Surveillance Report for NE Sakhalin Island Pink Salmon Fishery MRAG‐F‐0006, MRAG‐F‐0007

MRAG Americas, Inc. 10051 5th St N, Suite 105, St Petersburg, FL 33702, USA

January 22, 2014

CLIENT DETAILS: Smirnykhovsky Regional Fisheries Association Mr. Vladimir Smirnov; Email: [email protected]

Companies Andrei and Tamara Mr. Andrei Sukhotin; Email: [email protected] Mr. Yury Mamaev

Document template tracking no.: MRAG‐MSC‐7e‐v1

MSC reference standards: MSC Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing Version 1.1 MSC Certification Requirements Version 1.2 MSC Guidance to Certification Requirements Version 1.1 MSC Accreditation Manual Version 5

General Information

Fishery Name: NE Sakhalin (Nogliki & Smirnykh Districts) Unit(s) of Certification: Pink Salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) Geographical boundaries Northwest Pacific, Russian Far East, Sakhalin Island Certification Date: June 12, 2013 Certification Expiry Date: June 11, 2017 Surveillance Assessment Team: Principle 1, Principle 2, Principle 3. Ray Beamesderfer Dr. Vladimir Tabunkov On‐site Audit Date: October 21‐23, 2013 Surveillance Stage: First surveillance audit Surveillance Frequency: Annual

Project Code: RU1090 Issue ref: First Surveillance Audit Report Date of issue: January 22, 2014 Prepared by: Ray Beamesderfer, Vladimir Tabunkov Checked/Approved by: RJT Contents

Summary ...... 4 1 Clarify if any new information warrants a review of the assessment scoring...... 4 2 Background ...... 5 2.1 Fishery Area ...... 5 2.2 Target Species ...... 5 2.3 Gear ...... 7 2.4 Seasons ...... 7 2.5 Organization ...... 7 3 The Surveillance Process ...... 8 4 Current Information ...... 9 4.1 Principle I – Target Stock ...... 10 4.2 Principle II - Ecosystem Elements ...... 17 4.3 Management System ...... 19 5 MSC Certification validation requirements ...... 20 5.1 Public claims made by the client ...... 20 5.2 Review of any personnel changes in science, management or industry ...... 20 5.3 Review of any changes to the scientific base of information ...... 20 6 Progress in implementing the client action plan ...... 21 6.1 Condition 1 ...... 21 6.2 Condition 2 ...... 26 6.3 Condition 3 ...... 28 6.4 Condition 4 ...... 32 6.5 Condition 5 ...... 34 6.6 Condition 6 ...... 36 6.7 Condition 7 ...... 39 6.8 Condition 8 ...... 41 7 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 43 7.1 Progress relative to milestones ...... 43 7.2 Closed-out conditions ...... 43 7.3 Surveillance ...... 43 7.4 Certification Decision ...... 43 7.5 Recommendations ...... 44 8 Appendices ...... 45 8.1 Summary of Historical Reports by Rukhlov ...... 45 8.2 Summary of socio-oriented study of illegal fishing in NE Sakhalin implemented in 2013 46 8.3 Summary of SakNiro Taimen Article ...... 48

Summary The conclusion of the audit is that the certificate for the Northeast Sakhalin Pink Salmon Fishery should be extended for another year. The audit identified no substantive changes in management systems, regulations, personnel involved in science, management or industry, or the scientific base of information. The audit found that the Client Action Plan is being implemented, but that documentation of progress for a number of milestones was not provided. Hence, several milestones are identified as behind schedule. These issues will need to be rectified by the next scheduled surveillance in order to maintain this certification. All conditions remain open – none were scheduled for closure at this time.

Condition Indicator Status 1 1.2.2. Harvest control rules & tools Open & behind schedule 2 1.2.3. Information & monitoring Open & ahead of schedule 3 1.2.4. Assessment of stock status Open & ahead of schedule 4 2.1.1. Retained species – outcome Open & behind schedule 5 2.1.3. Retained species – information Open & ahead of schedule 6 2.3.3. ETP Species – information Open & on schedule 7 3.2.3. Compliance & enforcement Open & behind schedule 8 3.2.4. Research plan Open & behind schedule

1 Clarify if any new information warrants a review of the assessment scoring. There is no information that would prompt a review of the assessment scoring. All conditions remain open and so principle scores are unchanged.

MSC Principle Assessment Revision Principle 1: Sustainability of Exploited Stock Overall: 80.7 No change Principle 2: Maintenance of Ecosystem Overall: 80.7 No change Principle 3: Effective Management System Overall: 81.3 No change

2 Background 2.1 Fishery Area This fishery includes the Smirnykh and Nogliki districts of the northeastern Coast (Figure 1). The Smirnykh district is located in mid Island north of Terpenie Bay. This administrative district extends across the island from the east to west coast but only the eastern portion bordering 100 km of the Sea of Okhotsk is included in this assessment. The coastline of this district is relatively remote and undeveloped with only one road providing access from the mountainous interior to the only significant village on this coast – Pogranichnoe which is located at the mouth of the Langeri River. The Langeri is the largest river in this area, extending 108 km in length. Other significant rivers in this area include the Pilenga, Bogataya, Kostina, Khoi, Vengeri, and Khuzi. These systems are typically 30 to 60 km in length.

The Nogliki district includes a 200 km section of the northeast coast bordering the Sea of Okhotsk. The area is lightly populated but most of the major rivers and streams are crossed by the road system. The mountains generally lie inland from the coast, river valleys are swamped and several rivers flow into lagoon‐type bays (Kaev and Geraschenko 2008). Many of the commercial fishing trap nets of this region are located inside these bays including Nivskii Bay where several of the companies in this certification operate. The district contains about 20 large rivers and streams. The 330 km Tym is one of the two largest rivers on the island (the other being the Poronai River which flows into Terpenie Bay). Other large rivers in the Nogliki district include the Nabil, Dagi, Dzhimdan, Val, Askasay, and Evay – each is 60‐100 km in length.

2.2 Target Species The fishery targets the abundant pink salmon. This species spawns in low gradient gravel areas of streams and rivers throughout the region. Sakhalin pink salmon typically average about 1.5 to 2 kg and 50‐60 cm. The ocean distribution of Northeast Sakhalin pink salmon includes the Okhotsk and Bering seas. Pink salmon mature at two years of age. Odd‐year returns predominate on Sakhalin Island.

Sakhalin pink salmon are believed by the management system to intermix within each of six regions with little or no straying among the regions. Genetic analyses of pink salmon stock structure have generally identified broad geographical patterns but little or no difference among local populations of the same run component in any given region. Natural straying among local populations of pink salmon appears to be more significant than in other salmon species. Fish are believed to generally return to the same group of rivers (for instance inflowing to the same bay) but not necessarily to the same river. However, distinct seasonal run timing and geographical distribution patterns among pink salmon in many parts of Sakhalin Island suggest that there is significant substructure within the pink salmon stock. Homing fidelity is typically greater for large rivers (Tym, Poronai, Liutoga, and Naiba) which provide sufficient length and freshwater residence for local imprinting. Sea Val of Askasay Okhotsk Evay

Dagi

Nyivo Bay Dzhimdan

Orkuni Tym

Ado-Tymovsky Vazhi Nogliki Hatchery District Nabil Pilenga Hatchery

Chamru Nam

Smirnykh District Khuzi Negli

Langeri Vengeri

Khoi

Pilenga Bogotaya

Aniva District

Figure 1. Sakhalin Island fishing areas addressed by this assessment. 2.3 Gear These fisheries are conducted primarily with fixed trap nets in near shore coastal waters. Drifting trap nets are fished in a few locations including Nyivo Bay in the Nogliki District. River mouth net traps are also employed in two rivers of the Smirnykh district.1 Beach seines and floating gillnets are also occasionally used. The effects of all four commercial fishery gear types, coastal trap nets, river fishing weirs, beach seines, and floating gillnets, are considered in this assessment. However, only fish from coastal trap nets operated by the fishing companies participating in certificate sharing with the clients are authorized for sale under the MSC logo.

2.4 Seasons The pink salmon fishery in the Smirnykh and Nogliki districts typically operates from early/mid July through the first week of September, generally ending on September 5. This period coincides with the peak return timing of the Okhotsk pink salmon stock endemic to these areas. After September 5, fisheries may be conducted for chum salmon according to availability. In the Nogliki District, the chum run typically begins around August 10‐15 and dominates after August 20.

2.5 Organization The commercial salmon fishery is conducted by fishing companies. Each company operates one or more fishing sites. Fishing sites are currently leased from the government for a 20 year period. A total of 8 fishing companies have certificate sharing agreements to participate if the units of certification are certified.2 In the Smirnykh region, participants represent 20% (2 of 10) of the companies, and approximately one quarter of the average annual harvest. In the Nogliki region, participants represent 43% (6 of 14) of the companies and approximately one third of the average annual harvest.

1 River mouth nets are not employed by members of the district fishing association sharing the fishery certificate. 2 Nogliki District: OOO Lovets, OOO Tamara, OOO Dagi, OOO Okhotskoe more, IP Khryanin, OOO Irida. Smirnykh District: OOO Plavnik, OOO Sadko. 3 The Surveillance Process In preparation for this surveillance audit, stakeholders were contacted by notice on the MSC website and by direct email, and invited to submit comments. The notification of the surveillance audit was originally published on the MSC website on the 8 August, 2013 and revised on 30 September 2013.

The first annual surveillance audit was carried out at in Yuzhno‐Sakhalinsk, Russia on October 21‐22, 2013. The surveillance team consisted of Ray Beamesderfer and Vladamir Tabunkov, both of whom were members of the assessment team. Dr. Dimitri Lajus of St. Petersburg University attended the meetings as a consultant to the clients. Sergei Didenko of the Sakhalin Salmon Initiative attended the meetings as a facilitator on behalf of the clients. Meetings were conducted in the Hotel Gargarin and in various company and agency offices.

The surveillance team met with the following: Name Affiliation Subject Vladamir Smirnov Smirnikh Fishing company client Recent fisheries, new information,

Andrei Sukhotin Nogliki Fishing company client progress on conditions 21

Vladamir Samarskiy Sakrydvod Recent fish runs & fisheries, (director) availability of assessment Oct information, hatchery program developments. Representative SKTU (informal meeting) Information on illegal, un‐reported harvest & related enforcement activities Dr. Lev Zhivotovsky Vavilov Institute of General Current scientific information on Genetics, Russian Academy of pink salmon, chum salmon and Sciences taimen genetics & related research 22 plans

Oct Alexander Buslov SakhNiro Availability of salmon information (director) for fishery region, new hatchery Andrey Zhivogliadov assessment process, formal (Head of Salmon research plan documentation, Laboratory) technical basis for escapement goals, new taimen information

Discussions covered all issues as laid out in annex CG of the MSC Certification Requirements, including the principal changes occurring to the fishery within the first year of certification and the outcomes as outlined in the Client Action Plan (CAP) against the conditions set. The assessors drew from referenced material (emails, notices, research submissions, published and draft documents and personal communications) to support the findings in the report. The assessment processes followed the determination of the surveillance level based on Table 1 and Table 2 below. The overall surveillance score is calculated by adding the scores from Table 1. This unit of certification scored 8, which is greater than 2, requiring an annual on‐site surveillance.

Table 1. Criteria to determine surveillance score. Criteria Surveillance score Default Assessment Tree used Yes 0 No 2 Number of open conditions Zero conditions 0 Between 1‐5 conditions 1 More than 5 2 Principle Level scores >=85 0 <85 2 Conditions on outcome PIs Yes 2 No 0

Table 2. Surveillance Level. Score Years after certification or recertification from Surveillance Level Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Table 1 On‐site On‐site On‐site On‐site surveillance 2 or Normal surveillance surveillance surveillance surveillance audit & recertification more audit audit audit audit site visit Off‐site On‐site Off‐site Option surveillance surveillance surveillance 1 On‐site surveillance Remote audit audit audit 1 audit & recertification surveillance Off‐site Off‐site On‐site Option site visit surveillance surveillance surveillance 2 audit audit audit Review of On‐site Review of On‐site surveillance 0 Reduced Surveillance new surveillance new audit & recertification information audit information site visit

4 Current Information There were no major changes highlighted for the fishery, but it is pertinent to summarize the key points. The subject fishing companies are not subject to any current complaints or legal actions. 4.1 Principle I – Target Stock Abundance Pink salmon spawn in at least 107 rivers along the northeast coast of Sakhalin Island. These systems contain an estimated 6 million m2 of spawning habitat suitable for pink salmon. Total productive capacity of northeast region streams is approximately 12 million pink salmon based on assumed spawning densities at capacity of 2 fish/m2 identified by the management system.

Annual run size is estimated from the total harvest of all fishing companies and spawning escapement in index streams. Spawning escapement is counted annually in the northeast region from rivers Dagi (Nogliki), Bogataya (Smirnykh), and Melkaya (Poronaisk) – these systems contain about 36% of the total spawning habitat. Surveys are made in 30 additional rivers in some years. Numbers of wild fry migrants are also estimated in the Dagi and Melkaya rivers. In 2013, SahkNiro also began collecting juvenile migration information from the Langery River in the Smirnykh region (V. Smirnov, personal communication). Fry production numbers are available from each hatchery. Adult and juvenile numbers are extrapolated to other systems based on habitat availability estimates. These data are the basis for total escapement and production estimates summarized in Table 4.

Pink salmon returns to Northeastern Sakhalin have been fluctuating around a long‐term average or increasing over the last 30 years (Figure 2, Table 3). Escapement in surveyed streams has averaged 5.4 and 1.0 million pink salmon in odd and even years respectively for the period of record (1977‐2011). Very large returns were documented in odd years since 2005.

Figure 2. Annual harvest and spawning escapement of pink salmon in the northeast coast of Sakhalin Island including Smirnykh, Nogliki and adjacent areas (Kaev and Geraschenko 2008, Kaev 2011).3

3 2012 data needed.

Table 3. Fishery and escapement numbers of pink salmon (millions) in the northeast coast of Sakhalin Island including Smirnykh, Nogliki and adjacent areas (Kaev and Geraschenko 2008, Kaev 2011). Escapement numbers are available from a variable subset of all spawning rivers.4

Brood Adults Expl. Juveniles (downstream migration) Produc‐ Sur‐ Year Run Catch Escape Rate Wild Hatchery Total % Hat. tion vival Пропуск Степень Подход, Дикой Заводской Всего Доля Про‐ Выжива‐ Год Поймано на эксплу‐ всего молоди молоди молоди заводских дукция емость нерест атации 1977 5.34 256.75 5.90 2.3% 1978 1.65 250.36 8.08 3.2% 1979 5.90 2.40 3.50 41% 233.48 9.88 4.2% 1980 8.08 1.47 6.61 18% 436.02 0.27 0.1% 1981 9.88 0.96 8.92 10% 529.99 7.18 1.4% 1982 0.27 0.19 0.08 70% 10.07 0.13 1.3% 1983 7.18 1.12 6.06 16% 487.56 15.52 3.2% 1984 0.13 0.00 0.13 1% 22.05 0.09 0.4% 1985 15.52 3.97 11.55 26% 185.75 4.34 2.3% 1986 0.09 0.00 0.09 0% 6.79 0.12 1.7% 1987 4.34 1.27 3.07 29% 190.11 3.59 1.9% 1988 0.12 0.00 0.12 0% 11.00 0.64 5.8% 1989 3.59 0.33 3.26 9% 276.56 9.32 3.4% 1990 0.64 0.18 0.45 29% 56.94 0.39 0.7% 1991 9.32 3.63 5.69 39% 252.44 0.55 252.99 0.2% 4.46 1.8% 1992 0.39 0.03 0.36 9% 28.61 0.90 3.1% 1993 4.46 1.26 3.20 28% 185.17 6.36 3.4% 1994 0.90 0.11 0.79 13% 15.69 0.80 5.1% 1995 6.36 1.08 5.28 17% 255.04 10.61 4.2% 1996 0.80 0.10 0.70 13% 31.62 1.13 3.6% 1997 10.61 2.13 8.48 20% 148.58 5.68 3.8% 1998 1.13 0.05 1.08 5% 70.99 0.65 0.9% 1999 5.68 2.19 3.49 39% 424.67 8.16 1.9% 2000 0.65 0.07 0.58 11% 47.96 0.87 1.8% 2001 8.16 3.53 4.63 43% 282.61 12.55 4.4% 2002 0.87 0.06 0.81 7% 104.13 0.82 0.8% 2003 12.55 6.83 5.71 54% 630.71 2.85 633.56 0.4% 24.65 3.9% 2004 0.82 0.19 0.62 23% 83.43 1.00 1.2% 2005 24.65 16.99 7.65 69% 162.31 20.50 12.6% 2006 1.50 0.41 1.09 27% 0.70 8.6 2007 20.50 14.56 5.94 71% 181.5 0.00 182.2 0.4% 20.30 11.2% 2008 8.60 1.13 0.49 94% 609.10 0.42 609.5 0.1% 1.26 0.2% 2009 20.30 18.14 2.16 89% 361.50 0.00 361.5 0.0% 20.58 5.7% 2010 1.26 0.58 0.68 46% 294.50 2.20 296.7 0.7% 2011 20.58 17.43 3.15 85% 0.00 0.0% 2012 All years Avg. Even Odd Since 1990 Avg. Even Odd

4 2012 data needed to address condition 1 was not provided by the client. In the Nogliki District, escapement data were available to the assessment team for 10 systems for many or most years since 2001 (Table 4). Escapements averaged <10% and >100% of capacity based benchmarks in even and odd years, respectively. Capacity‐based benchmarks were met or exceeded in about half of odd years but none of the even years (as is typical of pink salmon with an odd‐even cycle dominance pattern). Escapements exceeded 50% of the benchmark values in the majority of the odd years and none of the even years.

In the Smirnykh District, escapement data were available to the assessment team for 7 systems for many or most years since 2001 (Table 4). The most complete data were available for the Bogataya, Khoi and Pilenga systems. Escapements averaged >50% and about 100% of capacity‐ based benchmarks in even and odd years, respectively. Benchmarks were met or exceeded in fewer than 50% of odd years but none of the even years. Escapements exceeded 50% of the benchmark values in all years for which data were available.

Record high abundance of pink salmon was observed 2012 and 2013 in marine waters of the Northeast region. Data on 2012 escapements needed to evaluation the adequacy of the harvest control rules has not been provided by the client. Escapement data from 2013 will be needed at the next surveillance

Harvest Smirnykh and Nogliki pink salmon harvest averaged approximately 6,000 and 4,000 mt, respectively, from 2001 – present (Table 5). Odd‐year harvests are many‐fold times greater than even‐year harvests on average. Pink salmon harvests have grown steadily on the northeastern coast since the 1990s with record harvests observed in odd‐year runs since 2005 (Table 3, Table 5). Annual exploitation rates of northeastern pink salmon historically averaged 40% in odd‐years and 20% in even‐years, based on data Kaev and Geraschenko (2008). Substantially greater apparent rates were observed with large abundances observed since 2005.

Harvests in the Smirnykh region in 2012 and 2013 were the highest even and odd year totals on record. These high harvests coincided with very poor returns of pink salmon to Aniva Bay, leading to speculation that significant numbers of southern Sakhalin pink salmon were intercepted by Northeast region fisheries. This anomalous migration pattern was associated with warmer‐than‐average nearshore water temperatures in southern Sakhalin.

In the Nogliki region, the 2013 pink salmon fishery was also strong. Fishing companies typically focus on harvest other fish species including herring and chum salmon during even years when pink salmon are not abundant (A. Sukhotin, personal communication).

Table 4. Pink salmon spawning habitat amount and escapement for northeast Sakhalin areas.5

River name Length Area Spawning escapement (thousands) Пропуск на нерестилища (Russian) (English) (km) (103 m2) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Аскасай Askasay ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Б.Вени b. Veni 40.0 20.2 7.7 ‐‐ 16.5 1.3 21.4 4.0 25.3 ‐‐ 8.2 0.6 31.27 Баури Bauri 15.6 12.9 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Чамгу Chamgu 48 274.2 ‐‐ ‐‐ 568.5 ‐‐ 538.9 ‐‐ 543.8 ‐‐ 504.3 49.4 568.52 Даги Dagi 98.0 323.0 477.0 25.6 217.5 21.6 554.0 22.6 380.7 22.4 38.0 26.8 31.58 Джиндан Dzhimdan 68.0 53.5 26.7 16.7 67.4 0.4 11.6 1.1 16.73 Эвай Evay ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Ясынге Iasynge 106.6 ‐‐ 49.2 1.8 146.7 5.2 96.3 ‐‐ 124.3 8.6 73.10 Конги Kongi 29.0 20.0 140.0 ‐‐ 156.3 144.1 0.424 222.4 ‐‐ 130.9 11.5 137.50

Nogliki Набиль Nabil 101.0 372.0 337.7 ‐‐ 253.4 21.2 632.2 ‐‐ 479.8 ‐‐ 245.5 4.1 565.00 Нампи Nampi 36.0 200.0 2,800.0 ‐‐ 500.0 ‐‐ 460.0 ‐‐ 232.0 ‐‐ ‐‐ 44.0 420.00 Оркуньи Orkuni 33.0 20.0 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Пильгни Pilgni 42 108.4 160.0 ‐‐ 239.5 ‐‐ 228.6 14.2 224.2 ‐‐ 179.3 20.7 226.30 Томи Tomi 40.0 240.4 ‐‐ ‐‐ 13.8 ‐‐ 30.3 0.7 41.1 ‐‐ ‐‐ 0.8 ‐‐ Тымь Tym 330.0 1828 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Вал Val ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Вази Vazhi 40.0 19.5 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Б. Хузи B. Khuzi 29.0 5.0 8.0 ‐‐ 7.8 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 10.7 ‐‐ 14.0 ‐‐ 55.80 Березовая Berezhovaya ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 2.90 Богатая Bogotaya 47.0 234.8 535.3 ‐‐ 547.1 ‐‐ ‐‐ 598.7 512.4 312.4 495.4 328.7 164.43 Хой Khoi 41.0 23 23.7 22.4 51.1 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 40.7 50.2 26.2 46.46

Холодный Kholodny ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 29.32 Костина Kostina ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 2.60 Лангери Langery 101.0 260 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 473.4 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 480.00 Smirnykh М.Хузи Malaia Khuzi 32.0 15 51.7 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 24.0 ‐‐ 40.0 ‐‐ 18.73 Пиленга Pilenga 49.0 148 223.0 ‐‐ 238.3 ‐‐ ‐‐ 299.0 367.7 158.9 323.2 158.4 280.00 Пурш‐Пурш Pursh‐Pursh 30.0 25 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Венгери Vengeri 35.0 20 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐

5 2012 data needed to address condition 1 was not provided by the client.

Table 5. Commercial fishery harvest by district and species (thousand metric tonnes). 6

Smirnykh Nogliki Pink Chum Pink Chum Total Companiesa Total Companiesa Total Companiesa Total Companiesa 2001 1,020.8 38.0 ‐ 2,434.1 205.1 ‐ 2002 5.8 ‐ 0.4 ‐ 2003 3,827.9 1,080.0 ‐ 1,558.6 247.4 ‐ 2004 ‐ 33.0 ‐ ‐ 2005 7,072.3 2,631.0 ‐ 5,061.4 1,285.7 ‐ 2006 ‐ 67.0 ‐ ‐ 2007 6,318.0 2,568.0 ‐ 4,753.0 642.1 ‐ 2008 561.0 98.0 ‐ 572.1 164.8 2009 13,199.2 3,800.0 1,130.3 8,206.1 2,497.0 3,195.6 2010 346.4 100.0 865.6 351.5 285.0 2,083.0 2011 10,982.6 2,110.0 499.60 b 9,936.3 713.00 a 2012 380.0 2013 5,170.0 Average 5,416.0 1,390.8 831.8 3,652.6 860.4 1,539.1 Odd‐yr 7,070.1 2,485.3 815.0 5,324.9 975.5 1,954.3 Even‐yr 453.7 114.0 865.6 308.0 285.0 1,123.9 a Companies participating in the certification. b Chum data for 2011 represent catch of chum salmon caught during the pink salmon fishery. No chum target fishery occurred.

6 2012 and 2013 data required to address condition 1 was not provided by the client. Annual Management The fishery is typically open in Smirnykh and Nogliki areas throughout the fishing season unless closures are required based on run size.

2010: The chum fishery was entirely closed. The pink salmon fishery remained open for the duration of the normal season.

2011: Regulatory actions adopted in 2011 by the Anadromous Fish Commission regarding pink salmon fishery in Smirnykh and Nogliki districts included: 21 April: Set up time of beginning of fishing season for salmon fishing in the NE Sakhalin: pink – 11 Jul, chum – 11 Aug, coho – 11 Aug. 31 May, 15 June: Determination of locations for trap nets for fishing of anadromous fish (just a confirmation of what has been done in 2008 for 20 years). 31 May: list of catch size of Pacific salmon (by species) according to applications 15 July: listing of “Plavnik” among companies having permits for sport fishing (pink – 5 mt) 26 August: listing of “Plavnik” among companies having permits for sport fishing (chum – 4 mt) 2 August: allocation of additional quota of Pacific salmon permitted for commercial fishing for “Rybak” (2000 mt of pink). 12 August: allocation of additional quota of Pacific salmon permitted for commercial fishing for Tamara (300 mt of pink). 8 September: allocation of additional amounts of Pacific salmon permitted for commercial fishing for Lovets (25 mt of coho). 8 September: to stop fishing for Pacific salmon on the base rivers of hatcheries by means of elevating of wings of trap nets and closing openings of traps from 00:00 12 September to 22 September 2012. 16 September: to close fishing for Pacific salmon in the NE Sakhalin from Elizaveta cape to Terpenia Cape from 00:00 19 September 2012 (excluding fishing parcel 65‐13‐44). To lift up wings of the trap nets and to close openings of traps from 00:00 19 Sept 2012

2012: Early closures of the pink salmon fishery were considered for the Smirnykh region due to low escapements but the fishery extended through the normal close date of August 22. Mortality was observed in the Malaia Khuzi River estuary due to high fish numbers and warm water conditions. A list of Anadromous Fish Commission regulatory actions for Smirnykh and Nogliki salmon fisheries in 2012 and 2013 is needed to address condition 1.

2013: No in‐season emergency regulations were adopted for the Nogliki pink salmon fishery. The pink salmon fishery was closed after August 24 when chum salmon began to dominate the harvest. No fishing occurred for chum salmon in the Nogliki region in 2013. The chum season was closed prior to the season based on a run size assessment. Enhancement Pink salmon are propagated at one of the two hatcheries in the Nogliki District (Pilenga on the Tym River) and historically contributed a negligible fraction (<1%) of the total estimated juvenile production. Hatchery production in this region is primarily focused on chum rather than pink salmon. Pink salmon releases have been discontinued at the Pilenga Hatchery (V. Samarskiy, personal communication). No hatcheries are present in the Smirnykh District.

According to the Federal Target Program "Improving the efficient use and development of the resource potential of the fishing industry in 2009‐2013", five new hatcheries are planned to be built and 15 more reconstructed, 7 of which are planned to increase the capacity of the hatchery. Potential hatchery sites have been identified on the Val River in the Nogliki District and the Yelnaya (Poronay tributary) in the Smirnykh District. However, neither of these potential hatcheries is currently under further development. No government or private funding has been identified for further hatchery development in these districts. Where hatcheries are being developed in other areas, the focus is on chum salmon because of higher economic returns. For the same reason, a number of pink salmon hatcheries in other districts are reprogramming production from pink salmon to chum salmon.

Table 6. Locations, names, and production capacity of Sakhalin Island salmon hatcheries.

Year Capacity (million eggs) District Hatchery Ownership established River of release Pink Chum Coho Cherry Nogliki Ado‐Tymovsky SakhRybvod 1919 Tym 0 33 3 Nogliki Pilenga Private 1989 Pilenga (Tym) 0.425 15 Subtotal 0.425 48 3 0

Chum salmon account for 80% of the total hatchery production in the Northeast Region. Hatcheries account for less than 0.1% of the pink salmon harvest and less than 20% of the chum salmon harvest in the northeast region (Kaev and Geraschenko 2008; unpublished data for chum). Chum salmon hatcheries have been reported to take the majority of the return for broodstock in some areas (Kaev 2011), although chum salmon are not in the certification unit.

Table 7. Number (millions) of salmon released in hatcheries of the Nogliki regions of Sakhalin Island.

Species Region Hatchery 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Pink Nogliki Ado‐Tymovsky 0 0 0 0 0 Pilenga 0 0.425 0 2.2 0 Total 0 0.425 0 2.2 0 % marked 0 0 0 0 0 Chum Nogliki Ado‐Tymovsky 24.9 26.1 26.0 26.7 27.0 Pilenga 1.0 8.2 9.9 2.2 1.0 Total 25.9 24.3 35.0 28.9 28.0 % marked 0 0 0 0 0 No otolith marking occurs at Northeast Region hatcheries. However, 1,000 otolith samples were collected in the Smirnykh commercial harvest in 2013 in order to estimate the potential contribution of hatchery pink salmon originating in southern Sakhalin programs (V. Samarskiy, personal communication). Similar sampling in the Poronai Region documented some occurrence of pink salmon from Aniva hatcheries in 2013.

4.2 Principle II ‐ Ecosystem Elements Retained Species Other species retained in the Sakhalin pink salmon fishery primarily include other species of salmon including chum, cherry, Chinook, and coho. Small numbers of flatfish and char might also be retained. Of these, only chum salmon typically account for more than 5% of the harvest by weight with a large portion of that occurring in seasonal chum fisheries occurring after the pink salmon fishery time frame. No other species constitutes 20% or more of the total harvest.

Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) were historically produced in large streams and rivers throughout Sakhalin Island but suitable habitats are most abundant in the Northeastern and Terpenie Bay regions. Sakhalin populations are primarily fall late‐run fish which return from September and October. Summer early‐run populations spawning in July and August co‐occur with the fall run in some large rivers including the Tym and Poronai. The Tym River is the only system in the Northeast Region reported to support commercial numbers of chum salmon in the Northeast region although spawning populations of chum are reported to occur in other rivers including the Langery.

Cherry salmon (Oncorhynchus masu) spawn in the upper portions of large river systems including the Tym River. Adults typically return to freshwater from March through May at three or four years of age and spend the summer in freshwater before moving to headwaters to spawn in September and October. Run timing is prior to the current pink salmon commercial fishery time frame.

Small numbers of coho (O. kisutch), Chinook (O. tshawytscha), and sockeye salmon (O. nerka) are harvested in Sakhalin salmon fisheries. Chinook and sockeye do not spawn in Sakhalin Island rivers. Small coho salmon populations have been reported in several Sakhalin systems including the Tym and Naiba rivers.

Char may also be retained and sold in the fishery but volumes are small. Char are widely distributed and common throughout the Sakhalin region. Catch recommendations for char are established by the regional scientific agency but actual catches are typically 50% of recommended levels.

Flatfish are similarly abundant in Sakhalin waters and not highly exploited. Commercial flatfish fisheries occur in the Sakhalin Region but there is no area of overlap with the salmon fishery. Crabs are prohibited from retention due to historical overfishing. By‐catch The design of the traps allows keeping the entire catch of pink salmon and all by‐catch species alive until it gets loaded into boats for delivery to a shore base. By‐catch can be returned to the sea alive or used for commercial purposes or personal consumption. When pink catches are large, most sorting takes place in the processing plant. While pink catches are small, bycatch and retained species are sorted at the time when nets are pulled out of water. By‐catch comprises a very small portion of the harvest in the trap net fishery. A recent bycatch assessment program reported that common bycatch species include char, flatfish, far eastern dace, sculpins, codfish, smelt, and crab. The numbers of any given species fall well below the MSC standards of 5% to 20% used to distinguish main or target species. ETP Species For the purposes of this assessment, endangered, threatened, or protected species are those that are recognized by national legislation and/or binding international agreements (e.g., CITES) to which jurisdictions controlling the fishery under assessment are party. Protected species occasionally intercepted by the Sakhalin pink salmon commercial fishery include Sakhalin taimen, and two species of sturgeon. Harbor seals are also listed in the Red Book of Russia and therefore receive protections by law.

The Northeast region supports some of the largest Taimen populations on the Island in the Piltun, Val, Aksakai and Dagi rivers. There is historical commercial data on Taimen harvest for the Dagi River from the period prior to red listing. Significant numbers of taimen occur in Nyivo Bay in the Nogliki District. Taimen are occasionally caught in Sakhalin commercial fisheries for pink salmon. However, spawning migrations of taimen are substantially earlier than the period of the pink salmon fishery. In the Nogiki region, catch of Taimen by the client company is reportedly 5‐10 per year with most during flounder, herring, smelt and codfish fisheries which occur prior to the salmon fishing season (A. Sukhotin, personal commincation).

Green sturgeon were native to western Sakhalin and the Khabarovsk region but have been widely depleted or extirpated. This species reportedly occurred in the Tym River. Kaluga sturgeon originating from the Amur River on the mainland, are occasionally observed in Sakhalin fisheries. In the central part of NE Sakhalin usual catch of Kaluga is reported as one specimen per stationary net per season. Retention is illegal and sturgeon captured in traps are typically released alive, although fish are sometimes tangled in net wings or walls.

One Nogliki fishing company is licensed by the government to harvest up to 300 seals for commercial sale and to control effects on salmon (A. Sukhotin, personal communication). The quota is established based on recommendations by TINRO‐Center scientists. However, the full quota is not taken due to low commercial values. Harvest is typically 100‐150 per year depending on demand by the local peoples. Most of this harvest occurs before the fishing season. Harvest is considered to have a negligible effect on the seal population due to their very large abundance. 4.3 Management System Management of Sakhalin is administered by Federal and Regional governmental agencies (Figure 3). Sakhalin Island is the subject of the Russian Federation and is under the direction and control of the Government of the Russian Federation. Fisheries of the Russian Federation are managed and controlled by Fisheries Agency of the Russian Federation, which located in Moscow and also represented by a local office on Sakhalin. Operational management of all activities on the island is performed by the Governor of the Sakhalin Region.

Figure 3. Organization of Federal and Regional salmon fishery management structure of Sakhalin Island (source: Wild Salmon Center, Portland, Oregon). The current management system involving fishery regulation by the regional Anadromous Fish Commission, an “Olympic” system where catch is a product of fishing parcels and in‐season abundance rather than pre‐season allocation quotas based on forecasts, and long‐term leases of fishing parcels to commercial companies has been in place since 2008. This system has been widely lauded by the fishing companies and the fishery management agencies as more transparent, responsive and effective than the previous centralized fishery control structure. This system has been particular effective in reducing misreporting of harvest by commercial fishing companies attempting to circumvent limitations of the historical Total Allowable Catch system.

No major changes in the management system were identified during the surveillance audit. However, catch limits of 100 kg of salmon per person per year were adopted for by indigenous people in 2013. Previously, no limit was applied to this catch.

5 MSC Certification validation requirements 5.1 Public claims made by the client None of the clients in the Smirnykh or Nogliki regions is using MSC logo in product labeling or marketing. The only claim by the client is that the fishery is MSC certified and is a sustainable fishery. No unsupportable claims are made.

Permit holders region are not currently realizing any marketing or price benefits of the certification. The entire catch of both clients is sold in Russian domestic markets where the MSC certification apparently provides no additional market value. Neither certificate holder has yet developed access to other international markets. Potential access is currently through intermediaries which absorb any price benefits of MSC certification from the end market. In fact, the Nogliki certificate holder has not yet obtained MSC chain‐of‐custody certification for their processing plant.

5.2 Review of any personnel changes in science, management or industry There have been no significant changes to the organisations managing the fishery, nor the main personnel involved in in the respective organisations.

5.3 Review of any changes to the scientific base of information No significant changes in the scientific base of information regarding this fishery were identified. Stock assessments are conducted annually with results detailed in section 3 of this report. 6 Progress in implementing the client action plan 6.1 Condition 1 1.2.2. Harvest Control Rules & Tools: There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place. SG 80 • Well defined harvest control rules are in place that are consistent with the harvest strategy and ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached. • The selection of the harvest control rules takes into account the main uncertainties.  Available evidence indicates that the tools in use are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules.

Some questions remain regarding the effectiveness of the available tools in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules across the full range of run sizes observed in these highly variable pink salmon stocks. Harvest and exploitation is regulated by the in‐season management system employed in the northeast region pink salmon fishery. Average annual escapements are approximately 100% of capacity‐based targets for monitored streams and escapements fluctuate around target levels in odd years of this odd year cycle dominant pink salmon stock. The assessment team considers escapements of 50‐100% of the capacity‐based target identified by the management system as clearly within a range that avoids recruitment overfishing. However, it remains unclear whether escapements observed to fall under target levels in non‐dominant even years and some odd years reflect limitations of the current harvest control years under certain conditions.

Of particular concern is the use of river mouth nets or weirs and the planned increase in that fishing method in years and streams where escapement objectives are not met.

In addition, empirical support for the escapement target of 2 fish/m2 has not been made available and it is unclear whether this value represents a yield or capacity based objective or benchmark.

Condition By the first surveillance audit, the fishery client must present evidence that a plan is in place to demonstrate that tools are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules. By the second surveillance the fishery client must present evidence that the plan has been implemented. By the third surveillance the fishery client must demonstrate that tools are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules throughout the Northeast Sakhalin Region. Client Action Plan The goal of Russia’s salmon management system is to achieve a regionally optimal escapement of spawners, which is currently set at 2 adult pink per m2 of spawning grounds (if sex ratio is 50:50). The Client will work with SakhNIRO, SKTU, and other authorities to provide justification for this target, including a description of the data and methods used to demonstrate it is robust and appropriate for this region. If adequate justification is lacking (compared to other regions in the Russian Far East or compared to best practices used outside of Russia), the client will develop a research plan to determine an optimal level of escapement for the rivers in the certification unit, including a monitoring plan that can gauge whether escapement targets are routinely being met once they are established. The research plan will be implemented by the 2013 fishing season and the results of the analysis will be provided to the audit team during the third surveillance audit. The success indicator for the plan will be the escapement of the fish to the spawning grounds being at a level that is not lower than the optimal escapement based on existing data from SakhNIRO and Sakhrybvod.

In the future, Client will work in cooperation with other interested organizations and with the assistance of specific research studies in order to clarify the optimal escapement level for each individual river which flows into the sea at Client’s sites, taking into account the ecosystem’s needs for this basin.

To achieve the optimal escapement of spawning grounds by pink producers, Client will regulate the fishery (catch of pink by using stationary nets in sea parcels). Every 5 days companies that are under assessment will indicate the catch in a table, which takes into account the forecast for the area, claimed and fixed quota as well as catch for every five days and the catch with cumulative totals. In addition, the catch of the companies that are not participating in the certification but fishing in the district which is under full assessment is also taken in to account. Monitoring will be conducted from the time when the Anadromous fish Commission decides to begin the fishing season until the fishing season is officially closed.

The Client will undertake all possible efforts to prevent fishing pink in the spawning rivers on fishing counting weirs. The only exception is in cases of a clear threat of the mass death of salmon resulting from a combination of unfavorable hydrological factors. However, the criteria and appearance of such a threat must be pre‐designed for specific rivers relevant to the certified fisheries. In the NE Sakhalin Unit of Certifications, there has been no use of counting weirs in the past. But the Client will investigate the possible use of fish counting weirs and their impacts on wild salmon runs in the Unit of Certification in the case weirs are used. In this case, a report about use and impacts will be provided to the certification body by the second surveillance audit.

Consultation SakhNIRO forecasts the fishery and gives information about the pink returns. Sakhrybvod monitors the escapement and the hydrology of rivers. SKTU approves the decisions of the Commission about harvest regulation. The results of the Anadromous Fish Commission are published at http://sktufar.ru. The representatives of the Client have met with SakhNIRO, Sakhrybvod and SKTU to begin collaboration in order to control the catch and the escapement of spawners to the spawning grounds by using stationary nets, as well as monitoring the hydrological characteristics of the rivers flowing into the sea on their fishing grounds, with the spread of this practice to all rivers. Assessment Actions by client & The client provided additional information regarding the basis for current management escapement goals. organisation  Summaries of reports by F. N. Rukhlov in 1968 and 1972 on characteristics of pink and chum salmon redds – this information was used to establish the escapement target of 2 adult pink per square meter of spawning grounds. (See Appendix 8.1 for a detailed summary)  Explanations of the current interpretation and application of the escapement goals by the management system. Evidence Provided Target spawning densities of two fish per square meter were established by the management system based on historical research by Ruklov which estimated the average area of one pink salmon red to be one square meter. These densities are applied the estimated area of suitable spawning habitat in each stream determined by the regional scientific agency in order to establish spawning “optimum” spawning escapement objectives. Subsequent experience with high sustained yields and stock‐recruitment analyses by SakNiro have confirmed the efficacy of this standards (A. Buslov, SakNiro, personal communication). Salmon escapement goals are typically managed based on production functions defined by stock‐recruitment curves relating spawner numbers with adults produced in the next generation of return. Escapements greater than the habitat capacity will reduce productivity due to density‐dependent regulating factors involving competition for limited space and food. Escapements substantially less than capacity reduce fishery yields. Maximum sustainable yield typically occurs somewhere between 50% and 100% of the habitat “capacity” where capacity is defined based on the point of maximum production in the stock recruitment curve. Discussions with regional fish managers indicate that the spawning escapement goals for pink salmon are effectively treated as the point of maximum production beyond which the capacity of the habitat is exceeded and future returns of salmon decline. Thus, fisheries are managed for a stream‐specific range of spawning escapements estimated to provide maximum recruitment and yield at spawner numbers between 70 and 100% of capacity (S. Makeyev, Sakryvod, personal communication). A. Buslov (SakNiro, personal communication) supported this interpretation, stating that it was better to fall below the goal than above it due to the potential for catastrophic mortality due to high escapements. Stock‐recruitment analyses of aggregate pink salmon production data for Northeast Sakhalin indicate that escapement goals based on 2 fish/m2 exceed levels that maximize production and yield occurs at lower levels of escapement. For the dominant cohort (odd year) data, maximum sustained production of 11.1 million fish was estimated to occur at escapements of 4.1 million. Maximum sustained yield of 7.6 million was estimated to occur at escapements of 3 million. Total productive capacity of northeast region streams is approximately 12 million pink salmon based on assumed spawning densities at capacity of 2 fish/m2 identified by the management system.

Figure 4. Stock-recruitment relationship for odd-year pink salmon data from Table 3.

Substantially lower production was estimated in stock‐recruitment analysis of even‐year broods. Maximum sustained production of 1.6 million fish was estimated to occur at escapements of 2.1 million. Maximum sustained yield of 0.3 million was estimated to occur at escapements of 0.7 million. This analysis suggests that managing for consistently lower escapements in even than in odd years is an appropriate strategy in this fishery, at least when considered from an aggregate population perspective.

Figure 5. Stock-recruitment relationship for even-year pink salmon data from Table 3.

Significant spawning escapements were anecdotally reported to occurr throughout northeast region rivers in 2012 consistent with established practice and historical productivity patterns. However, documentary proof has not been provided. Use of river mouth traps (RUZ) is regulated by the Anadromous Fish Commission. In 2009, RUZs were fished in two rivers of the Smirnykh region for the duration of the fishing season. In 2013, RUZs were employed only in the latter portion of the season. RUZs are not employed in the Nogliki region because the large size of the rivers precludes effective operation. Conclusion Milestones for the first surveillance have been not been met. Some information was provided which suggests that the tools in use are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules and consistent with maintaining high productivity of the stock. However, the following information is needed to document this conclusion.  Spawner‐recruit information from SakhNIRO based on annual run size and escapement estimates to NE Sakhalin streams suitable for an assessment of optimal spawning escapement.  Estimates of spawning escapement by stream for 2012.  Pink salmon harvest in 2012 & 2013 including totals by district for Noglikli & Smirnykh, and totals by participating companies.  List of Anadromous Fish Commission regulatory actions for Smirnykh and Nogliki salmon fisheries in 2012 and 2013. Recommendation Annual assessments of escapement relative to objectives and the use of in‐ season management measures to achieve escapement objectives is necessary for further analysis of progress on this condition. 6.2 Condition 2

1.2.3. Information and monitoring. Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy. SG 80 • Sufficient relevant information related to stock structure, stock productivity, fleet composition and other data is available to support the harvest strategy. • Stock abundance and fishery removals are regularly monitored at a level of accuracy and coverage consistent with the harvest control rule, and one or more indicators are available and monitored with sufficient frequency to support the harvest control rule. • There is good information on all other fishery removals from the stock. • Information is sufficient to estimate the significance of fishery harvests on stock components.

Good information is not available on illegal unregulated harvest of pink salmon in freshwater streams. Multiple sources report a high incidence of illegal harvest but estimates of numbers and exploitation rates are not available. Information is not sufficient to estimate the significance of fishery harvests on population level stock components which represent the diversity of the pink salmon stock within the northeast region. Estimates of the relative magnitude of illegal, unregulated harvest in the Northeast Sakhalin Region are not available. An assessment should include estimates the approximate scale of illegal harvest relative to the legal harvest and a description of a defensible rationale for estimation. The evaluation should also consider the effect of illegal harvests on escapement estimates. Condition By the first surveillance audit, the fishery client must present evidence that a plan is in place with an estimation protocol to obtain good information on all other fishery removals from the stock. By the first surveillance audit, the fishery client must present evidence that a plan is in place to demonstrate that information is sufficient to estimate the significance of fishery harvests on stock components. By the second surveillance the fishery client must present evidence that the plan has been implemented. For subsequent surveillance audits, the client must present credible estimates of other fishery removals. By the second surveillance the fishery client must present evidence that the plan has been implemented. By the third surveillance the fishery client must describe the significance of fishery harvests on key stock components represented by returns to different systems throughout the Northeast Sakhalin Region Client Action Plan Fishing companies that are under assessment have been actively involved in actions to reduce illegal fishing in the Northeast Sakhalin for the past 10 years. These companies work with local and regional enforcement agencies, private security agencies and public organizations to improve the level of protection of the rivers. This work will be continued. The budget for security measures for 2012 has already been adopted. In this case, there is a clear understanding that for the evaluation of the results of anti‐poaching actions, and respectively, in general, to develop an effective strategy to control poaching, there must be clear idea about the illegal fishing ‐ its scope, organization, etc. Therefore, Client has a clear understanding of the need to objectively assess the level of illegal fishing.

By the first surveillance audit, the Client along with the regional fisheries associations, the local salmon councils, Sakhalin Environment Watch, Sakhalin State University will develop a plan to estimate the scale of illegal unregulated salmon harvests in NE Sakhalin. Annual estimates will be available to the surveillance team during the second and subsequent audits. According to this plan, information about illegal fishing reported in the press and information gathered from SKTU, Ministry of Internal Affairs, and Prosecutor’s office and other organizations will be analyzed. In addition, the plan will include working with public organizations.

The participation of public organizations will ensure the gathering of the most accurate information because an objective picture about the level of illegal harvests cannot always be done according to official data. The Client, together with SakhNIRO and Sakhalinrybvod, will develop a plan to estimate illegal fishing not only on fishery stocks in whole, but also on its the most important components (in particular, key populations and subpopulation of the Nogliki and Smirnyh districts). A joint plan will be prepared by the beginning of the first audit and its implementation should be started by the beginning of the second audit. Initial results will be presented by the beginning of the third audit.

The criteria for measuring the reliability of the assessment of the level of illegal harvest will be the verification of the results of the assessments with independent sources of information. To demonstrate that information is sufficient to estimate the significance of fishery harvests on stock components, the client will begin reporting annual harvest by fishing site beginning with the first annual surveillance.

Consultation Different organizations are interested in the assessment of the level of illegal harvest. SakhNIRO: should take into consideration when producing fishing forecasts (although in recent years, after Pacific salmon are excluded from Total Allowable Catch, the level of SakhNIRO’s interest has declined), SKTU: has the duty to monitor compliance with fishing regulations. Accordingly, the level of illegal harvests is a measure of the effectiveness of this control. Fishermen: catch is directly affected by the level of illegal harvests especially under the conditions of the modern methods of fishery management and environmental organizations. Client will engage in dialogue with these organizations. Assessment Actions by client The client has contracted with University anthropologists to conduct a pilot study & management on the feasibility of estimating the significance of pink salmon harvest in illegal and organisation unregulated fisheries in the certification unit. A study plan has been developed and field work was conducted in 2013. Evidence See Appendix 8.1 for a summary of the project proposal and schedule. Provided Conclusion Milestones for the first surveillance have been met. A plan for addressing this condition has been developed. Progress is ahead of schedule with implementation of the project in 2013. Recommendation Implementation of assessment plan will be evaluated at the second surveillance.

6.3 Condition 3

1.2.4. Assessment of Stock Status. There is an adequate assessment of the stock status. SG 80  The stocks are well‐defined and include details on the major component stocks with a clear rationale for conservation, fishery management and stock assessment requirements.  Where indicator stocks are used as the primary source of information for making management decisions on larger groups of stocks in a region, there is evidence of coherence between the status of the indicator stocks and the status of the other stocks they represent within the management unit to the extent that a high likelihood exists of tracking stock status for lower productivity stocks (i.e., those at higher conservation risk).  The assessment is appropriate for the stock and for the harvest control rule, and is evaluating stock status relative to reference points.  The assessment takes uncertainty into account.  The stock assessment is subject to peer review.

Assessments are based on indicator populations rather than indicator stocks. Escapement data are limited for several of the larger pink salmon producing systems in the region including the Tym and (Nogliki District) and Langery (Smirnykh District) rivers. It is unclear whether the monitored systems are representative of the diversity and status of the larger systems which account for a significant portion of the harvest. It is also noteworthy that hatchery production of pinks in this region is limited to the Tym system for which wild escapement data is unavailable.

The concern is that much of the fishery in this region is driven by production from the large systems but assessment data is based on the smaller systems and it is unknown how representative the index populations are of the whole. Differences in stock‐productivity patterns and their application to escapement management are unclear between even and odd‐ year returns of this cycle dominant stock.

Condition By the first surveillance, the fishery client must provide evidence that a plan is in place to provide evidence of coherence between the status of the indicator stocks and the status of the other stocks they represent within the management unit to the extent that a high likelihood exists of tracking stock status for lower productivity stocks (i.e., those at higher conservation risk). The plan must also address uncertainty in the effects of consistent low escapements of even year returns which are substantially below escapement target levels applied to the dominant odd‐year returns. A plan for assessing the validity of the index streams will require escapement data for representative rivers in the area including current index streams and a statistically valid array of non‐index streams to show that the index streams are statistically correlated. Representative streams will need to be stratified by size and geography at the very least. By the second and third surveillance audit, the fishery client must provide evidence that the plan has been implemented and necessary data collection and analysis is underway. By the fourth surveillance audit the client must provide evidence of coherence between the status of the indicator stocks and the status of the other stocks they represent within the management unit to the extent that a high likelihood exists of tracking stock status for lower productivity stocks (i.e., those at higher conservation risk). Client Action Plan Client will work with Sakhalinrybvod and SakhNIRO to monitor pink salmon escapements and juvenile out‐migrations into the sea in the index and non‐index rivers of NE Sakhalin, including the Tym River. This monitoring plan will be available by the first surveillance audit. Initial data will be provided to the audit team starting from the second audit. A minimum of three years of data will be necessary to demonstrate whether index population is representative of other stocks in NE Sakhalin.

Also, Client will assess the existing data (archival or published) in order to analyze the relationship between the fluctuations in the number of index populations and those that they represent. Rivers that are currently in use as index rivers by SakhNIRO will be used for this purpose in this monitoring. These were chosen in 1950‐60 on the criteria of convenience of observing the changes in the number of commercial stock. It will be determined by using correlative analysis how informative these rivers are for management units in general, and if their information value is low, recommendations will be given for their revision.

The analysis will also examine differences in the validity of the index streams between even and odd year cycles. The plan will determine the gradual expansion of the list of rivers in certified districts as well as their inclusion in the analysis.

The plan also provides for monitoring of the construction of new hatcheries (despite the fact that at the present time specific plans for such construction are not available). Additionally, Client will monitor the activities of the salmon hatchery Pilenga, which is currently the only hatchery in the district that releases pink salmon even though in small numbers.

A planned tagging program will begin with an increase in the release of salmon fries from the hatchery. Data on actual release are quite transparent, and therefore allow for reliable estimates. During the period of the release of fry from any hatchery, a commission is formed that includes stakeholders, representatives of authorities, sanitation control, hatcheries, etc. The client can request data on production and keep records accordingly. If the release of pink salmon from the hatcheries grows, then after the number of hatchery salmon reaches a certain percentage of the number of wild fish (the definition of this percentage will require further consultation) a tagging program will be required. Deadlines for the implementation of this program will be determined later.

At the same time, an assessment program for returning salmon will be developed. Because Pilenga is a privately owned, a tagging program will be conducted only with the consent of the hatchery. The initial results of the work performed according to this plan will be presented by the beginning of second audit.

Consultation SakhNIRO and Sakhrybvod share responsibility for the monitoring of pink salmon streams on Sakhalin and they have sufficiently detailed data for many rivers. Client has met with these agencies. Sakhrybvod monitors juvenile releases from hatcheries in the region, regardless of ownership. Assessment Actions by client The client has contracted with St Petersburg State University to conduct a study of & management pink salmon run characteristics in northeast Sakhalin. A study plan has been organisation developed and field work was conducted in 2013. Information and analysis of Tym River pink salmon escapement by tributary and correlations among monitored population throughout the region has been requested from Sahkrybvod by S. Didenko on behalf of the client. Sakniro collected data on the catadromous migration from the Langery River in 2013 for the first time at the encouragement of Smirnov, data will be utilized by SakNiro for monitoring Evidence A brief summary of the study plan, objectives and schedule for the University Provided project were provided as follows. Objectives: 1) Monitoring of spawning migration of pink salmon and collecting data according to SakhNIRO methodology (mostly, from Vladimir Smirnov’s fishery, with some data from Andrey Sukhotin’s fishery). To provide data to SakhNIRO in order to include them in governmental monitoring (addressing MSC condition 1). 2) Collecting samples for analysis of population structure of the Sakhalin Island pink salmon (otoliths, bones, scales) for further processing in SakhNIRO and SPbSU. Researchers:  Igor Orlovsky, bachelor student of SPb State university,  Maria Moganova, MS student of the same university  Dmitry Lajus, PhD, SPb State University. Schedule: 21 July – 25 August 2013 – work at Smirnov’s fishing place 28 July – 1 August sampling at Sukhotin’s fishing place. Brief report Igor Orlovsky and Maria Moganova arrived to Smirnov’s fishing station at 24 July. During their stay they performed ordinary analyses of pink salmon according to SakhNIRO program (size, total and empty weight, sex, gonad weight, fecundity, scales of 100 specimen each five days during all the fishing season – from 25 July to 20 August). Most of samples were taken in Smirnykh district, one sample (100 specimens) were collected by D.Lajus from the Sukhotin fishery, Nogliki district. In total 470 specimen were collected. Students also performed some additional analyses – liver weight, analyses of fish collected in the Langery river. Every day they registered size of catches – totally and separately for each set net and trap (in total, there were four set nets operating, and from three to five traps on each set net). Collected samples will be used for bachelor thesis by I. Orlovsky entitled “Spawning migration of pink salmon in Langery river, NE Sakhalin”. Conclusion Milestones for the first surveillance have been met. A plan for addressing this condition has been developed. Progress is ahead of schedule with implementation of the project in 2013. Recommendation Implementation of assessment plan will be evaluated at the second surveillance.

6.4 Condition 4

2.1.1. Retained Species – Outcome: The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained species. SG 80  Main retained species are highly likely to be within biologically based limits, or if outside the limits there is a partial strategy of demonstrably effective management measures in place such that the fishery does not hinder recovery and rebuilding.

Chum salmon are reportedly depressed in all areas primarily as a result of historical illegal harvests. Thus chum salmon are neither within biologically based limits nor fluctuating around their target reference points, which are defined by annual spawning escapement objectives. While a fishery management strategy of late season closures is at least partially effective in limiting impacts to chum salmon, exploitation rates on chum salmon in the pink salmon fishery time frame are not reported.

In addition, summer run chum salmon, whose timing overlaps that of pink salmon, are reportedly present in some large rivers such as the Tym. Based on the available information, it cannot be concluded that the fishery strategy for pink salmon is demonstrably effective in not hindering recovery and rebuilding of chum salmon.

Condition By the first surveillance, the fishery client must provide evidence that a plan is in place to ensure that pink salmon fishery is demonstrably effective in not hindering recovery and rebuilding of chum salmon. By the second and third surveillance audit, the fishery client must provide evidence that the plan has been implemented. By the fourth surveillance audit the client must provide evidence that the plan is effective. Client Action Plan Client will work with Sakhalinrybvod and SakhNIRO to develop and implement a plan for assessing the catch and stock status of the summer and fall chum salmon in NE Sakhalin by the first surveillance audit. The seasonal data on catch (with a period of 5‐10 days) and escapement data to assess the impact of the pink fishery on chum, will be submitted separately for the Smirnykh and Nogliki districts. Moreover, the possibility of thermal marking of chum for the separation of hatchery and wild chum salmon will be studied. Consultation SakhNIRO and Sakhrybvod share responsibility for the monitoring of chum escapement on Sakhalin and they have sufficiently detailed data for many rivers. Client has met with these agencies. Sakhrybvod monitors juvenile releases from hatcheries in the region, regardless of ownership Assessment Actions by client Additional explanations regarding status and management of chum salmon in & management Northeast Sakhalin was provided by the fishing companies and the governmental organisation scientific agency. Data on sport harvest of chum salmon in the Smirnykh fishing parcels from V. Smirnov provided information on run timing and relative abundance. The client has also contracted with St Petersburg State University to conduct a study of non‐target species retained and discarded catch in the pink salmon fishery. A study plan has been developed and field work was conducted in 2013. Evidence Abundance of the aggregate chum salmon return in the Nogliki District is based on Provided limited index counts conducted in the lower mainstem of the Tym River by SakRybvod for fishery regulation purposes. Almost 30 million chum fry are released annually from hatcheries in the Tym River. Hatchery fish comprise a large proportion of the aggregate return. SakRybvod considers the wild contribution of chum salmon to be neglible although no information on spawning escapement of wild chum is available. Run timing of the fall run chum which predominate in Northeast Sakhalin is predominately in late September and early October. This is substantially later than the pink salmon time frame in July and August. The onset of the chum salmon return typically overlaps with the tail end of the pink salmon return. However, the fishery is regulated based on chum salmon abundance when chum salmon begin to predominate in the harvest. For instance, the Nogliki District was closed on August 24, 2013 following a large proportion of chum in the catch and a weak run size assessment.7 Because of run timing differences between pink and chum salmon, chum salmon comprise a small proportion of the total harvest during the pink salmon fishery timeframe. The majority of the chum harvest occurs in chum target fisheries in years when abundance is sufficient to allow open seasons. The available information on total harvest of pink and chum salmon in each fishing district overestimates the significant of chum during the pink salmon season. Information on the harvest of chum salmon specifically during the pink salmon fishery timeframe is being prepared by the client fishing companies. Conclusion Milestones for the first surveillance have not been met. A plan for addressing this condition has been developed and is being implemented. However, data on commercial harvest of pink and chum salmon in the fishing districts and by the client companies needed to evaluate progress on this condition was not provided. Recommendation Information on the harvest of chum salmon specifically during the pink salmon fishery timeframe is being prepared by the client fishing companies will be reviewed during the second annual surveillance.

7 Closures occur to meet hatchery broodstock needs and allow harvest of returning hatchery fish by fishing companies which operate the hatcheries. 6.5 Condition 5 2.1.3. Retained Species – Information: Information on the nature and extent of retained species is adequate to determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage retained species. SG 80  Qualitative information and some quantitative information are available on the amount of main retained species taken by the fishery.  Information is sufficient to estimate outcome status with respect to biologically based limits.  Information is adequate to support a partial strategy to manage main retained species.  Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk level (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the strategy).

Quantitative data are collected on the harvest and escapement of chum salmon, which is the main retained species. Any significant retention of other species, including flatfish and char, for the purposes of commercial sales is also quantified and reported to the management system. While information on retained species that are sold is reportedly collected, data on species retained for personal use may not be recorded. Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in the risk level (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the strategy) for chum salmon. However, monitoring of retained species is not conducted in sufficient detail to assess ongoing mortalities to other significant retained species (e.g. cherry salmon, coho salmon, char) such that increasing risk levels can be detected. Condition By the first surveillance, the fishery client must provide evidence that a plan is in place to provide sufficient data to detect any increase in risk level (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the strategy) of significant retained species such as cherry salmon, coho salmon, and char. By the second and third surveillance audit, the fishery client must provide evidence that the plan has been implemented and necessary data collection and analysis is underway. By the fourth surveillance audit the client must provide data sufficient results to show that they can detect any increase in risk level of significant retained species such as cherry salmon, coho salmon, and char. Client Action Plan Client will work with Sakhalinrybvod, SakhNIRO and SKTU to develop a plan for monitoring and collecting quantitative data about the catch, any personal use take, and the population status of all retained species in NE Sakhalin, including, but not limited to chum, cherry, coho and char. At the present time, SakhNIRO conducts monitoring and regulation for these species at certain levels. According to the Fishery Rules, the whole catch, including bycatch (used and unused) must be registered in the fishing log. However, since the amount of bycatch is very low, and it is generally used for personal consumption or is simply thrown out (a special permit is required in order to have the fish commercially moved, bycatch in the fishing log goes completely unreported. Because of this, a special methodology for monitoring of bycatch has been developed and successfully applied in 2010. The methodology includes an assessment of the number of species, their sex (for those species in which this determination is possible without special methods), and their size. These studies have allowed the quantification of the amount of bycatch, which has confirmed its small volume. This monitoring was continued in 2011. In order to assess the impact of the salmon fishery on bycatch species, consultations will be held with the experts of SakhNIRO and TINRO in order to identify any potential risks. The initial results will be made available to auditors during the second and third audits. Analysis of the impact of salmon fisheries on the status of by‐catch species will be available to the stakeholders and other interested parties as well as a group of auditors during the fourth audit. Consultation The Client has experience in the collection of data on the size of catches and with receiving biological information on bycatch species at the fishing sites and in the processing plants. Data collection will be done on their own and in cooperation with SakhNIRO. This is especially true for the assessment of the impact of the fisheries on the population status of bycatch species. Assessment Actions by client & The client has contracted with St Petersburg State University to conduct a study management of non‐target species retained and discarded catch in the pink salmon fishery. A organisation study plan has been developed and field work was conducted in 2013. Evidence Provided A brief summary of the study plan, objectives and schedule for the University project were provided as follows. Objectives:  Monitoring of non‐target catch at the pink salmon fishery in 2013 (mostly, from Vladimir Smirnov’s fishery, with some data from Andrey Sukhotin’s fishery).  Summarizing of available information on non‐target species in the NE Sakhalin (including previous samplings and data from companies).  Analysis of effect of pink salmon fishery in the NE Sakhalin on non‐target species. Researchers:  Maria Moganova, MS student of SPb State university  Igor Orlovsky, bachelor student of SPb State university,  Dmitry Lajus, PhD, SPb State University. Brief report The students worked with analysis of bycatch and retained species. They regularly, each five days, performed samples of bycatch and did their analysis at the Smirnov’s fishery in 2013. In total, 192 specimens belonging to 12 species were analysed. Collected samples will be used for master thesis (M.Moganova) entitled “Effect of pink salmon set net fishery in the Sakhalin Island on bycath and retained species”. Similar work is planned in 2014. Conclusion Milestones for the first surveillance have been met. A plan for addressing this condition has been developed. Progress is ahead of schedule with implementation of the project in 2013. Recommendation Implementation of assessment plan will be evaluated at the second surveillance.

6.6 Condition 6 2.3.3. ETP Species – Information: Relevant information is collected to support the management of fishery impacts on ETP species, including: ‐ information for the development of the management strategy; ‐ information to assess the effectiveness of the management strategy; and ‐ information to determine the outcome status of ETP species. SG 80  Information is sufficient to determine whether the fishery and enhancement activities may be a threat to protection and recovery of the ETP species, and if so, to measure trends and support a full strategy to manage impacts.  Sufficient data are available to allow fishery and enhancement activities related mortality and the impact of fishing to be quantitatively estimated for ETP species.

Data are not sufficient for the impact of fishing to be quantitatively estimated for taimen. Even though reported catches of ETP species occur, there is no special monitoring of them. Occasional monitoring occurs from observers from research institutes and fisheries inspection. Documentation of the catch is limited to historical records from commercial sales prior to implementation of conservation regulations, and limited data from independent observations reported previously in this assessment. Information on the distribution and abundance of Sakhalin taimen in the fishery areas is simply inadequate to complete such an assessment.

Condition By the first surveillance audit, the fishery client must provide evidence that a plan is in place to quantitatively estimate fishery and enhancement related mortality and the impact of fishing for ETP species, including taimen. By the second surveillance audit, estimates must be available. Estimates of mortality and impacts must be provided at the third and fourth surveillance audits. It is recommended that the plan includes quantitative estimates of abundance, distribution, and stock structure for ETP species as well as better harvest and incidental take data so that fishery and enhancement related mortality for ETP species, including taimen, can be fully assessed. Client Action Plan The Client, in cooperation with SakhNIRO and/or the Institute of General Genetics (Moscow), will develop an independent observer program on NE Sakhalin sufficient to estimate related mortality of taimen and other ETP species, such as sturgeon, as a result of salmon fishing as well to estimate the impact of this mortality on the state of populations of ETP species. This program will be evaluated in terms of its cost and effectiveness. In the case of there being funds available to ensure a sufficient level of efficiency of such a program, it will be available by the time of the first audit and it will be implemented.

In the event that available funds are insufficient for implementing a full observation program, alternative opportunities will be considered. In particular, acoustic tags which will mark several fish in different certification areas will be used in order to assess the degree of overlap that exists of outmigrations of ETP species with active salmon fishing.

The clients will also examine the potential of implementing annual taimen spawning surveys on NE Sakhalin rivers. Such alternative programs will be submitted by the time of the first audit. Additionally, all available data (not just scientific) regarding population status of Sakhalin taimen and cases of capture of ETP species will be summarized. Preliminary results will be available to the audit team by the second surveillance audit.

Additionally, during the first audit, the client will present materials about the activities of hatcheries and analysis of any potential threats from hatchery activities to taimen populations (e.g. evidence that hatchery equipment is not physically blocking the migration path to the spawning grounds). The program has been ongoing for three years. A report on this program has been published and will be made available during the first surveillance audit. This report shows the results of the genetic analysis of taimen taken from different districts of Sakhalin. Based on these results, the program offers guidelines for the taimens’ conservation.

These proposals will be considered when developing a program to evaluate the impact of pink salmon fishing on the taimen population. Consultation The client will conclude an agreement with SakhNIRO and the Institute of General Genetics (Moscow) to evaluate and, if practical, to implement the above mentioned observer programs.

Assessment Actions by client & The regional governmental scientific agency (SakhNIRO) has recently published a management review of current information on the status and limiting factors of taimen on organisation Sakhalin Island. Dr. Lev Zhivotovsky of Vavilov Institute of General Genetics, Russian Academy of Sciences provided an informal verbal summary of results of genetic analysis of Sakhalin taimen population structure. Bycatch studies identified under condition 5 will also include information on the occurrence of taimen in the fishery. Evidence Provided The SahkNiro publication reported on the status of taimen populations throughout Sakhalin and concluded that the primary threat to taimen is illegal harvest by the general populace in readily‐accessible rivers. Sakniro has estimated approximate harvest levels of this illegal fishing. (See appendix 8.3). Dr. Zhivotovsky highlighted the difficulty of sampling this species due to current status and protective regulations. However, sufficient samples were available from Sakhalin 30 populations to conduct an analysis based on 20 microsatellite loci. This analysis found clear genetic differences among taimen at the population level. Every population was distinct from every other. Genetic indicators were also consistent with a depleted status for many taimen populations. These results have already been incorporated into taimen restoration efforts – a Sakrybvod taimen hatchery project in southeast Sakhalin was retooled to use local broodstock rather than fish transferred from Nogliki’s Dagi River. The article has been submitted for publication in the peer‐reviewed scientific literature. Conclusion Milestones for the first surveillance have been met. A plan for addressing this condition has been developed and is being implemented. Recommendation Implementation of assessment plan will be evaluated at the second surveillance.

6.7 Condition 7 3.2.3. Compliance & Enforcement. Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery and hatchery management measures are enforced and complied with. SG 80  A monitoring, control and surveillance system has been implemented in the fishery and enhancement activities under assessment and has demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules.  Sanctions to deal with noncompliance exist, are consistently applied and thought to provide effective deterrence.  Some evidence exists to demonstrate fishers and hatchery operators comply with the management system under assessment, including, when required, providing information of importance to the effective management of the fishery and its enhancement activities.  There is no evidence of systematic noncompliance.

Evidence of parcel operators placing or extending nets beyond the boundary of the parcels indicates that the management system has not implemented a procedure to assure compliance with permits for operations at the parcels. Continuing problems with illegal harvest call into question the adequacy of enforcement of relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules in providing comprehensive controls. Independent sources of information are largely nonexistent for verifying the legality of commercial fishery operators. While commercial fishing companies participating in the fisheries appear to be effectively regulated, illegal harvest by others in freshwater erodes the benefits of those efforts. Questions remain regarding the consistency of application and the effectiveness of deterrence for illegal harvest activities in freshwater. Condition By the first surveillance audit, the fishery client must provide evidence that a plan is in place to assure a monitoring, control and surveillance system for the fishery and enhancement activities under assessment will demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules. By the second surveillance audit, the fishery client must provide evidence that the plan has been implemented. By the third annual audit the fishery client must provide evidence that the system enforces relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules with sanctions that provide effective deterrence for illegal harvest. It is recommended that evidence provided consistent with this condition include documentation and corroboration from official sources. Client Action Plan Client will work with the fishing companies in the certification unit to explore and implement options for cooperatively policing their fishery for regulation compliance. The Client will document the official data on the number of raids, identified offenses, arrests, fines, as well as the number of cases brought to court. At the same time, an attempt will be made to assess how the official information corresponds to the actual state of affairs. An analysis will be made of governmental agency as well as private company activities to ensure compliance with the Fishery Rules. There will also be an attempt to understand how the decision about the level of protection is made and how the effectiveness of law enforcement organizations is evaluated. Based on this, options for improving the monitoring and protection will be offered. In addition, the client will work with relevant non governmental organizations to obtain satellite imagery of NE Sakhalin fishing parcels to determine regulatory compliance with gear use regulations. The client is committed to conduct this monitoring work at least during “fish years” for pink (e.g. 2013, 2015). A plan for funding and implementing this work will be developed by the first annual audit. Satellite photos will be taken at undisclosed times during the following fishing seasons by a third party (presumably by "ScanEx"). Consultation Much of this work can be initiated by the Client without governmental assistance. Discussions have already begun with relevant experts and non governmental organizations including ScanEx http://www.scanex.ru/en/ and Sakhalin Environment Watch http://sakhalin.environment.ru/ Assessment Actions by client The Smirnyk fishing association provided funding and other resources to enhance & management cooperative enforcement activities in the district by governmental authorities. organisation Information was formally requested by the client from SKTU on enforcement activities on commercial fishing companies in NE Sakhalin such as how many inspections were carried out, violations observed, citations given, and number of convictions. Summarize available data. A plan was initiated by the client for conducting an independent monitoring program to demonstrate compliance with commercial fishing permit stipulations. Evidence The client presented a detailed report of the cooperative enforcement program and Provided showed but did not provide the surveillance team a copy in Russian. The client also summarized SKTU information on recent enforcement actions in Smirnykh & Nogliki districts but requested documentation was not provided. Conclusion Milestones for the first surveillance have not been met. A plan for addressing this condition has been developed and is being implemented. Verbal descriptions of a cooperative enforcement program and recent enforcement actions by SKTU was provided but related documentation is required: A detailed report of the cooperative enforcement program was provided. Summary of SKTU information on recent enforcement actions in Smirnykh & Nogliki districts was provided verbally but not documented. Recommendation Implementation of assessment plan will be evaluated at the second surveillance.

6.8 Condition 8 3.2.4. Research Plan. The fishery and its related enhancement activities have a research plan that addresses the information needs of management. SG 80  A research plan provides the management system with a strategic approach to research and reliable and timely information sufficient to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC’s Principles 1 and 2.  Research results are disseminated to all interested parties in a timely fashion.

A research program was approved by the Federal Agency for Fisheries in 2007. Its official name is “Far Eastern Basin program of complex investigation of Pacific salmon for period 2007‐2012”. This program appears to addresses all the information necessary for effective fishery management of the directed fishery. Sakhalin fisheries are essential part of this program. However, the team has not received a copy of the plan, so it remains unclear where all questions related to MSC principles 1 and 2 are addressed, particularly with respect to ecosystem effects, ETP species, and hatchery impacts.

Condition By the first surveillance audit, the fishery client must provide evidence of a research plan with a strategic approach to research and reliable and timely information sufficient to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. Client Action Plan The Client will develop a research plan for what is needed in order to obtain information regarding the salmon fisheries in the districts of the certification. This will allow salmon fisheries to conform the principles MSC 1 and 2 (i.e., information about the status of the target species and the effect of fishing on ecosystems). This plan will identify specific goals and objectives for the research and set priorities for conducting of such studies. A number of studies that will be included in such a plan (e.g. a review of the optimal density of the spawners in the spawning grounds, a study of the effect of salmon fisheries on bycatch and ETP species) have already been discussed within the Client Action Plan.

Depending on the need and amount of funds available, different elements of the plan will be carried out either by the Client directly or by the Client in collaboration with the fishing companies, NGOs or government agencies. Part of the objectives of the research plan is to study problems for public institutions, such as SakhNIRO and Sakhrybvod and they must be carried out by these organizations. In developing our research plan, SakhNIRO’s research plan will be studied as well as work plans of other stakeholders. A general plan will be developed by the first audit.

Consultation SakhNIRO is the agency responsible for scientific research on salmon on Sakhalin. Client has met with SakhNIRO’ representatives who have agreed to develop a research plan. SSI Center, as the Client, implements its work while in constant contact with SakhNIRO. We understand that any actions, and especially action plans, require agreement and financing.

Assessment Actions by client & The client has sought the following items from the Governmental Scientific management Agency (SakNiro): organisation  Documentation of 5‐year SakNiro plan for salmon (2012‐2016), published by the FAR.  List of what research and monitoring activities are planned by SakNiro for the fishery districts in 2014‐2015.  Published summary of results of November 2013 interagency hatchery meeting (from SakNiro website). Evidence Provided Discussions with the SakNiro Director identified the above information and this information was determined to be suitable for public distribution upon request. This information has been requested but not yet provided. Conclusion Evidence has been provided that a strategic research plan exists but documentation is incomplete. Recommendation Documentation of the strategic research plan will be reviewed at the second annual surveillance. The first and second milestones must be achieved at the time of the second surveillance.

7 Conclusions and Recommendations 7.1 Progress relative to milestones The audit found that the Client Action Plan is being implemented, but documentation of progress for a number of milestones was not provided. Hence, several milestones are identified as behind schedule. These issues will need to be rectified by the next scheduled surveillance in order to maintain this certification. All conditions continue to have outstanding actions for future surveillances.

Condition Indicator Status 1 1.2.2. Harvest control rules & tools Open & behind schedule 2 1.2.3. Information & monitoring Open & ahead of schedule 3 1.2.4. Assessment of stock status Open & ahead of schedule 4 2.1.1. Retained species – outcome Open & behind schedule 5 2.1.3. Retained species ‐ information Open & ahead of schedule 6 2.3.3. ETP Species – information Open & on schedule 7 3.2.3. Compliance & enforcement Open & behind schedule 8 3.2.4. Research plan Open & behind schedule

7.2 Closed‐out conditions No conditions were closed or scheduled for closure during the first annual surveillance. 7.3 Surveillance Based on the guidelines as set out in Annex CG 27.22, the Surveillance score is 2 or more. Table 2 indicates that the Year 2 annual surveillance audit should be normal and on site. 7.4 Certification Decision The MRAG Americas Certification Committee concurs that the certification of the Northeast Sakhalin pink salmon fishery against the MSC Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing be continued for a further year. 7.5 Recommendations Continuing progress on conditions will be reviewed at the second annual surveillance in 2014. The fishing companies will also be expected to provide (or arrange for provision) the following information in the next annual surveillance will include: 1. Description of any substantive changes in management systems, regulations, fishing sites, personnel involved in science, management or industry, or the scientific base of information. 2. Estimates of total run size and escapement of pink salmon to NE Sakhalin streams in 2012 and 2013 (as per Table 3). 3. Spawning escapement of pink salmon in Smirnykh & Nogliki streams by stream in 2012 and 2013 (as per Table 4). 4. Information/analysis on Tym River pink salmon escapement by tributary and correlations among monitored population throughout the region. 5. Pink salmon harvest (mt) in 2012, 2013 and 2014, total by district for Noglikli & Smirnykh and total by participating companies (as per Table 5). 6. Chum salmon harvest (mt) in 2012, 2013 and 2014, total by district for Noglikli & Smirnykh, total by participating companies and totals by participating companies during the pink salmon fishery time frame. 7. List of Anadromous Fish Commission regulatory actions for Smirnykh and Nogliki salmon fisheries in 2012, 2013 and 2014. 8. Summary of fishery enforcement activities and actions for 2012 and 2013. 9. Progress report of anthropologist project to estimate illegal or unaccounted harvest. 10. Progress report of University project on Langery River pink salmon run characteristics. 11. Progress report of University project on fishery bycatch (fishery sampling), retained species sales (agency information) and status of misc. retained species (literature review). 12. Progress report on taimen information obtained from fishery bycatch study. 13. Research plan documentation including:  5‐year SakNiro plan for salmon (2012‐2016), published by the FAR  SakNiro summary of research and monitoring activities planned for the fishery districts in 2014‐2015.  Published summary of results of November 2013 interagency hatchery meeting (SakNiro website).

8 Appendices 8.1 Summary of Historical Reports by Rukhlov The estimated optimum spawner density of 2 spawners per m2 is based primarily on estimates of mean redd size from the 6 sampling years for the 1968 study in Sakhalin. Data collected in the 1972 study suggested similar redd sizes in Kamchatka, but observed spawner densities were less than 2 spawners per m2 even in the high density year.

Summary of the following articles: F.N. Rukhlov. 1968. River phase of Sakhalin pink salmon. F.N. Rukhlov. 1972. Characteristics of pink and autumn chum salmon redds.

These two studies by Rukhlov describe data from surveys of pink salmon redds conducted in several Sakhalin and Kamchatka rivers (Poronaya, Pokosnaya, Nayby, and Lyutoga in Sakhalin, Pokosnaya and Olya in Kamchatka) in the 1960’s. Redd sizes were examined in both studies, although methods differed. In the 1968 study on Sakhalin, the boundaries of the redds were measured, whereas in the 1972 study on Kamchatka, the length and width of the redds were measured, with length defined as the measurement parallel to the river current. Each river was sampled for 2‐6 consecutive years, and sample sizes ranged from 230 to 288 redds per river for all sampling years combined. The 1968 study found that redd areas ranged from 0.2 to 2 m2 (Table 1), with a mean of 0.76 m2 for years with high salmon densities (odd years) and a mean of 0.84 m2 for years with low densities (even years). The 1972 study did not explicitly estimate redd areas, but length and width measurements suggested areas varied from about 0.45 to 1 m2, assuming redds were oval in shape.

Both studies also provided estimates of pink salmon spawner densities, either derived or observed. The 1968 study estimated an optimal spawner density of 2 spawners per m2 based on the observation that mean redd sizes did not exceed 1 m2, assuming that each redd was used by one female and one male. The 1972 study did not estimate an optimal density but described observed densities in the Pokosnaya River, with a low value of 0.03 spawners per m2 and a high value of 1.32 spawners per m2. There was no description of the methods used to obtain the observed densities. The 1972 study also examined whether redd sizes were smaller in years with high salmon densities. In the Pokosnaya River, redd width and elongation factor (ratio of length to width) indeed had smaller means and variances in the year with higher pink salmon density. However, redd measurements were larger in the high density year in the Olya River. Rukhlov noted that the difference in population sizes between high and low‐density years was smaller in the Olya River than in the Pokosnaya River, although the Olya population sizes were not shown. These results may suggest that redd sizes decrease at higher spawner densities due to limited habitat availability, but the data are insufficient to provide much support.

Additional data on observed pink salmon spawner densities, especially in relation to occurrences of redd superimposition, would be useful for determining whether 2 spawners per m2 is truly an optimum.

Data on pink salmon redd sizes and spawner densities from other studies: In Pacific Salmon Life Histories, 1991, eds. Groot and Margolis, p. 150. Other estimates of average redd sizes for pink salmon are 1.1 m2 (McNeil 1967) and 1.5‐2 m2 (Smirnov 1975).Observed density of redds can range from 1 per 1 m2 to 1 per 10 m2, with redd density increasing with spawner density (Eniutina 1972). Heard (1975) found that an instantaneous density greater than 0.8 females per m2 influenced spawning behavior patterns.

8.2 Summary of socio‐oriented study of illegal fishing in NE Sakhalin implemented in 2013 Effective management of fisheries, particularly salmon fisheries in the Far East of Russia, cannot be based only on fisheries research. It also requires understanding of the socio‐cultural context of fisheries. The attention to this aspect is clearly insufficient at present time, and this is a serious obstacle to achieving sustainable fisheries. As a result of certification salmon fisheries north‐eastern Sakhalin against the standards of the Marine Stewardship Council, which successfully ended in 2012, the company‐certifier MRAG set up several conditions. In particular, it is evaluation of the level of illegal removal of pink salmon and retained species in this fishery, in particularly Sakhalin taimen, a Red List species of the Sakhalin region. It seems that obtaining such data is impossible without social‐oriented research.

In this project, we propose a pilot anthropological study of the relationship of the local population to the practice of fishing ‐ both legal and illegal. This research will help to make an initial understanding of the situation, to make the expert opinion of the estimated levels of illegal fishing, as well as to present the point of view of fishermen themselves from the "inside." Application of anthropological approaches can infiltrate the social context and look at the problem through the eyes of the local population. Also important is the study of relations between local fishermen and the fish that can be understood as the "ethics of fishing" and is part of the "anthropology of the environment."

We base our research methodology on participant observation, in‐depth semi‐structured interview, and questionnaire. Social anthropology as a discipline usually does not give a priority to questionnaire or statistical analysis. This fact to a large extent is connected with a tradition of a strong criticism of positivistic methodology as such. This criticism is also relevant for many social and humanitarian disciplines, for example, human geography. The major focus of anthropology is so‐called ‘emic’ approach allowing a scientist to share local practices and narratives, become a part of a community in order to understand local life and everyday meanings. Therefore, participant observation implies that an anthropologist go and try to live with people in a way they do every day, conduct a diary, make photo, video, and audio recording, and finally experience him or herself what it might mean, for example, to be a fisher on Sakhain Island. However, we find that for a pilot research the method of questionnaire might bring fruitful results so we are going to use it in the field as a point of departure.

Researchers: Vladimir Davydov (PhD in Anthropology, Aberdeen university, Ph.D. in Sociology, European university, St.Petersburg) Head of Department of Siberia Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography, Russian Academy of Sciences), Veronica Simonova (PhD in Anthropology, Aberdeen university, PhD in Sociology, European university, St.Petersburg), Senior researcher at the Kazan Federal University) . The timing and duration of the project:  2 weeks (mid July ‐ early August 2013) ‐ field work: interviewing, observations,  2 weeks ‐ processing of empirical data,  2 weeks ‐ writing of the final report and recommendations. Due date is 31 October.

Brief report Researchers arrived to Sakhalin on 20 July, and departure for Smirnykh at the same day. They started their field work on 21 July 22 in Smirnykh and Orlovo villages communicating with local people, and participating in fishing along with them. 23 July Simonova and Davydov spent at the Smirnov’s fishing station. Then they in Smirnykh and adjacent villages. They were able to collect abundant information though interview with local people about techniques and quantitative parameters of illegal fishing, although they did not approach people who are organizing illegal fishing.

In the Nogliki district Simonova and Davydov met with Vladimir Sangi, who is a well‐known Nivkh writer, and visited they visited several families which are involved in illegal fishing in Val village. They visited local library and copied articles in local newspapers devoted to illegal fishing. 8.3 Summary of SakNiro Taimen Article

«About problems of Sakhalin Taimen protection and measures on its preservation” in Sakhalin region ‐ Distribution, population dencity and problems of Sakhalin Taimen protection at the Sakhalin Island in the modern period Despite of intent attention to Sakhalin Taimen as an object of protection, it is necessary to recognize the fact that the level of knowledge of its biology, ecology and population dynamics is low because of the difficulties of carrying out of research on a low density population, difficult functional structure of an area and «red book» status, prohibiting sampling for research purposes. Only some results of research on Taimen were published during the last ten years. The most informative are two publications from A.U.Semenchenko and S.F.Zolotuhin (2008; 2011). According to these authors Taimen is most abundant at Sakhalin Island in comparison to the other areas. Besides, the Sakhalin populations are estimated by them as the most productive, and there is an information about increase of the population density of Taimen on Sakhalin Island from 2005 as a result of “natural causes” (Semenchenko, 2008). Considering modern level of knowledge about Taimen it is impossible to tell, how stable this tendency is.

It is necessary to notice that at the highest densities and efficiency of populations Sakhalin Taimen was entered into the “Red book of the Sakhalin region”. But in the other areas (Khabarovsk territory, an Island of Hokkaido) where its densities are essentially lower, Sakhalin Taimen has no such protective status. It is necessary to mention that Semenchenko and Zolotuhin (2008) conclude that entering of Sakhalin Taimen into the “Red book of the Sakhalin region” is unreasonable. However it is necessary to tell that in the 2011publication authors did not approve the given conclusion, and on the contrary, suggested recommendations about improvement of Taimen protection. But they did not present any quantitative data testifying to sharp decrease of Taimen population densities in the rivers of Sakhalin Island. On the contrary, they specify that «during the last years there was no decrease in spawning grounds of Sakhalin Taimen on Sakhalin Island». Most likely author’s conclusions concern mostly that areas and rivers, where populations of Taimen are the most stable and productive. If to speak about peripheral sites where native populations were not so numerous because of geomorphological structure of reservoirs, materials available from SahNIRO testify to their reduction, and in certain cases even degradation.

All aforesaid testifies that representations about the modern status of Sakhalin Taimen are far from full, and sometimes contradictory. Therefore, decision‐making on preservation measures and restoration of Taimen populations should not be hasty and based on an emotional background. Effective measures can really work effectively only if will be based on the research data Taimen biology and finding the cause of its population density decrease, i.e. on the competent scientific approach. In this sense the statement that «special red book status of Sakhalin Taimen in reservoirs of Sakhalin and Primorski Krai creates only illusion of its protection which cannot be proved or disproved» (Zolotuhin, Semenchenko, 2008) is considered fair. Modern distribution area of Sakhalin Taimen includes the rivers running into Sea of Japan, from the Kievka river at the continental coast and from island Hokkaido to the estuary of the Amur River, which probably is the northern border of an area at the continental coast of Asia. In northern part of Honshu Island it is deplited (Nagasava, Torisava, 1991) and, on the conclusion of the professor of Tokyo fisheries university M.Nakamura's reported sightings of Taimen in prefecture of Aomori in the last decades may considered doubtful (Nakamura, 1963). On an island of Hokkaido Taimen is rare, and sighted not even every year. Natural reproduction of Taimen is found only in the rivers Kushiros, Masuhoro (cape Soya), Siribetsu and next to it Sjubuto (peninsula Osima). On Sakhalin Island Taimen is distributed practically in all large rivers. Based on the data from 1998‐2011 Sakhalin Taimen has been found in 79 rivers (fig. 1). Highest densities are found in the rivers of northwestern Sakhalin (the river of Viahtu, the river of Tyk, the river of Lah) (table 1).

Table 1. Structure of the classes allocated on the average number in the beach seine catches from the last 20 years data.

Number of the Number in a class The rivers rivers in a class 1. Sabot, 12. Kongi, 16. Langeri, 17. Pilenga, 18. Bogataia, 19. Melkaia, 20. Nerpichja, 22. Rukutama, 23. Olenja, 25. Gastelovka, 26. Nituj, 27. Makarovka, 28. Lesnaia, 29. Lazovaja, 30. Pugachevka, 31. Manuj, 32. Firsovka, 33. Aij, 35. Bahura, 36. Anna, 37. Zhukovka, 38. Ochepuha, 39. Podorozhka, 40. Komissarovka, 42. Udarnitsa, 44. Shljuzovka, 45. Chibisanka, 46. Suslovka, 47. Shishkevicha, 48. Merija, 49. 1‐5 54 Susuja, 50. Tsunaj, 51. Lutoga, 52. Taranaj, 53. Urjum, 54. Tambovka, 56. Kura, 59. Vindis, 60. Kuznetsovka, 61. Kastroma, 62. Novoselovka, 63. Chiornaia, 64. Tomarinka, 65. Iljinka, 67. Ugliegorka, 68. Lesogorka, 69. Avgustovna, 70. Pilvo, 71. Agnevo, 72. Arkovo. 76. Uanga, 77. Bolshoi Вагис, 78. Pyrki, 79. Langry,

2. Kadalyni, 3. Paromaj, 4. Piltun, 5. Val, 6. Askasaj, 9. Bolshaia.Veni, 10. Tym, 11. Nabil, 13. Chamgu, 14. Pursh‐ 5‐20 18 Pursh, 15. Vengeri, 24. Poronaj, 34. Najba, 41. Kazachka, 43. Vavaj, 55. Uljanovka, 57. Najcha, 58. Moguchi 20‐50 4 7. Evaj, 8. Dagi, 21. Vladimirovna, 66. Ajnsky,,

50 and more 4 73. Viahtu, 74. Tyk, 75. Lah, 80. Tum*

Pict. 1. Structure of the classes allocated on the average number in the beach seine catches from the last 20 years data. Speaking about search of the reasons causing decrease of Sakhalin Taimen numbers, it is necessary to notice that, basically, they are already known. All experts agree in opinion that the basic threat at the present stage is possibility of an easy access of the citizens to reservoirs for the amateur fishery. Aforementioned authors in their publications directly specify that in the conditions of the Sakhalin rivers not only illegal gill nets are the culprit, but also officially allowed fishing gear ‐ angling rod (Semenchenko, Zolotuhin, 2011). By their estimate one fisher with an angling rod catches tens Sakhalin Taimen juveniles at the age of 0 + ‐ 2 +. Our expert estimates (SakhNIRO) are close to the above‐stated data. We consider that on the average one fisher catches 10‐15 Taimens per year. It occurs mainly in the spring during migration down the rivers and in the autumn during migration of Taimen up the rivers for the winter. The most intense fishing occurs in time of winter migration when Taimen is intensively feeding near the mouth of the rivers before wintering. Semenchenko and Zolotuhin (2011) also notice that «the considerable numbers of young Taimens are caught during winter ice fishing on the river lagoons». According to the last year's seminar on the amateur fishery (took place at SakhNIRO), rough number of amateur fishermen on Sakhalin Island is about 50‐60 thousand. If we reduce this number three times as a precautionary measure, we can assume that in amateur fishery using angling rod not less than 200 thousand of Taimens are killed per year. Even if we admit that the most number of fishes is released, the survival rate of Taimen after capture remains unknown. The way fishermen pose with caught Taimen on numerous pictures from fishing sites question 100 % of survival rate of the fish released after that. It is also necessary to consider specialized poaching by the nets which is difficult to estimate even for an expert. The aggregate number of adult Taimens in all rivers of Sakhalin Island under the most optimistic calculations is estimated by us about 10 thousand. Probable number of juveniles of near and far replenishment can reach 500 thousand. Apparently, at such conditions of the Taimen resources and escalating interest of the population to amateur fishing, the tendency of sharp decline in population’s densities can only increase.

One more risk factor of the negative influence on Taimen and in a greater degree interfering possible restoration of its numbers ‐ a shallowing of the rivers on the island. The last is caused by deforestation and fires near the large rivers, in particular the river of Najba, Tym, Poronaj and their tributaries. We have to mention construction work by the rivers as well because there is a ground dump in the rivers, leading to a change in environment.

There is an opinion that Taimen bycatch at the sea fish traps in salmon fishing and on the river fishing sites is the reason of the decrease in its numbers. However experts of SahNIRO disagree. They admit that individual (occasional) bycatches exist, but their number is incommensurably less than volumes of amateur fishery. Besides, it is necessary to consider that only much less numerous sea ecological form of Taimen can be caught in a salmon trap seine. However fishes of this form do not make long migrations in the sea, and adhere to certain sites on rocky‐gravel plateau with thickets of seaweeds, where commercial fishing gear is not installed as a rule. It essentially reduces potential danger of the Taimen bycatch.

It is necessary to talk about the situation with fish counting weirs in more details. Weirs are used on Sakhalin Island for tens of years. Their main purpose is to allow optimal escapement to the spawning grounds. There is no data about influence of counting weirs on migrating fish species. In the season of 2011 weirs were installed in 55 rivers. Taimen is found only in 19 of them. In the other rivers it was never found. Same to the sea salmon traps weirs can potentially influence only the not numerous sea form of Taimen as most number of weirs is located in the mouths of the rivers. Even in this case risks of possible catch of Taimen during weirs operation are minimal because of specific Taimen biology. Weirs are installed, as a rule, from the end of July to the end of August, when the water temperature in the rivers is at maximum (18‐20°С) and has the low concentration of oxygen (not more than 6 mlg/l). Sakhalin Taimen, as well as char, avoids such water temperature. Different forms of Sakhalin Taimen react different ‐ one migrates upwards in the main river, other migrates down to sea close to the shore line, or lagoons and lakes. Nevertheless, in our opinion it is important to continue research of the influence of weirs on river species of fish, especially Taimen. It is also necessary to take in consideration brood stock collection sites at the hatcheries.

Speaking about the factors negatively influencing Taimen stocks, it is logical to mention the measures which could help restoration. In our opinion, the most perspective is artificial restoration of the declined stocks. The basics of biotechnics for collecting brood stock of Sakhalin Taimen, gathering of eggs and incubation were developed in the seventies of XX century (Hatkevich, 1972). Attempts of incubation in small amounts and rearing of juveniles were undertaken periodically at Ohotsky, Lesnoy and Bujuklovsky salmon hatcheries on Sakhalin Island. Moreover research on eggs incubation and feeding of fry of Sakhalin Taimen was done and by "SahNIRO" (Ivanov, Korablina, Ivanov, 2001). Available results from scientific research and cultivation experience show that the hatchery reproduction of Sakhalin Taimen is quite possible.

Summing up aforesaid, following measures can be applied towards preservation and restoration of Sakhalin Taimen stocks:

1. Conduct an inventory of the Taimen rivers. 2. Develop the program on hatchery reproduction of Sakhalin Taimen and release in the rivers for maintenance or restoration of population density. 3. In the near future to develop recommendations on changes to the Rules of amateur and sports fishing in reservoirs of the Sakhalin region, this could limit a press on Sakhalin Taimen resources. 4. Continue observations on weirs for the purpose of an estimation of their possible influence on migrations of Sakhalin Taimen. 5. Consider possibility of the deforestation termination near the rivers and restoration of forest after the fires. 6. Intensify educational activity about the status and preservation of Sakhalin Taimen.

V.D.Nikitin The Head of the lab. of Fresh‐water and coastal fishes, Ph.D.