MORE than three quarters of Scottish salmon farms certified as “sustainable” broke the environmental rules of the certifying body last year without losing their accreditation, The Ferret can reveal.
We examined inspection reports published by the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) – which certifies “highest standard” farms with a public-facing “green tick” – and found there have been breaches of its rules at dozens of fish farms.
Some sites suffered months-long lice infestations and misdeclared death tolls while others were found to have overused chemicals and deployed unsafe, unauthorised equipment. No farms had their “green tick” accreditations removed, unless voluntarily.
The ASC works at arm’s length from seafood producers. But the company it contracts to inspect Scottish farms, Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance (LRQA), employs the majority of its Scottish inspectors from former roles in the aquaculture industry, The Ferret can also reveal.
LRQA was also responsible for certifying Uygur labour in Chinese seafood processing plants as socially responsible, despite known human rights abuses.
In Scotland, LRQA’s head inspector worked in fish farming for three decades and another prominent inspector appeared to work for a fish farming company and LRQA simultaneously.
Environmental campaigners described the system as “woefully lax” and accused it of misleading consumers who chose products “believing that this certification is far more robust than it is in reality”.
One former auditor from another sustainability certification body described our findings as “the norm” within a system where “the people getting inspected are the people paying for a service”.
ASC said helping fish farms find and fix rule-breaking is “a core part” of its “continuous improvement approach” and that suggesting farms should lose their sustainable accreditation for breaking rules “misunderstands how an independent certification system works”.
Salmon Scotland, a trade body for the farmed fish industry, said ASC helps aquaculture companies “strengthen performance”. LRQA did not respond to requests for comment.
Non-conformities THE ASC awards site-by-site “green tick” certifications to recognise “environmentally and socially responsible” farmed seafood around the world.
The ticks are used in marketing to retail and wholesale consumers, to help companies meet sustainability targets and to secure “green” bonds for future investments.
Farms which apply for the certification are judged against a set of environmental and social criteria, and subject to annual inspections. In 2025, these revealed regular breaches of certain rules – like accurate counting of dead fish and environmentally safe numbers of sea lice – as well as more unusual rule-breaks and violations.
One Mowi farm in Loch Etive, near Oban, was found using an unauthorised piece of equipment to remove dead salmon which staff called “the Reaper”. Inspectors saw this “sucking up” and killing living wrasse fish which had been placed in pens to clean salmon.
Mowi staff explained that the cleanerfish were new so staff were not trained to deal with them, according to the inspection report. The issue was resolved remotely after the company sent LRQA a “snap shot” of its training.
Across a number of Bakkafrost farms inspectors found either that the number of dead fish reported was incorrect, or that their cause of death had been recorded incorrectly. Accurate mortality counting should allow regulators to close farms with high death tolls, a recent parliamentary enquiry concluded.
At some sites dead fish were too disfigured – by jellyfish stings or rotting underwater – for staff to identify a cause of death. At Gravir farm, off the Isle of Lewis, a staffer simply “called out the wrong number” of dead fish without categorising them at all.
The most common rule-breaking concerned acceptable lice counts. Recent academic studies cited in government aquaculture regulations have found that lice from salmon farms kill juvenile wild fish migrating near pens and hinder the recovery of wild populations at large.
Bakkafrost blamed “occasional breaches” at nine of its farms on the fact that its fleet of boats used to treat lice infestations were too busy at other sites “where the issue is greater”. At three Mowi sites staff said fish were either too sick to treat for lice, or that their organic status restricted them from using chemicals to help.
Bakkafrost staff also questioned the ASC’s thresholds (which were raised fivefold in 2023), arguing that their fish were big enough to safely support more lice.
Abigail Penny, executive director of animal welfare campaign group Animal Equality UK, asked how accepting so many breaches is “supposed to deter bad practice”.
“What a cosy little arrangement these farms find themselves in. They can go about their business, causing untold suffering to animals and wreaking havoc on the environment, mostly without any real risk of repercussion,” she said. “Consumers are being sorely misled into believing that this certification is something far more robust than it is in reality.”
Bakkafrost and Mowi are the only two Scottish fish farmers which currently apply to the ASC for accreditation. Replying on behalf of both, Salmon Scotland first asked for a list of sites which had broken rules.
When The Ferret provided one, the industry group did not respond to any specific breaches. Instead, a spokesperson touted £1bn investment in “responsible farming” and celebrated survival rates and lice levels.
“ASC certification provides an additional layer of independent scrutiny and is designed to drive continuous improvement through transparent reporting,” the spokesperson added. “Its audit process identifies opportunities to strengthen performance and ensures any issues are addressed.”
ASC’S global press and media manager, Sophia Balod, rejected the idea that rule-breaking (a “non-conformity” in the council’s vocabulary) undermined a farm’s certification.
“The suggestion that any non-conformity should automatically result in a farm losing its ASC certification misunderstands how an independent certification system works,” she told The Ferret in a written statement, which added that breaches are identified and addressed in order for a site to keep its tick.
“The fact that a nonconformity is identified and publicly reported demonstrates that the audit process is identifying issues that require attention; it does not in itself mean that a farm should immediately lose certification.”
The Ferret identified a number of farms which identified the same non-conformity in repeat years without losing their certification.
In inspection reports for more than a dozen individual farms, non-conformities are described as “systemic” or “repeat” breaches from the year before. This included farms suffering months-long lice infestations which breached ASC thresholds, and inaccurate counts of dead fish multiple years in a row.
Balod says that repeat rule-breaking “does not, on its own, indicate a lack of improvement; the circumstances, evidence and corrective actions must be considered.”
Revolving Door THE Ferret identified a number of LRQA’s inspectors with close ties to the aquaculture industry, according to their own professional social media profiles.
The senior auditor responsible for signing off on most of ASC’s certified Scottish farms in 2025 worked for fish farming companies for three decades before joining LRQA under its previous name, Food Certification International.
Another “technical expert” joined LRQA directly from fish farming company Scottish Sea Farms (SSF). Their LinkedIn profile shows the inspector working for both SSF and LRQA for an overlapping seven months. They did not respond to our request for a comment.
Another technical auditor approved Scottish farms from Chile, after working for seven years as chief of certifications for Cooke’s Latin American office.
LRQA did not respond to requests for comment.
ASC’s Balod said that evidence of an inspector working for a company while certifying the same company “would clearly warrant examination” but that “relevant professional experience within the aquaculture sector does not in itself constitute a conflict of interest”.
She added that ASC contracts a third company, ASI, to oversee subcontractors like LRQA.
MARK Borthwick worked as an auditor with another certification body, the Soil Association, before becoming an animal welfare researcher.
“What you’ve identified is the norm across the industry,” he said. “These schemes place a downwards pressure on standards and practice: the government offloads health and welfare to these schemes, but the schemes have every incentive to be lax.”
He cited both the turnover of staff between farming companies and inspectors, and the royalties ASC earns on products sold with their ticks. ASC said outsourcing audits maintains the integrity of its certifications from financial incentives. Borthwick said this “diffuses the responsibility” for holding farms to account.
“Anyone could tell you the incentive structure places a downward pressure on welfare, but it’s always someone else’s problem in the chain,” he said. “There’s no need for a formal conspiracy when everyone’s incentives point in the same direction.”
