Bagh Dail nan Ceann ( BDNC) Salmon Farm, Loch Shuna

Bagh Dail nan Ceann ( BDNC) Salmon Farm, Loch Shuna AUTODEPOMOD MODELLIN G REPORT 09. 2016V1 REPORT WRITTEN BY ENVIRONMENTA L ANALYST) CHECKED BY ENVIRONMENTAL MAN AGER) Registered in Scotland No. 138843 Registered Office, 1st Floor, Admiralty Park, Admiralty Road, Rosyth, FIFE, KY11 2YW Marine Harvest ( Scotland) Limited, Stob Ban House, Glen Nevis Business Park, Fort William, PH33 6RX 01397 715078 01397 703626 Marine Harvest ( Scotland) Limited, Stob Ban House, Glen Nevis Business Park, Fort William, PH33 6RX http:// marineharvest. com

CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 2 2 MODEL INPUT DETAILS 3 2.1 HYDROGRAPHIC DATA 3 2.2 SITE DETAILS 5 2.3 RUN DETAILS 7 3 MODELLING RESULTS 8 3.1 BIOMASS RESULTS 8 3.1.1 TRANSECT AND SAMPLING STATIONS 9 3.2 IN-FEED TREATMENTS 11 3.2.1 SLICE 11 3.3 BATH MODEL RESULTS 12 4 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 13 REFERENCES 15 1

List of Figures Figure 1 Location of the Salmon Farm... 2 Figure 2 Site current direction frequency from the surface current meter... 4 Figure 4 bathymetry and cage layout... 7 Figure 5 Benthic impact for run 2, Int-Spring current data... 8 Figure 6 Location of the selected and spare transects... 9 Figure 7 Cross-sections of both the selected and spare transects respectively... 10 Figure 8 EmBZ concentrations for run 1 (118 days)... 11 List of Tables Table 1 Summary of Results... 1 Table 2 A summary of the mean and residual currents recorded at the site... 4 Table 3 Project Information... 5 Table 4 Loch Parameters... 6 Table 5 Selected and Spare Transect Starting Points... 9 Table 6a&b The details of the three selected and spare survey stations respectively... 10 Table 7 Modelling Results Summarised... 14 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report has been prepared by Marine Harvest ( Scotland) Ltd. to meet the requirements of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency ( SEPA) for the purpose of assessing an application to install equipment and consequent biomass, and for consent to use sufficient sealice treatments in a marine salmon farm, via AutoDepomod and dispersion modelling. The report describes biomass, in-feed and bath treatment modelling results for the BDNC site, a summary of which is provided in Table 1 below. The report held centrally, and previously accredited, by SEPA (AMMR11v02) details modelling methods used. Table 1 Summary of Results Site Name: Site location: SITE DETAILS BDNC Loch Shuna Peak biomass ( T): 2,500 CAGE DETAILS Number of cages: 10 Cage dimensions: 120s Working Depth ( m): 16 Cage group configuration: Surface Currents Middle Currents Seabed Currents HYDROGRAPHIC SUMMARY Average Speed (m/s) 1(2x5) 0.084m/s Residual Direction 0.018m/s at 270 G Wind-Influence Average Speed (m/s) Slight 0.084m/s Residual Direction 0.023m/s at 250 G Average Speed (m/s) 0.084m/s Residual Direction 0.018m/s at 270 G BENTHIC MODELLING Max fish biomass proposed (T) 2,500 Max Average Stocking Density ( kg/m³) 13.6334 Distance to the 30ITI contour (m) 98 Direction of transect ( T) 22.8 IN-FEED TREATMENTS Recommended consent mass EmBZ (g) 2,712.5 Equivalent Fish Biomass (T) 7,750 Maximum Treatment Amount EmBZ ( g) 875 BATH TREATMENTS Recommended consent mass in 3hrs Azamethiphos 324.6g cage/treatment, 2.8 treatment/ day Recommended consent mass in 24 hrs Azamethiphos 229.2g cage/treatment, 2 treatment/ day Recommended consent mass in 3 hrs Cypermethrin Recommended consent mass in 3 hrs Deltamethrin 58.8g cages/treatment, 10.3 treatments/ day 22g cages/treatment, 9.6 treatments/ day 1

1 INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared by Marine Harvest to meet the requirements of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency ( SEPA) for the purpose of assessing an application to install equipment and consequent biomass, and for consent to use sufficient sealice treatments, via AutoDepomod and dispersion modelling. The report describes modelling results for the BDNC site in Loch Shuna ( Figure 1) to determine EQS-compliant biomass and sea-lice treatment levels for the proposed equipment. Report number AMMR11v02 which is held centrally, and has been previously accredited, by SEPA, provides details of the generic modelling methods used. Figure 1 Location of the Salmon Farm 2

2 MODEL INPUT DETAILS 2.1 HYDROGRAPHIC DATA The site data was collected by Marine Harvest for the purpose of assessing a consent application with the AutoDepomod software. Methods of the data collection and analysis followed current SEPA guidelines (SEPA, 2005); the data used were of 15 days duration and were analysed using both the appropriate SEPA hydrographic excel template for 20 minute data and the hg-analysis spreadsheet, also provided by SEPA. The Admiralty Hydrographic Office tide prediction software Total Tide was used to determine the start dates of spring and neap tides and to determine the times of high water and mean tidal height for the area (see Table 3). Following SEPA guidelines the start points in the current meter record used for modelling are those closest to midday on the day of the intermediate spring tides and the intermediate neap tides. In the current meter data used, after hourly averaging, the times of intermediate HW spring and HW neap corresponded to records 132 and 276 respectively. Prior to commencement of modelling the current data required correction to Grid North and was thus corrected by 3.574W. The hourly averaged current data for the surface, middle and bottom bins were then saved as space delimited files, as detailed in AMMR11v02 and following the default AutoDepomod file structure. Using the hg-analysis spreadsheet the mean speed and the residual current speed and direction were established for each of the three current meter depths. The mean and residual currents, and the histogram frequency peaks are summarised in Table 2 below. The data showed a residual current in the south westerly direction at near-surface ( Figure 2) and easterly at mid- and near-bed depths. A slight correlation was found between the surface current speeds and the wind speeds (Figure 2); however a tidal pattern can still be seen. The wind direction was predominantly from the north west and the mean wind speed over this period was 1.5m/s. Further information relating to the current data is provided in a hydrographic report which forms part of the CAR application. 3

Figure 2 Site current direction frequency from the surface current meter SURFACE Mean speed 0.082m/s Residual Speed 0.022m/s at 258 G Residual Parallel 0.015m/s Residual Normal 0.016m/s Tidal Amplitude Parallel 0.120m/s Tidal Amplitude Normal 0.054m/s Frequency Peak 230 G MIDDLE Mean Speed 0.084m/s Residual 0.023m/s at 250 G Frequency Peak 220 G BOTTOM Mean Speed 0.084m/s Residual 0.018m/s at 270 G Frequency Peak 210 G Table 2 A summary of the mean and residual currents recorded at the site 4

2.2 SITE DETAILS The site is situated near the eastern shore of Loch Shuna ( Figure 1). Marine Harvest proposes to increase the net depth and increase the maximum biomass at the existing site and so the AutoDepomod and the Bath Treatment models have been run to determine EQScompliant biomass and medicinal consents for this new equipment. Details of the site are provided in Table 3. The receiving water is defined as a loch. The width of the strait and the distance both to the shore and to the head of the loch were calculated from digital Admiralty Charts and are shown in Table 4. Table 3 Project Information SITE DETAILS Site Name: BDNC Site location: Loch Sunart Peak biomass ( T): 2,500 Proposed feed load (T/yr): 8,103 Proposed treatment use: CAGE DETAILS Azamethiphos, Cypermethrin, Deltamethrin & Emamectin Benzoate Group location: E177592 N704589 Number of cages: 10 Cage dimensions: 120m circumference Working Depth (m): 16 Cage group configuration: 1(2x5) Cage group orientation ( G): 214 Cage group distance to shore (km): 0.30 Water depth at site (m): 30 HYDROGRAPHIC DATA Current meter position: E177394 N704357 Depth at deployment position (m): 39.7 Surface bin centre height above bed (m): 33.6 Middle bin centre height above bed (m): 23.6 Bottom bin centre height above bed (m): 3.6 Duration of record: 15 days: from 09/04/2016 to 24/04/2016 Current meter averaging interval: 20 mins ADDITIONAL DATA Magnetic correction to grid North: 3.574W Predicted Spring Tide 11/04/2007 Predicted Neap Tide 18/04/2007 Predicted Spring Tide 25/04/2007 Mean Tidal Level at Site (m): 1.2 Closest Standard Port Loch Beag Date of Intermediate- Spring Tides: 14/04/2007 Date of Intermediate- Neap Tides: 20/04/2007 5

Table 4 Loch Parameters LOCH PARAMETERS Area 31.7km2 Length 29.1km2 Distance to Head 27.6 km2 6

2.3 RUN DETAILS A new project was created in AutoDepomod and named BDNC16vF1. The site and cage details provided in Table 3 were entered into the appropriate files and all other data were set to default. The resulting site bathymetry and cage layout is shown in Figure 3. Modelling of both the biomass and chemotherapeutants was undertaken following the methods outlined in the Methods Report AMMR11v02 which is held centrally by SEPA. Details of the modelling results have been provided in the next section according to SEPA requirements. Figure 3 bathymetry and cage layout Two types of treatment are used to control sea lice infestation in marine salmon farms and these require different modelling approaches. The in-feed treatment Slice ( active ingredient Emamectin Benzoate) requires deposition modelling using AutoDepomod to predict the chemical accumulation on the seabed beneath the fish cages associated with fish faeces and uneaten treated feed. The bath treatments Salmosan ( chemical name Azamethiphos), Excis chemical name Cypermethrin) and Alphamax ( Deltamethrin), where the salmon are immersed in a diluted solution of the treatment chemical require dispersion modelling to predict the concentration in the water column after release. Results from both AutoDepomod and the Bath model have been provided in the next section. 7

3 MODELLING RESULTS 3.1 BIOMASS RESULTS AutoDepomod was run initially with the company s preferred stocking density of 13.6334kg/m3, and proposed cage layout, using the model s auto-distribute biomass function. The model did not require to iterate to an EQS-complaint solution as a pass was achieved at this stocking density and pen volume for the resultant maximum allowable biomass of 2,500 tonnes. At this biomass the model predicts the 80% solids area to be 72,205m2 while the flux in area is expected to be 1,167g/m2/year. The proposed layout and tonnage results in a cage area of 38,284m2 with a minimum ITI of 3.8 within the area. The flux in the cage group area is predicted to be less than the trigger value ( 10,000g/m2/year) at 9,661g/m2/year. The benthic sampling area ( ITI = 30) is expected to be 95,091.2m2 flux inside this area will be 191.8g/m2/ year. The plotted AutoDepomod output for the Int-Spring run 2 is shown in Figure 4. A summary with all of this information can be found in BDNC16vF1_ marine_ sum_v3.xls and in BATH TREATMENTS Recommended consent mass in 3hrs Azamethiphos Recommended consent mass in 24 hrs Azamethiphos Recommended consent mass in 3 hrs Cypermethrin Recommended consent mass in 3 hrs Deltamethrin 324.6g cage/treatment, 2.8 treatment/day 229.2g cage/treatment, 2 treatment/day 58.8g cages/treatment, 10.3 treatments/day 22g cages/treatment, 9.6 treatments/ day Table 7 of this report. Figure 4 Benthic impact for run 2, Int-Spring current data 8

The mass of solids released in run 2 is estimated to be 1,020,816kg with 49% ( 496,442kg) predicted to remain within the 1km2 modelling grid, thus 51% (524,374kg) of the input load is predicted to be transported from the model grid as a result of resuspension. The site is classed as moderately flushed with a vector average residual of 0.022m/s at 258 G indicating that this waste material is likely to be dispersed away from the cages in a southwesterly direction. 3.1.1 TRANSECT AND SAMPLING STATIONS Two transect profiles were created ( Figure 5) as part of SEPA s requirements to determine site-specific sampling locations. The selected and spare transect information have been saved to the BDNCvF1- BcnstFI- S-2_000.xls file located in the mapping folder. Details of both transect starting points are provided in Table 5 below. Figure 5 Location of the selected and spare transects 9

Transect X1 Y1 X2 Y2 Bearing Length Depth T1 177595.9 704603. 5 177705. 7 704830. 2 25.8 251.9 41.2 T2 177355.2 704364. 7 177184. 4 704174. 6 222 255.6 40.7 Table 5 Selected and Spare Transect Starting Points Table 6 describe the location and details of the three selected and spare survey stations. Figure 6 shows the cross-sections of the selected and spare transects, and the relevant survey stations. SELECTED EQS - 10m 1st Station) S1 EQS 2nd Station) S2 EQS + 10m 3rd Station) S3 SPARE EQS - 10m 1st Station) S1 EQS 2nd Station) S2 EQS + 10m 3rd Station) S3 NGR Easting 177634 177638. 4 177642. 7 NGR Easting 177291. 5 177284. 8 177278. 1 NGR Northing 704682. 3 704691. 3 704700. 3 NGR Northing 704293. 8 704286. 4 704278. 9 Distance (m) 87.5 97.5 107.5 Distance (m) 95.3 105.3 115.3 CD depth (m) 39.6 38.9 38 CD depth (m) 36.9 36.6 36.5 Modelled ITI 24.7 30 36.9 Modelled ITI 24.5 30 36.5 10

Table 6a&b The details of the three selected and spare survey stations respectively Figure 6 Cross- sections of both the selected and spare transects respectively 11

3.2 IN-FEED TREATMENTS 3.2.1 SLICE The SLICE aspect of AutoDepomod was run initially for a Total Allowable Quantity sufficient to treat 3.1 times the proposed peak biomass ( 2,712.5g & 7,750 tonnes respectively). Marine Harvest have followed SEPA s guidance and used the maximum feedload for the site in the model, resulting in a feedload of 8,103T. The model did not require to iterate to an EQS-complaint solution as a pass was achieved at this quantity and biomass. The predicted area inside the 0.763 g/kg contour (115,299m2) was smaller than the predicted far field AZE area (154,889m2). The mean concentration of Slice in the near field AZE exceeds the EQS trigger value of 7.63g/kg by 132.97g/kg and thus enhanced monitoring will be required at the site if Slice is used. The plotted AutoDepomod output for this run is shown in Figure 7. A further run for 223 days duration was performed to obtain a site residual curve for this biomass. Figure 7 EmBZ concentrations for run 1 (118 days) The mass of EmBZ remaining on the bed at the end of run 1 was 1,088g. For Slice, in the absence of resuspension, 74% or 2,007.25g of the input EmBZ load would remain on the seabed after 118 days. This indicates that less than half of the original input load is lost through resuspension ( 33.9%). The mass of EmBZ lost from the grid (919.25g) represents an equivalent area of 9.97km2 if it assumed to distribute evenly at the far field EQS concentration of 0.763g/kg sediment. 12

3.3 BATH MODEL RESULTS Cage details are given in section 2. The cage treatment depth used for the bath treatments was 1m. Using the results from the analysis of the surface current meter data in the short term bath treatment model EQS compliance for both Deltamethrin and Cypermethrin at this cage depth was predicted. EQS compliance for Azamethiphos was predicted at a cage depth of 1m. Cypermethrin & Deltamethrin Results: Cage Treatment Depth = 1m Permissible Quantity of Cypermethrin = 58.8g; 10.3 cage/3 hours Permissible Quantity of Deltamethrin = 22g; 9.6 cage/3 hours Azamethiphos Results: Cage treatment depth = 1m Permissible Quantity of Azamethiphos = 324.6g; 2.8 cage/3 hours Permissible Quantity of Azamethiphos = 229.2g; 2 cage/24 hours The permissible quantity of Cypermethrin or Deltamethrin ( 4.7 cage/3hrs) means that full treatment of the 10 pens at the site, would take approximately one/two days to complete. The bath treatment model files are saved in the folder BDNC16vF1\Bath 13

4 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS It is recommended that the biomass and treatment amounts are consented at this site as given below in BATH TREATMENTS Recommended consent mass in 3hrs Azamethiphos Recommended consent mass in 24 hrs Azamethiphos Recommended consent mass in 3 hrs Cypermethrin Recommended consent mass in 3 hrs Deltamethrin 324.6g cage/treatment, 2.8 treatment/ day 229.2g cage/treatment, 2 treatment/ day 58.8g cages/treatment, 10.3 treatments/ day 22g cages/treatment, 9.6 treatments/day Table 7. The results of the modelling performed at this site are given in the file : BDNC16vF1_ marine_sum_v3.xls in the BDNC16vF1 folder. BENTHIC MODELLING: Max fish biomass proposed ( T) 2,500 Cage depth (m) 16 Max Average Stocking Density (kg/m³) 13.6334 Maximum number of cages 10 loss of solids from model grid (%) 51 Cage area equivalent (m²) 38,284 Flux in the cage area (g/m²/y) 9,661 ITI in the cage area 3.8 Flux under cages is less than the trigger value 80% solids area (m²) 72,205 Flux in the 80% solids area (g/m²/y) 1,167 ITI in the 80% solids area 12.6 Benthic sampling area (m²) 95,091.2 Flux in the benthic sampling area (g/m²/y) 191.8 ITI in benthic sampling area 30 SITE SPECIFIC SAMPLING: Transect start coordinates 177596 704604 Direction ( T) 25.8 CD Depth (m) 41.2 Distance to the 30ITI contour ( m) 97.5 SPARE TRANSECT INFORMATION Transect start coordinates 177355 704365 Direction ( T) 222 CD Depth (m) 40.7 Distance to the 30ITI contour ( m) 105.3 14

IN-FEED TREATMENTS Peak fish biomass at site (T) 2,500 Near Field AZE (m²) 57,084 Far Field AZE (m²) 154,889 Recommended consent mass EmBZ (g) 2,712.5 Equivalent Fish Biomass ( T) 7,750 Maximum Treatment Amount EmBZ (g) 875 Area of Impact at Far Field EQS (m²) 115,299 loss of EmBZ from model grid (%) 9.97 BATH TREATMENTS Recommended consent mass in 3hrs Azamethiphos Recommended consent mass in 24 hrs Azamethiphos Recommended consent mass in 3 hrs Cypermethrin Recommended consent mass in 3 hrs Deltamethrin 324.6g cage/treatment, 2.8 treatment/ day 229.2g cage/treatment, 2 treatment/ day 58.8g cages/treatment, 10.3 treatments/ day 22g cages/treatment, 9.6 treatments/day Table 7 Modelling Results Summarised 15

REFERENCES SEPA 2005. Regulation and monitoring of marine cage fish farming in Scotland - a procedures manual: Annex G Models for assessing the use of medicines in bath treatments (January 2007). SEPA, 2005. Regulation and monitoring of marine cage fish farming in Scotland - a procedures manual: Annex H - Methods for Modelling In-Feed Anti-Parasitics and Benthic Effects (June 2005) SEPA, 2005. Regulation and monitoring of marine cage fish farming in Scotland - a procedures manual: Attachment VIII Hydrographic data requirements for applications to discharge from Marine Cage Fish Farm (May 2005). UKHO, 2002. Admiralty Tide Tables; volume 1 UK and Ireland. United Kingdom Hydrographic Office, Taunton. 16