states the requirements for, ‘further research to address the significant gaps in knowledge, data, analysis and monitoring around the adverse risk of salmon farming on the marine environment, especially around discharges from farm pens and the use of medicines’.

This CivTech challenge will support the Vision for Sustainable Aquaculture's aim that, ‘environmental impact is within acceptable limits, with continual progress to minimise that impact through innovation, research and development.’

SEPA regulates the waste discharged from Marine Pen Fish Farms through The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 following a set of environmental standards in line with the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010

SEPA recognises the need to strengthen understanding of the sensitivity of seabed habitats to fish farms through the Finfish Aquaculture Sector Plan. SEPA's Seabed Environmental Standard currently states that, until an approach is put in place, there is no requirement for monitoring on hard substrata other than to provide visual evidence to confirm that a grab cannot be performed. Therefore, until we develop a method whereby we can assess these habitats, there is no formal assessment process to monitor for degradation.

Many of these habitats are protected nationally as Priority Marine Features (PMFs) and internationally through OSPAR and the EC Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC) and thus SEPA has a duty to ensure that effects are within sustainable limits. Under Scotland’s National Marine Plan (2015), SEPA as the regulator and NatureScot as the advisor on nature conservation, must consider PMFs in relation to evaluating proposed marine developments including fin-fish aquaculture. Protection of qualifying features is stronger within the Marine Protected Areas, but many fish farms have been operational prior to designation of these MPAs, and therefore it is important that we develop a non-destructive method to assess fish farm impacts on these marine habitats. Although implementation of a new compliance method may come at a cost to the operators, this is in line with the guiding principles in the Vision for Sustainable Aquaculture, which includes the principle that the polluter should pay for environmental damage and that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source.