Workers at an Arnarlax sea farm. The company - a subsidiary of Icelandic Salmon, owned by SalMar - is one of those affected by the revocation of licenses in Iceland.
Photo: Arnarlax.
In Iceland, the Environmental and Natural Resources Board of Appeal has issued two rulings on the granting of two operating licenses issued by the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority (MAST) in Ísafjarðardjúp. In the first, the Board has fully revoked the license issued in May to Arnarlax for a maximum biomass of 10,000 tons of sterile salmon. In the second, it partially annulled the license issued in February to Arctic Sea Farm, for a maximum biomass of 8,000 tons, in this case of rainbow trout and salmon.
The Board of Appeal issued a third ruling as well rejecting the request to invalidate the license granted in March also to Arctic Sea Farm for a maximum biomass of 7,800 tons of sterile salmon in the Patreks- and Tálkna fjords.
As said, on May 21, 2024 MAST granted Arnarlax an operating license issued on May 21, 2024 for a maximum biomass of 10,000 tons of sterile salmon at three sites in Ísafjarðardjúp: Óshlíð, Eyjahlíð and Drangsvík.
Earlier, on February 29, 2024, it had been Arctic Sea Farm – a subsidiary of Arctic Fish - which had secured a license for a maximum biomass of 8,000 tons of rainbow trout and salmon at Ísafjarðardjúp, also for three sites: Arnarnes, Kirkjusund, and Sandeyri, of which 5,200 tons were fertile salmon.
In the case of this fjord, in their argument, the appellants cited problems such as lack of site-specific coordinates, navigational safety concerns, inadequate coastal zoning, non-compliance with building laws and cultural heritage laws, lack of a new genetic intermixing risk assessment under the Aquaculture Act, breaches of environmental principles under the Nature Conservation Act, and the responsibility of one of the permit holders in the country's largest fish escape incident, among others.
The Environmental and Natural Resources Board of Appeal dismissed part of these arguments but did cite a clear negative position on the risk assessment for navigational safety at the Óshlíð site due to "high vessel traffic and no feasible mitigating actions," which led to the cancellation of the operating permit that had been granted to Arnarlax for this site.
In addition, the Board ruled that the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority must issue reasoned decisions on disease-related issues associated with aquaculture operations. It concluded that MAST's documentation lacked a comprehensive risk assessment regarding the spread of animal diseases and parasites resulting from the exemption granted to reduce the 5 km minimum distance between unrelated operators.
Consequently, the Board of Appeal annulled the decision to permit sea cage fish farming not only at Óshlíð but also at Eyjahlíð and Drangsvík, i.e. at the three Arnarlax sites in Ísafjarðardjúp. This is also why the MAST decisions affecting two of the Arctic Sea Farm sites, Arnarnes and Kirkjusund, were annulled, while the permit for Sandeyri remains in force.
Following the news, Arnarlax - Iceland's leading salmon farming company and a subsidiary of Icelandic Salmon, itself owned by Norway's SalMar - issued a statement appreciating the decision of the Environmental and Natural Resources Board of Appeal to revoke the license for sterile salmon farming in Ísafjarðardjú originally granted in June this year.
"This is unfortunate but will not affect our longterm guideance for production of fertile salmon on current licenses. We are now going over the ruling and will work with MAST on the next steps," said Arnarlax CEO, Bjørn Hembre.
The company said it will cooperate with the environmental authorities and MAST on all matters cited for revoking the license and will conduct the necessary evaluation to have it reissued.
In addition, its parent company, Icelandic Salmon, stressed that no fish farming operations have been initiated in Ísafjarðardjúp and that the judgment will therefore have no effect on current operations or directions.
Regarding the appeals on the Patreks- and Tálknafjörður-licenses, the appellants argued that the environmental impact of the project needed to be reassessed, asserted that the coordinates for farming sites were missing, and argued that MAST was obliged to ensure a minimum distance of 5 km between unrelated operators.
Likewise, as in the Ísafjarðardjúp appeal, they also expressed concerns about navigation safety, non-compliance with environmental law, responsibility in a major fish escape incident, and lack of a construction permit, citing inadequate Westfjords coastal zoning and environmental impact assessments.
The Environmental and Natural Resources Board of Appeal said that, during permit renewals, MAST must reassess compliance with animal health and welfare laws. They noted that site coordinates must be specified, noting the distinction between permit issuance and activation, and that the coordinates of the growing sites are included in the location certificate.
However, after considering the arguments, the Board of Appeal concluded that MAST had indeed fulfilled its duty to verify that the applicants complied with fish health, specific disease prevention, and welfare requirements.
Therefore, the Board finally rejected the request to overrule MAST's decision that on March 21, 2024, had renewed a license to Arctic Sea Farm - as mentioned, a subsidiary of Arctic Fish, itself owned by Norway's salmon giant Mowi - for a maximum biomass of 7,800 tons of sterile salmon in the Patreks- and Tálkna Fjords, including the establishment of a new farming site at Kvígindisdalur and adjustments to the resting periods.
