A.          RTD (Practical)

• Impact of alien species (Impasse); ongoing project interlinks to alien species regulation. Looking for guidelines on quarantine and best stock enhancement practises.
• Potential for using fish farm waste – has scope for certain products. Probably needs refining and clarity in results.
  • Recommendation to address disease content/impact in waste discharge and treatment
  • Recommendation to asses impact/use/value of sludge (concentrated farm waste)
• ‘Sustainaqua’ – special focus on water treatment/recirculation in functional farms – use less water for same or higher production.
  • RAS has a role – but very slow on implementation – how can users benefit from this R&D on site (cost/benefit)
  • Model farms in Denmark best example to date
• Improved consumer communication needed – works well in France, Italy, Spain etc. (e.g. Test achats network) – Newer Member States not so well established on this front
• Malformations rest a major ‘quality’ and productivity issue;
  • need to look at dietary availability and legislation on supplements (some conflicts)in feeds
  • feed components/supplements  still an issue

B.         Managerial/Commercial

• Natura2000/Birds Directive – major problem for inland farmers
• FEAP/IUCN Guidelines on Mediterranean (Sustainability indicators) mentioned (addressing farmers/decision-makers): Can this model be applied to continental Freshwater aquaculture?
  • FEAP/IUCN agreement expanded to include freshwater in Oct 2008
  • Similar approach would need funding
• Presentations on eel production referred to Eel Management plans and difficulties encountered in this sector.
  • Glass eel/elver production? In hatcheries? To counter export of glass eel?
• Measuring and proving sustainability a big issue for the sector
  • Role for improving CONSENSUS indicators?
• Sturgeon seen as big opportunity – mainly for caviar production – but all of a sturgeon can be used (cf. pigs) – applications in other areas (cosmetics, pharmaceuticals…)
• Technology transfer and skill development remains an issue, particularly if difficult to get younger people into the sector

C.          Social/Political

• Water Framework Directive rather scary as fish farmers seen as ‘industrial polluters’ – many freshwater farmers throughout Europe still not sure how WFD will affect their fish farm
  Need for a full impact study? Water charges based on volume ‘use’ would kill the business.
  Use based on transit vs. evaporation?
  Close consultation required on WFD developments needed (e.g. classification of water bodies)
  Role of large ponds (inland Europe) in water catchment – Natura 2000 (needs promotion)
  Benefits if water quality improves in passage through ponds
  Pond Farmers should be seen as partners in WFD implementation
• Spatial planning a big issue: no regional policies for freshwater aquaculture
• Fish Health; risk-based surveillance and compartmentalisation ); monitoring of health status of surrounding water. Overlap with principles of WFD. Does this need examination?
• Availability of land & water, environmental interactions dominate thinking; pond farms need large space for small production levels. Scope for development (inc productivity)
  • Need to quantify costs to meet environmental references – establish [economic] tolerance levels between farmer and society (research needed on this – absence of solid data)
• Irritation on implementation of WFD – farmers feel it has potential to reduce level playing field (subsidiarity application).
• Noted difficulty in getting RTD into practise in the field
• Need to raise skill levels
• Need review of financial impact and real costs of implementation of WFD (throughout Europe)
• Need improved governance within inland Continental aquaculture (cf NACEE, EIFAC…)
• Need to develop a more REGIONAL approach, including governance, on some issues (e.g. consumer issues, WFD management)
• Communication again raised as an issue.