The Loch Long Bienn Reithe fish farm planning application Public Hearing takes place on Monday 31 October at Arrochar.
A number of MSPs, government bodies and the Argyll & Bute MP have submitted letters of support. However some 200+ members of the public, community councils and environmental organisations have submitted letters opposing the industrial development which will use unproven technology in what will be Scotland’s largest salmon farm.
There are a number of ways, individuals and their communities can continue to oppose this application. We would stress that as time is of the essence, letters of opposition should be submitted to the following ahead of Monday 31 October, 2022.
We have also provided below some useful facts as to why the planning application should be refused. Please also visit other AFFtheClyde pages for more information.
WHO TO WRITE TO.
Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Planning
planning@lochlomond-trossachs.org (Ref. 2021/0357/DET)
Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Board Members:
*Iain Shonny Paterson representing Ward 1 – Cowal and North Loch Lomond
*David Fettes representing Ward 2 – Breadalbane and the Trossachs
*Dr Richard Johnson representing Ward 3 – Callander
*David Mackie representing Ward 4 – East Loch Lomond and Port of Menteith
Sid Perrie representing Ward 5 – West Loch Lomond and Balloch
*Planning & Access Committee members:
Claire Chapman, Ronnie Erskine, Professor Christopher Spray, Iain Shonny Paterson. David Fettes, Dr. Richard Johnson, David Mackie.
Board members can be contacted at committeeclerk@lochlomond-trossachs.org.
MPs:
Argyll & Bute MP – Brendan O’Hara (submitted letter of support) brendan.ohara.mp@parliament.uk
MSPs
Argyll & Bute MSP – Jenni Minto (submitted letter of support) Jenni.Minto.MSP@Parliament.scot
Dumbarton MSP – Jackie Baillie. Jackie.Baillie.msp@parliament.scot
Galloway & West Dumfries MSP – Finlay Carson (submitted letter of support) Finlay.Carson.msp@parliament.scot
Edinburgh Central MSP – Angus Robertson (submitted letter of support) Angus.Robertson.msp@parliament.scot
Pam Gosal MSP & Donald Cameron MSP (submitted letter of support) Pam.Gosal.msp@parliament.scot & Donald.Cameron.msp@parliament.scot
Inverness & Nairn MSP – Fergus Ewing (submitted letter of support) Fergus.Ewing.msp@parliament.scot
Councillors:
Cllr Gordon Blair (submitted letter of support) gordon.blair@argyll-bute.gov.uk
Cllr Ross Moreland (submitted letter of support) ross.moreland@argyll-bute.gov.uk
Cllr Iain Shonny Paterson iainshonny.paterson@argyll-bute.gov.uk
FACTS you may wish to include in your letter:
In recent media statements from Loch Long Salmon Company (LLSC), the company stated the following:
LLSC – “The host Community Council is supportive”
Fact – The fish farm site falls within the LochGoil Community Council area boundary and the CC has NOT submitted any letter supporting the application.
LLSC – “It has the support of bodies such as… NatureScot”
Fact – In their representation document NatureScot stated “This proposal could be progressed with appropriate mitigation. However, because it could affect internationally important natural heritage interests, we object to this proposal unless it is made subject to conditions so that the works are done strictly in accordance with appropriate mitigation measures. If your Planning Authority intends to grant planning permission against our advice, you must notify Scottish Ministers.”
LLSC – “It has the support of a cross-party grouping of MSPs”
Fact – Both Arianne Burgess & Ross Greer of Scottish Greens are opposed to the proposal.
LLSC – “It has the support of a range of local people and groups.”
Fact – The National Park received some 200+ letters from individuals and groups opposing the proposal and circa 72 supporting the proposal.
LLSC – “The technology has been proven for decades..”
Fact – The semi-enclosed cage has been used over the last six or seven years in Norway and now in Western Canada and The Faroes. According to the list of users on the manufacturers website, most of the applications have involved the rearing of post smolts, juvenile fish, that then have to be transferred to other systems to raise to full harvest size. It has never been clear in the LLSC application which of these choices they wish to adopt.
We are not aware that any of these users have installed solid waste collection for handling on land rather than simply discharging to sea. The latest company orders for more of these semi enclosed cages have come from Cermaq Canada and Hiddenfjord Faroes. In neither case is there any intention of collecting solid wastes. It can be said therefore that collection of solid wastes rather than discharging to sea is “untried technology”.
The risk, a very real one for the reasons explained in the objection letter is that the claimed 85% collection of wastes is a gross overestimate of collection efficiency and that only 50% if that is collected. Any failure to collect 85% would mean that the operation would exceed SEPA environmental quality requirements and grossly contaminate the seabed of the loch.
No trials have been conducted anywhere to demonstrate that such claimed collection efficiency is possible. Not only that this collected sludge will be difficult to handle on land requiring dewatering and is very likely to create an odour issue. There is no indication in the proposals that the on-land handling equipment is up to the job. Clearly the technology is unproven.
LLSC – “Loch Long is the ideal location for our demonstration site. We are confident Board Members will see the benefits of this game-changing project, furthering the National Park’s goals by promoting sustainable business growth, creating jobs and supporting communities.”
Fact – The National Park Special Report questioned the level of contribution the development would bring to the area, given that only 12 jobs would be generated locally, compared with the level of risk associated with the development and that there was no guarantee that the proposed roles would be filled by local people. There is no guaranteed figure from LLSC as to how financially local communities would gain from the development.
In addition, the Park’s aim ‘to promote sustainable social and economic development of the area’s communities’ is its fourth aim and where it conflicts with its first three, i.e., 1. ‘To conserve and enhance the natural and cultural heritage of the area’ 2. ‘To promote the sustainable use of the natural resources of the area’ 3. ‘To promote understanding and enjoyment (including enjoyment in the form of recreation) of the special qualities off the area by the public.’ these take precedence.
Clayoquot Action, Canada monitored for over a year a similar semi-closed fish farm system which LLSC are proposing for Loch Long. This is their footage.