Din. Pe eg [ER ———

  

2 L Da. X A
COMMISSION EUROPEENNE {X Dr nn
Secrätariat general | ME Amen
SH PRec) | 13 ir 895
Secteur Courrier de la Commission .

 

Dr mer LE he,

44, —l
SG(96) A/ 9805 ee

DOCUMENT INTERNE

BORDEREAU D'’ENVOI DU COURRIER

OBSERVATIONS |

   

DESTINATAIRE(S)
Pour attribution (*) :

     
 

 

Pour information :

  

Lettrede :R.P. DE L'IRLANDE

en date du : 11/6/1996 enregistree au SG le: 13/6/1996

Objet : INFRACTION : IRLANDE A.93/4525 93/4870 94/4078 et 94/4274

 

Substances dangereuses - CO DONEGAL ‚ ferme salmoniole
- Reponse ä la lettre de mise en demeure; cf SG ( 96) D/ 2223 du 14/2/1996
Pour le Secrötarfiat general,

+4.

SR

REPRESENTATION PERMANENTE
DE L'IRLANDE
AUPRES DE
L'UNION EUROPEENNE

RUE FROISSART 893-933
1040 BRUXELLES
TEL. 230 886 80
FAX 230 32 03

 

Il June, .1996.

Secretary General, 8 f
Commission of the European Union, FE ee
Rue de la Loi 200,
B-1049 Bruxelles.

Dear Secretary-General,

I have been asked by my authorities to refer to your letter of 14
February 1996 concerning the implementation in Ireland of Directive
76/464/EEC .in, relation to marine fish farms with particular
reference to complaints Nos. 93/4525, 93/4870, 94/4078 and 94/4274
concerning fish: farming in Donegal.

A comprehensive response to the complaint referred to in the

Commission's letter was’made on 7 April 1995. The letter detailed

the work undertaken to minimise the impacts of salmon farms on the
environment and the assessment made of such impacts. In
particular, it referred to the comprehensive assessment undertaken
by Dr. R.J. Gowen of the Natural Environment Council, Dunstaffanage
Marine Laboratory, Argyll in his report "An Assessment of the

Impact of Fish Farming on the Water Column and Sediment Ecosystems

of Irish Coastal Waters". The Gowen Report confirmed that fish
farming has few significant impacts on the Irish environment.
Arrangements are currently being put in place to commission a
follow-up report of equivalent status.

In the past Feed Conversion Ratios (FCR) were of the order of 2:1
i.e. 2 tonnes of feed per tonne of fish produced. This has now
been reduced to about 1.2:1 and considerably less waste arises from
fish feed. This is explained by the development of new high energy
diets which sink more slowly and therefore allow greater uptake by
caged fish. Such waste feed that does arise may be eaten by wild

fish species such as mullet. It can also be retrieved and
recycled. Because feed costs are so expensive in the region of
£600-700 per tonne it is not economic to waste it. Good farm

"management practices will ensure that such waste is minimised.

+5.

2.

The first two bases for complaint (i.e. (I) and (ii) of the
Commission's letter) have been largely overtaken by changes in farm
management practices in the last five years. To improve fish

health the build-up of solid and particulate wastes from fish farms
has been minimised and sites are fallowed every 24 months.

Furthermore the use of larger cages has meant that shelter is no

longer a major criteria for site selection. Sites are now chosen

‚for their hydrodynamic properties where there is good flushing and

dispersion of waste away £rom cages.

The predicted impacts reported in the mid-80s based on the
Norwegian experience in deep poorly flushed fjords is less likely
to occur in the majority of Irish shelf waters under current levels
of production. These represent macro tidal environments with
sufficient assimilative, dilution and dispersion capacity to absorb
nutrients produced by finfish farming. Furthermore any production
in excess of 100 tonnes per annum requires the preparation of a
detailed environmental impact statement where basic data on the
site has to be assembled to allow an evaluation of potential
impacts. The Irish threshold ‚requirements for EIS are far more
stringent than those of other EU countries.

As regards the specific reference to ammonia and nitrates in the
Commission's letter, the discharge of these is authorised and
controlled by the Department of the Marine's aquaculture licensing
system. Licensing may only take place after detailed examination
of each proposal with an environmental impact statement required
for annual tonnage production in excess of 100 tonnes, a much more
stringent threshold than is applied in other Member States. As the
licensing system controls both numbers of: farms and tonnage, prior
authorisation of the discharge of ammonia and nitrates is in place
with beneficial effects as reflected by the Gowen Report.

It appears that the outstanding matter of specific concern is with
the possible introduction into the coastal waters of List II
substances, referred to in Article 7(2) of Directive 76/a64A/EEC.
In particular the Commission's concern is that. Nuvan, a lice
treatment for salmon - the use of which has dramatically declined,
as detailed in our letter of 7 April 1995 - contains dichlorvos,
a List II substance. The extent of decline in Nuvan use is
illustrated by the reduction from a figure of 4,701 litres in 1990
to 240 litres in 1993 and to practically nil use in 1995. We are
advised that research has shown that the product is not in fact
lethal to lobsters and observation has indicated that it has no
adverse effect on bivalves ancidians and other crustacea.

The issue of authorisation for list II discharges was raised by the
Commission at the Package Meeting of 10th July, 1995, in the

+6.

3

Department of the Environment, Dublin. .The minutes of the meeting
record, inter alia, that:

"new aquaculture legislation is planned, and the Irish
Authorities stated that they would give consideration to
examining existing water pollution controls on fish
farms in the context of the proposed new legislation.
The Commission agreed to the request to supply
information on the position in other Member States".

While no response was received from the Commission in relation to
the position of other Member States, we understand that the
Scottish Authorities have made requlations (1990 No. 126(8.15) &
1992 No. 574 (S.63) providing a system for classifying the quality
of relevant territorial, coastal waters and inland waters. As
regards discharges from Scottish fish farms we understand that the
authorisation of discharges was a matter for the Scottish River
Purification Boards up to the 1st April and since that date the
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency assumed responsibility for
the matter.

‚As regards a specific authorisation system for List II substances,
in particular, dichlorvos, which the Commission contends is
required by Article 7(2) of Directive 76/464/EC in respect of
salmon farming, the Department of the Marine's representatives at
the July Package Meeting in Dublin, signalled that it is proposed
to deal with this matter generally by legislative provision at the
first available opportunity; particular mention was made of

proposed new aquaculture legislation. The scheme of an aquaculture _

Bill was recently approved by the Government and an enabling
provision providing for a specific authorisation system in terms
of emission standards laid down on the basis of quality objectives
will be included in the proposed legislation. It is the intention
to have the Bill enacted during 1996.

As regards Article 7(3) and the setting of water quality
objectives, my authorities wish to’advise that the Environmental
Protection Agency is currently finalising a discussion document
which will deal with a broad range of List II substances, including

those of relevance in the context of the marine environment. The
document will be made available for general consideration and
comment. The Agency's recommendations in respect of specific

substances will be finalised in the light of submissions received

and will then be presented to the Minister for the Environment for °

the purpose of assisting the establishment of appropriate water
quality objectives, including objectives for estuarine and coastal
waters.

It

4

is expected that statutory effect by means of regulations under

Section 26 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 will

be
to
II
be
in

My

given initially to priority substances based on their relevance
Irish environmental conditions. Dichlorvos and any other List
substances relevant to the operation of marine fish farms will
considered for inclusion as priority substances to be dealt with
the first set of regulations setting quality objectives.

authorities trust that the information provided in this reply

satisfactorily deals with the Commissions queries in these matters.

Yours sincerelv,

18.