SCOTTISH salmon faces "huge unnecessary burdens" due to the Brexit deal being pursued by the UK Government, according to the trade body for the sector.
Exports to the EU do not need Export Health Certificates (EHCs) because of the free movement of goods within the union.
However, the UK Government's decision not to align with EU regulations in the future has caused concerns that EHCs will be needed once the transition period ends on December 31.
The Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation (SSPO) estimates the cost of the added measures for Scottish farmed salmon will be between £1.3 million and £8.7 million per year.
Producers also warned that lorry-loads of Scottish salmon could be left to rot in an industrial estate at a cost of millions of pounds to the economy, in part due to the extra time it will take to process them.
Julie Hesketh-Laird, chief executive of the SSPO, said: "Scottish farmed salmon is the UK's biggest food export.
"We now send more than £190 million worth of salmon to France, a third of our total exports.
"Once in the main French markets, the salmon can then be dispatched to almost anywhere in the EU.
"We deal in a perishable product so it is crucial for the thousands of loyal customers we have in the EU that we get our fresh fish to key markets as quickly and smoothly as possible."
The added costs would depend on the amount charged by councils for each EHC and the number required per lorry load.
The SSPO also predicts it could mean the processing and signing of an extra 50,000 to 100,000 certificates every year.
Each one has to be signed by either an environmental health officer or a vet, meaning extra staff would be needed at the main haulage distribution hub, the DFDS base at Larkhall in South Lanarkshire, and delays and hold-ups in the dispatch of salmon to the continent.
Hesketh-Laird added: "We are appealing to the UK Government to make this a priority in negotiations with the EU.
"We want both sides to commit to allow seafood trade to the EU to continue as it is now, without the imposition of any new tariff or non-tariff barriers and we want UK ministers to call for this in negotiations."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel