The Salmon Welfare Scorecard (SWS) provides a transparent overview of the the policies and practices published by leading salmon producers.

It evaluates producers across thirteen key parameters, offering a clear and comprehensive classification of publicly shared salmon welfare practices.

While any assessment involves some level of subjectivity, the Scorecard is designed to compare participants as objectively as possible.

Assessment

Documents evaluated

Each producer was assessed based on their publicly available content related to salmon welfare.

This included reports, policies and company-owned websites that are accessible to the public. Only official company websites were considered, as Compassion in World Farming believes that companies should make their reported data easily available through their own official communications, without relying on third-party sources.

Assessment form

A structured assessment form was developed to register the documents and organise the information collected for each producer.

Each document was recorded along with the date it was accessed to ensure accurate future reference. To streamline referencing, each document was assigned a code representing the document type (W: Website; P: Policy; R: Report) and a number to identify it.

The assessment form is divided into thirteen parameters. Information from the documents was classified under the relevant parameter by copying the relevant sentence into a designated field alongside the corresponding answer. Each entry included the document code and the page number where the information could be found.

Parameter structure

Each parameter is divided into several related topics to provide a more detailed assessment. These topics are further broken down into

Sub-parameters or Topics
Statements or Questions

These subdivisions allow for a more granular classification of the information found in the assessed documents, enabling a more precise evaluation when scoring each parameter.

Types of answers

One the main objectives of the Salmon Welfare Scorecard (SWS) is to standardize the information published by producers. Each parameter subdivision is paired with a set of answers designed to describe the related topic. When assessing the information, the answer that most accurately describes the practice was selected.

There are two types of answers:

Single choice: A drop-down list where only one answer can be selected. This is used when a practice can be sufficiently described with a single, specific answer.
Multiple choice: A list of possible answers where multiple selections can be made. This is used when the topic involves several potential answers, though not all may be applicable.

Unscored topics

The SWS includes certain subdivisions that are not scored. These topics are considered relevant to welfare by CIWF and may become significant in the future, or represent practices we aim to promote, though they are not yet widely adopted.

These sections serve to introduce emerging topics that could be incorporated into future editions of the Scorecard or to foster ongoing discussions around evolving welfare practices.

Parameters

The parameters were organised to accurately reflect and classify practices, ensuring that the scores effectively represent the producers' performance.

Enclosure

The enclosure parameter covers the systems in which salmon are grown, ensuring these environments meet their natural needs and minimise the risk of injuries.

Recently, there has been a growing interest in using Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) for salmon farming. Unfortunately, these systems lead to an undesired intensification of aquaculture and raise significant welfare concerns, including extremely high stocking densities, water quality issues, technology failures and barren environments.

Enclosure
Environmental enrichment	Provision
	Type (not scored)
	Species-specific
Recirculating Aquaculture System
Design of the enclosure	Design to not cause injury
Design of the enclosure	Mimics natural environment

Feed and Feeding

This section gathers information on salmon feeding practices, ensuring that all fish are adequately fed and are prevented from starvation. Fasting periods should be minimised as they can induce stress, and should only used when absolutely necessary for fish welfare purposes.

Fish Meal and Fish Oil are currently essential components of salmon diets, but their use raises sustainability concerns for fisheries and contributes to broader welfare issues in the industry. This section evaluates whether they are plans to reduce their use and examines the sourcing of these ingredients.

Feed and Feeding
Feeding method
Fasting	When it is used
	Repeated fasting
	Registration
	Duration
Fish Meal and Fish Oil content	Use
	Origin of fish ingredients
	Reduction plan

Genetics

This section addresses the use of genetically engineered, cloned or triploid animals in salmon farming. While these techniques may improve productivity, their impact on fish welfare remains largely unknown.

Additionally, there is a risk that such fish could negatively affect wild populations if they escape from the cages where they are reared.

Genetics
Use of genetic engineered salmon
Use of cloned salmon
Use of triploid salmon

Health Planning and Treatments

The health and welfare of salmon are paramount and should be managed through a comprehensive plan developed and reviewed by a qualified health or welfare professional.

It is essential to clearly document when and why salmon are treated, who approves the treatments, and the quantities used. Particular attention should be given to the use of antibiotics, due to the global concern over antibiotic resistance. A key recommended practice is vaccinating fish during their rearing phase to help prevent diseases and reduce the need for antibiotics.

Health Planning and Treatments
Designated fish health/welfare responsible
Health and Welfare Plan	Presence and design
	Revision
	Treatments outlined
Non-antibiotic treatments	Approval
Non-antibiotic treatments	Registration
Growth promoters
Vaccination	Salmon
Vaccination	Cleaner fish
Antibiotic treatments	Prophylactic use
	Permitted use
	Use of critical antibiotics
	Reduction plan
	Target
	Measuring unit
	Public reporting

Humane Slaughter

All animals slaughtered for food must be treated humanely. This requires them to be effectively stunned, rendered instantly insensible, and remain unconsciousness until death occurs.

Commercially available technical solutions exist to ensure this standard and they should be used. This parameter evaluates the stunning and slaughter methods in use, as well as the extent of their application.

Additionally, a reliable back-up system is necessary to ensure a humane end to the animals' lives, should the primary method fail.

Humane Slaughter
Statement on humane slaughter
Implementation	Percentage of implementation
Implementation	Target to implement
Stunning and slaughter	Use of a stun-kill method
	Stunning method
	Slaughter method
Back-up system

Key Welfare Indicators (KWI)

The health and welfare of fish must be regularly assessed and monitored throughout the rearing period.

Various types of indicators can be used to evaluate welfare, and for this Scorecard, they are classified into physical and behavioural indicators. The goal is to encourage greater use of behavioural indicators, which are often underutilised and generally reported in a vague manner.

Physical indicators are well-established, and their use is expected, while behavioural indicators are less commonly used, but provide valuable insights into the overall welfare of the fish.

Key Welfare Indicators (KWI)
General statement on monitoring welfare
Physical indicators	Monitoring frequency
	Registration
	Types
Behavioural indicators	Are they used?
	Monitoring frequency
	Registration
	Type (Not Scored)

Mortality

Although mortality could be considered a welfare indicator, we have given it a separate parameter due to its social relevancy, the availability of data, and how it is typically reported.

Mortality data is widely collected, often on a daily or high-frequency basis. While it is a retrospective measure and can be a crude indicator of welfare issues on the farm, an increase in mortality rates may signal overlooked welfare concerns.

It is essential to report mortality rates, along with the causes, and to clearly disclose how these figures are calculated and what factors are included in the mortality calculation.

Additionally, we suggest that acute mortality events be considered as another important measure to evaluate welfare practices on a farm.

Mortality
Recording frequency
Mortality reduction plan
Mortality reporting	Publicly reported
	Loses included
	Causes reported
	How it is calculated?
	% of cumulative mortality (Not Scored)
Acute mortality events	Number of acute mortality events (Not Scored)
	Publicly reported
	Causes reported
	Intervention

Predator Management

Salmon farms coexist with local wildlife, including predators that are attracted by the concentration of fish and the use of fish feed.

The presence of predators can cause stress to the fish and even result in injury as predators attempt to catch them. Predators can also harm themselves in the process.

It is important to manage interactions between the farms and predators through a control plan that outlines non-lethal actions and methods. The plan should explicitly prohibit lethal methods and prioritise the protection of protected species.

Predator Management
Predator control plan in place
Use of lethal methods
Non-lethal methods
Protected predators specifically mentioned

Sea Lice

Sea lice are one of the most significant welfare challenges in salmon farming today. These crustacean parasites attach to the skin and soft tissues of salmon, thriving in farming conditions and rapidly increasing in number, which negatively impacts salmon welfare and can lead to death.

This parameter assesses how sea lice infestations are monitored and reported. Ideally, producers should have a dedicated team focused on sea lice management to ensure proper attention without time constraints.

Producers should prevent sea lice infestation rather than just treating the affected pens. Current treatments for sea lice are known to be harmful to the salmon, and we recommend phasing out these methods in favour of more effective and welfare-friendly alternatives.

Cleaner fish are often used to manage sea lice, but we suggest phasing out their use. While they may be used for prevention or treatment, their involvement extends the welfare impact to more species, and it remains unclear whether their welfare can be adequately maintained.

Sea Lice
Reporting	Public reporting
Reporting	Reporting level
Who counts the sea lice
Prevention methods
Treatments	Hydrogen peroxide
	Medicinal (chemical) treatment
	Thermal treatment
	Mechanical treatment
	Cleaner fish
	Other treatments

Stocking Density

Stocking density is an important management tool for optimising the welfare of farmed salmon, influenced by both environmental factors and fish behaviour. It is also variable, fluctuating over time.

The stocking density in a salmon farm should be low enough to allow the fish to express natural behaviours, such as dispersing to more favourable areas when water conditions are suboptimal, gaining access to feed or seeking their preferred environmental conditions.

We recommend that salmon farms set a maximum stocking density of 10 kg/m3 and report their stocking density as accurately as possible.

Stocking Density
Maximum stocking density set
What volume of water is used to calculate stocking density
Stocking density reported	Average stocking density
	Separate freshwater and seawater stages
	How it is calculated?

Training and Husbandry

Awareness of fish welfare is crucial for implementing effective practices across the company. A deep understanding of the reasoning behind these practices and fostering empathy for the animals under care are essential components of comprehensive training programs. These programs should cover all relevant topics and be regularly updated to incorporate new insights and developments in the field.

This parameter includes three husbandry procedures - crowding, grading, and handling - that directly impact salmon welfare. These practices should be minimised and only carried out when absolutely necessary. Furthermore, clear limits and procedures should be established to assess and ensure the welfare of fish during these operations.

Training and Husbandry
Fish welfare training	Training topics
Fish welfare training	Repetition
Husbandry procedures	Crowding
	Grading
	Handling

Transport and Transfer

Salmon are often transported during their rearing process, typically at the end of their lives for slaughter, or for treatments and cage transfers. These movements can be highly stressful for the fish and may compromise their welfare.

In this parameter, we focus on the reporting of transportation and transfer practices. We assess how salmon are transported, the methods used for transfer, and whether appropriate measures are in place to ensure the welfare of the fish throughout these processes.

Transport and Transfer
Fish are transported for slaughter?
Materials and methods for transfer of fish	Equipment
Materials and methods for transfer of fish	Use of pumps
Transport of fish for slaughter or other reasons	Method
	Stocking density
	Water quality
	Fish welfare

Water Quality

Water quality is essential for the health and welfare of farmed salmon, as poor water conditions can lead to significant welfare issues. Producers should have a proactive plan in place to monitor and address any deterioration in water quality to ensure the salmon under their care remain healthy.

We recommend that water parameters be measured regularly, ideally on a daily basis depending on the parameter. Measurements should be taken at different depths within the facility to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the water available to the salmon, and ensuring optimal conditions for their well-being.

Water Quality
Reaction plan to rapid changes and suboptimal conditions
Measurements at different depths
Parameters measured and frequency	Oxygen
	Salinity
	Temperature
	Turbidity
	Other parameters

Calculation of scores

Basis of the scoring

The scores in the Salmon Welfare Scorecard are based on Compassion's corporate asks and recommendations for Atlantic salmon (Salmon salar). These recommendations are informed by the knowledge reviewed and summarised in our technical resources for Atlantic salmon.

Throughout the development process, we incorporated valuable feedback from stakeholders. While not all feedback was included, it had a significant impact on shaping the questions, answers and overall design of the Scorecard, including the distribution of scores.

Scores

Each score is calculated using formulas embedded within the assessment form. These formulas determine the score for each subdivision based on the answers provided.

Individual scoring

Each of the thirteen parameters are scored independently. The score for one parameter it is not influenced by the answers given for other parameters.

The only exception to this rule concerns the use of cleaner fish. While not directly scored, the presence of clearner fish in the Sea Lice parameter influences the score distribution in the Enclosure parameter. Specifically, the environmental enrichment score for the Enclosure parameter will be shared between the cleaner fish and the salmon.

The Scorecard does not generate an overall score for each producer that combines the scores of all parameters.

Weights or proportions

The scoring for each parameter is distributed across its subdivisions, with each subdivision assigned a proportion based on its relative importance for salmon welfare. This is designed to promote better practices, encourage detailed reporting, and reward high welfare standards.

Similarly, each answer within a subdivision is assigned a proportion, with a higher weight given to answers that reflect better practices. This differentiation helps highlight good welfare practices.

Calculation rules

Several rules are applied during the scoring process when answers to certain subdivisions depend others within the parameter or when a single answer is not sufficient to fully describe a topic. The following rules are applied across the parameters, either individually or in combincation:

Addition: Applied to multiple choice answers. The score for each selected answer is added together to calculate the final score for that subdivision.
Condition: Used when the answer to one subdivision influences the answer opitons available to another. The scoring depends on the interrelation between answers across subdivisions.
Prioritisation: Applied when a multiple-choice answers describe different practices, and simply adding scores isn't appropriate. The practice considered the least beneficial to salmon welfare (or the least ideal for reporting purposes) will receive the highest score, while still acknowledging all practices reflected in the documents.

Public tiers

Final scores for each parameter are summarised into five public tiers to reflect each producer’s performance.

The tiers range from 1 to 5, with 1 representing the lowest performance and 5 the highest. Each tier represents increments of 20% of the total score. A colour gradient from red (lowest) to green (highest) is used to visually represent each tier.

Table Key: Percentage of score achieved for each parameter.
	Tier 5: 80 - 100%
	Tier 4: 60 - 80%
	Tier 3: 40 - 60%
	Tier 2: 20 - 40%
	Tier 1: 0 - 20%

Flagging salmon welfare controversies

Protocol

The Salmon Welfare Scorecard has been established to drive improvements in the welfare of farmed salmon by:

Analysing and comparing producers based on their management practices, policy commitments and public disclosures related to salmon welfare.
Catalysing and enabling stakeholders in the supply chain - including the public - to advocate for improved management of the risks and opportunities associated with farmed salmon welfare in the food industry.

The Salmon Welfare Scorecard relies exclusively on publicly disclosed information. This approach is intentionally designed to encourage greater transparency, empowering supply chain stakeholders to hold companies accountable for their salmon welfare practices and performance.

The Salmon Welfare Scorecard is a biennial evaluation based on publicly disclosed information at a specific point in time. It is not an audit scheme, nor does it endorse any producers. Furthermore, it does not have the capacity to verify individual company claims or address specific allegations of poor practices or performance.

As a leading animal welfare organisation, Compassion in World Farming does not condone any instance of animal cruelty. In cases where producers evaluated in the Scorecard are accused of welfare practices that fall below acceptable standards, the following steps will be taken:

Compassion in World Farming will conduct an initial review of the case to establish the significance of the issue, the credibility of the data/evidence, and any actions taken by the company.
If the case is deemed significant, credible and relevant to the Scorecard, it will be referred to the Assessment Team - a group of aquatic specialists and Food Business Managers involved in the Aquatics Project. The team will review the evidence and determine the appropriate course of action.
In cases where there is a significant, credible and relevant issue reported that contradicts the Scorecard's assessment (either explicitly or implicitly), the company and the affected parameter will be flagged on the Salmon Welfare Scorecard webpage. This flag will indicate concerns about the accuracy or implementation of the producer's public policies. We will:
- Tag the company and involved parameter in the Salmon Welfare Scorecard website as being the subject of one or more significant concerns.
- Encourage the supply chain stakeholders to write to the company, individually or collectively, highlighting the issues of concern and requesting a meeting.
- Once a case is considered by the Assessment Team to be satisfactorily resolved, the website tag will be updated but the producer will remain tagged for a period agreed by the Assessment Team (generally 6 months).

Representation in the scorecard

When a producer or parameter is flagged, it will be represented by its tier number and colour, accompanied by an exclamation mark ("!").

The Scorecard states: '!' indicates a parameter where other relevant information may suggest uncertainty about the accuracy or implementation of the producer's public policies. However, the tier number and colour still reflect what is found in their public policies.”