The Scottish Government has refused to be drawn into row over research which has pitched an industry body against one of Scotland's leading universities.
A row erupted after St Andrews University claimed 39% of Atlantic salmon deaths were due to parasites, while salmon farmers, represented by the Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation (SSPO), said the figure is 1% to 2%.
Both sides extrapolated their conclusions from near-identical data. The SSPO accused Scotland's oldest university of misleading the nation. St Andrews is standing by its findings.
While it has been claimed sea lice thrive among farmed salmon kept in coastal cages, the Government said that the case was not proven.
A Scottish Government spokesman gave no explanation for the reasons for such a wide variation in conclusions.
He added: "We will consider carefully the recent St Andrew's University report on the impact of sea lice on wild salmon in the marine environment.
"The study acknowledges it does not provide any new data on the impact of sea lice on salmon, nor was it about the particular effects of fish farms, but rather brings together data from a number of studies in Norway and Ireland and analyses them in a new way.
"We recognise there are disagreements between the parties over the interpretation of the report.
"The Scottish Government continues to consider any evidence of an impact on wild fish stocks from fish farms, but the suggestion that the decline of wild salmon stocks in Scotland is as a result of sea lice emanating from fish farms is not proven.
"It is, however, appropriate that interested parties continue to discuss and debate the evidence and we would encourage them to do so in a constructive way."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article