'Scotland can protect wild salmon - if we face every pressure with honesty'

Ahead of the May 7 election that will decide who controls the next Scottish Government, former Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) official and aquaculture sector executive Anne Anderson has written a series of five articles exploring why some of the most contested debates around salmon farming remain unresolved despite extensive evidence and policy intent. Today she looks at what is causing the decline of Scotland's wild salmon, and what must be done to halt the fall in numbers.

Scotland’s wild salmon are in crisis, yet the national conversation about why has become increasingly narrow. Salmon farming is often portrayed as the main culprit, but recent scientific assessments and regulatory reviews have reinforced just how complex that picture actually is. Multiple interacting pressures determine survival, and progress depends on addressing all of them honestly.

The Chief Scientific Adviser Marine’s 2026 review of SEPA’s Sea Lice Regulatory Framework is a useful starting point. The review concluded that the scientific basis for the framework is sound and defensible, even as it recommended better documentation, clearer thresholds, and more consistent implementation. Scotland’s regulatory system can be credible, but continual refinement is essential.

A critical protection: Scotland’s east coast presumption

One of the most overlooked facts is Scotland’s long‑standing presumption, reinforced through the National Planning Framework 4, which prevents open net pen salmon farming on the north and east coasts, in precisely the regions used by the majority of migratory salmon.

Those fish never encounter a farm, yet they continue to decline. This reinforces a point already made explicit in the Scottish Wild Salmon Strategy: marine survival is decreasing across the North Atlantic due to climate‑driven changes, prey shifts, and widespread environmental pressures. Recognising this does not diminish concerns about local impacts; it simply corrects the misconception that aquaculture is the dominant driver of national declines.

Sea lice: important, but only one pressure

Sea lice remain a legitimate coastal risk. SEPA note that salmon face multiple pressures, including habitat barriers, climate change, and degraded water conditions, and that lice can add an additional burden. The CSA Marine review confirms that Scotland’s approach is scientifically robust yet still developing. Sea lice matter, but they are not the whole story and treating them as such obscures what is required for real recovery.

Having worked with regulators, industry, and NGOs, I’ve seen how debate narrows when stakeholders focus on their own priorities rather than the full ecological picture. That kind of narrowing increasingly limits Scotland’s ability to act effectively on wild salmon conservation.

Climate‑driven river warming: a major emerging threat

One of the clearest risks is in Scotland’s rivers. Research from the James Hutton Institute and University of Aberdeen (2024) shows that river temperatures in the west and northwest could rise by up to 4°C by 2051–2080. Higher temperatures increase physiological stress, reduce juvenile survival, and raise catch‑and‑release mortality. These impacts require riparian planting, habitat restoration, water‑quality improvements, and catchment‑scale climate resilience.

Angling pressures: a necessary conversation

Angling is culturally and economically important, but as rivers warm, catch‑and‑release mortality increases. The Environment Agency’s scientific review highlights the temperature-sensitivity of post-release survival. Put simply, in warm conditions, fish are already under physiological stress, leaving them with little capacity to cope with the added strain of being hooked, handled, and released. Norway has responded to historically low returns with temporary river closures and stricter controls. Scotland may need similar adaptive responses, not to diminish angling, but to protect the long-term viability of the resource on which it depends. This is uncomfortable, but unavoidable.

A just transition for river communities

Wild salmon recovery affects river management, employment, and rural economic stability, particularly in hospitality. Angling visitors sustain hotels, restaurants, and local businesses. If declining stocks force temporary closures, the economic shock will hit those operators first. Support packages, diversification assistance, and conservation-linked tourism investment are needed to avoid long-term damage to rural communities. Scotland now needs an across‑government strategy that is genuinely holistic, one that goes beyond the Wild Salmon Strategy and provides the enabling framework required to restore wild salmon and the jobs and communities that depend on them.

What MSPs need to grapple with

To protect Scotland’s wild salmon, MSPs should:

• Deliver a holistic national strategy covering the entire salmon lifecycle.
• Support expanded conservation roles for river‑based workers.
• Assist hospitality businesses affected by necessary conservation measures.
• Ensure fair, evidence‑led regulation across freshwater, land, coastal, and marine activities.
• Prioritise catchment‑scale climate adaptation.

Scotland can secure the future of its iconic wild salmon – but only if we face every pressure with honesty and act with ambition.

Tomorrow: Wild salmon recovery is not an isolated environmental issue - it is a window into the wider condition of rural Scotland. The same forces shaping salmon’s future - climate resilience, infrastructure gaps, economic fragility, and the need for coordinated investment - also shape the prospects of the communities alongside them. The next article steps back to explore this bigger picture: the rural infrastructure, connectivity, and economic transformation Scotland must embrace if those communities are to thrive.