Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery 4Th Surveillance Report

Marine Stewardship Council fisheries assessments

UCSL United Certification Systems Limited 1 Anastasi Shoukri Street, Pamelva Court, Office 003, 3035 Limassol, Cyprus Mobile phone: +7-981-195-1778 Email: [email protected] Website: https://ucsl.eu/

Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery

4th Surveillance Report

Conformity Assessment Body (CAB) United Certification Systems Limited

Assessment team Dr. Rob Blyth-Skyrme and Dr. Dmitry Sendek

 Bratsk Fish Ltd. Fishery client  Bernard Wolf SA  ZAO Fishery Enterprise

Assessment type Fourth Surveillance Audit

Dr. Rob Blyth-Skyrme, Dr. Dmitry Sendek and Mariya Letunovskaya Author names (translation)

Date June 2021

Contents

Table of tables ...... 3 Glossary ...... 4 Executive summary ...... 5 1 Report details ...... 6 1.1 Surveillance information ...... 6 1.2 Background ...... 8 1.2.1 Changes to the management system ...... 8 1.2.2 Changes to relevant regulations ...... 8 1.2.3 Changes to Personnel involved in science, management or industry...... 8 1.2.4 Changes to the scientific base of information, including stock assessments ...... 8 1.2.5 Changes and updates on the ecosystem ...... 8 1.2.6 Updates on fishery’s position in relation to enhanced fishery scope criteria ...... 8 1.2.7 Developments or changes within the fishery which impact traceability or the ability to segregate certified fish from the UoC and non-certified fish from outside the UoC...... 8 1.2.8 Other changes ...... 9 1.3 Version details ...... 9 2 Results ...... 10 2.1 Surveillance results overview ...... 10 2.1.1 Summary of conditions ...... 10 2.1.2 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data ...... 11 2.1.3 Recommendations ...... 11 2.2 Conditions ...... 12 2.2.1 Progress against conditions ...... 12 2.3 Client Action Plan ...... 20 2.4 Re-scoring Performance Indicators...... 20 PI 2.3.2 – ETP species management strategy – Rescoring ...... 20 PI 2.3.3 – ETP species information – Rescoring ...... 22 3 Appendices ...... 25 3.1 References ...... 25 3.2 Evaluation processes and techniques ...... 26 3.2.1 Site visits ...... 26 3.2.2 Stakeholder participation ...... 27 3.3 Harmonised fishery assessments ...... 28

Table of tables Table 1. Surveillance information...... 6 Table 2. Fisheries programme document versions as applied for the Year 1 surveillance...... 9 Table 3. Summary of conditions and progress...... 10 Table 4: UoA 1 (Perch) quota and catch data (t) for the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery (Source: client)...... 11 Table 5. Condition 3 progress ...... 12 Table 6. Condition 4 progress ...... 14 Table 7. Condition 7 progress ...... 16 Table 8. Condition 8 progress ...... 18 Table 9: Summary of stakeholder meetings held...... 26 Table 10. Overlapping fisheries ...... 28

Glossary Ba Available stock biomass

BLIM Biomass limit reference point

BMSY The level of biomass resulting in maximum sustainable yield

BN Commercial stock abundance CAB Conformity Assessment Body CoC Chain of Custody ETP Endangered, Threatened or Protected F Fishing mortality FFA Federal Fisheries Agency (Rosrybolovstvo) (Russia)

FMSY The rate of fishing mortality that results in the maximum sustainable yield FSB Federal Security Service (Russia) HCR Harvest Control Rule IUU Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated LRP Limit Reference Point MC Marine Certification MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance MSC Marine Stewardship Council MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield NGO Non-governmental organisation PA Precautionary approach PCDR Public Comment Draft Report PCR Public Certification Report PI Performance Indicator SG Scoring Guidepost SI Scoring Issue SSB Spawning Stock Biomass TAC Total Allowable Catch TRP Target Reference Point UoA Unit of Assessment UoC Unit of Certification VMS Vessel Monitoring System VNIRO Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography

Executive summary This report comprises the 4th annual surveillance audit of the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery. The fishery was certified on 30th April 2016, with a single unit of assessment (UoA); perch (Perca fluviatilis) caught by commercial fishermen working within Bratsk Reservoir using trapnets.

Ten conditions of certification were set against the fishery at certification; these included four conditions on Principle 1 (focused on the target stocks), four on Principle 2 (focused on environmental impacts) and two on Principle 3 (focused on the management regime). Six of these conditions were closed at the 3rd annual surveillance audit, leaving open two conditions on Principle 1 and two conditions on Principle 2.

This 4th annual surveillance audit was announced on the MSC website on the 9th February 2021, and a remote audit took place in Bratsk, Russia, from the 15th March – 2nd April 2021. The audit was carried out according to the MSC Fisheries Certification Requirements and Guidance version 2.0 (MSC 2014) and using Fisheries Certification Process version 2.2 (MSC 2020).

This 4th annual surveillance audit was undertaken in conjunction with the site visit for the reassessment of the fishery. The primary focus of the surveillance audit was progress against conditions. However, the following was also inspected during the audit:  The scientific base of information and stock assessment;  Changes to the fishery and its management, e.g. legislation and regulations;  Changes and updates on ecosystem issues;  Changes to personnel involved with the science, management and industry;  Compliance;  Harmonisation with other MSC certified fisheries; and,  Any changes that might affect traceability within the fishery and conformity with regulations.

The audit concluded:  For Principle 1, there were no changes of note. Official information on the distribution of catches by fishing gear remained unavailable at the time of the 4th audit. Since the limitations of this information prevent the closure of Conditions 3 and 4, both of them are carried over to the next certification cycle (recertification) with an assessment of the progress in the 1st audit after recertification. Condition 3 in this case falls under the MSC extension under Covid-19 derogation and is automatically extended for 12 months. For Condition 4, which is not subject to MSC extension under Covid-19 derogation, the MSC Variation Request was submitted with a proposal to extend the closing time of this Condition by 2 years.  For Principle 2, there were no changes of note. Following review and discussion of catch data with scientists, Chief Fishery Enforcement Officers and fishermen, the ongoing data collection processes for the fishery (logbook data, enforcement checks and scientific monitoring) were deemed sufficient to meet the management and information requirements of PI 2.3.2 and 2.3.3, such that the Conditions on these two PIs were closed.  For Principle 3, there were no changes of note.

At this 4th annual surveillance audit, it is concluded that the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery continues to meet MSC requirements and should remain certified.

1 Report details 1.1 Surveillance information The following information in Table 1 summarises the basic information on the surveillance audit and the audit team.

Table 1. Surveillance information.

1 Fishery name

Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery

2 Unit of Assessment (UoA)

UoA 1 Species: Perch (Perca fluviatilis)

Stock: Bratsk Reservoir

Geographical area: Bratsk Reservoir, Irkutsk Oblast, Russia Harvest method: Trapnets, only Client Group: Bratsk Fish Ltd., Bernard Wolf SA, ZAO Fishery Enterprise Other eligible Licensed, commercial fishers working in Bratsk Reservoir using trapnets. fishers:

3 Date certified Date of expiry

29th November 2021 th 30 April 2016 Note that this expiration date reflects the extension from 5 years to 5.5 years that was provided by the MSC’s Covid-19 derogation1

4 Surveillance level and type

Level 6: Default surveillance

5 Surveillance number

4th Surveillance Yes

Other (expedited etc) N/A

6 Surveillance team leader

Dr. Rob Blyth-Skyrme

Rob started his professional career in commercial aquaculture in 1996, before switching to a focus on the science, management and policy of wild fisheries. Following his PhD, which considered biological and socio- economic aspects of an inshore shellfish fishery and resulted in peer-reviewed publications on issues including habitat and ecosystem interactions, he worked as the Senior Environment Officer and then Deputy Chief Fishery Officer at the Eastern Sea Fisheries Joint Committee, the largest regional fisheries management organization in England. In these roles he was responsible for, amongst other things, advising the Committee on ETP species, habitat and ecosystem considerations. Rob then became Natural England’s senior advisor to the UK Government on marine fisheries and environmental issues, leading a team dealing with fisheries policy, science and nationally significant fisheries casework.

1 https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/stakeholders/covid-19-pandemic-derogation-march- 2020.pdf?sfvrsn=c6dcdbe9_10 6

Since 2008, Rob has run Ichthys Marine Ecological Consulting Ltd., which provides fisheries and environmental advice to a variety of governmental and industry clients. Projects have included a review of ETP fish species management options to advise an expert group convened by a UK nature conservation body, reviewing fisheries management proposals for a suite of marine protected areas, and undertaking a detailed analysis of fisheries impacts in three marine protected areas in the UK. Rob has also undertaken all facets of MSC work as a Team Leader, expert team member and peer reviewer, across a wide variety of fisheries, including those for freshwater species. He has completed the MSC training on the Certification Requirements v.2.0 and Certification Process V.2.1 and v.2.2, and is a Third Party Expert for the MSC’s Peer Review College, having been a member of the College since its inception. Marine Certification LLC confirms that Rob meets the competency criteria for team leaders and has the appropriate skills and experience required to serve as a Principle 2 and 3 assessor. It is also confirmed that Rob has no conflicts of interest in relation to the Russian Lake Peipus fishery.

7 Team members

Dr. Dmitry Sendek

Dmitry has worked for 25 years as a professional fishery scientist. Since 2000 he served as a Senior Researcher at the Laboratory of Monitoring of Salmonid Fish Populations, State Research Institute on Lake and River Fisheries (GosNIORKh), St. Petersburg. From 1994 to 2000 he worked as a Researcher at the Laboratory of Fish Genetics, GosNIORKh, St. Petersburg. And from 1991 – 1993 he was employed as a Laboratory Assistant at the Laboratory of Cell Populations, Salmonid Fish Genetics Group. Institute of Cytology, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg. Dmitry received PhD in zoology in 2000 from the GosNIORKh, St. Petersburg with a thesis on the “Phylogenetic analysis of Coregonid fishes by means of allozyme electrophoresis method.” His research interests include: Evolution, phylogeography and systematics of coregonids species on the basis of molecular markers analysis; Population genetics of fish species: coregonids, Atlantic salmon, Sea trout, European grayling, Arctic char, European smelt, Sockeye salmon, and Pink salmon; Genetic conservation of coregonids fishes in Eurasia, and investigation of fish fauna of poorly studied water bodies of the Northern Russia. Marine Certification LLC confirms that Dmitry meets the competency criteria for team members and has the appropriate skills and experience required to serve as a Principle 1 assessor. It is also confirmed that Dmitry has no conflicts of interest in relation to the Russian Lake Peipus fishery.

Ms. Maria Letunovskaya (Russian-English Translation)

Maria has a Diploma (with Honours) in Translation and Interpreting, theory of translation and cross-cultural communication (French and English languages) from the Moscow State Linguistic University (Irkutsk branch). Maria’s work in Russian translation and interpreting in/from English and French started in 2014 at the Paralympic Games in Sochi. Her experience now includes technical translation of legal documents (contracts, court decisions and personal documents), as well as translation for industry and Russian television. Maria worked as the interpreter for Marine Certification LLC during the third audit of the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery in Irkutsk in 2019.

8 Audit/review time and location

Rob and Dmitry were off-site for the surveillance audit, with translation provided by Maria, who was acting

for the CAB.

The site visit took place in Bratsk, Russia, from 15th March – 2nd April 2021, with meetings as indicated in Table 9. Dmitry and Rob attended remotely due to travel restrictions during the Covid-19 pandemic. Consistent with the MSC derogation on auditing during the pandemic2, any risks of Rob and Dmitry being off-site are considered to be very limited; Dmitry was on the original team that conducted the full assessment of the fishery, and both Rob and Dmitry attended the 3rd annual surveillance site visit in Bratsk in 2018. Rob and Dmitry have

2 https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/stakeholders/new-global-pandemic-derogation-september- 2020.pdf?sfvrsn=f2914e45_8 7

also worked together several times previously on different fishery assessments, including with Mariya last year on the 3rd annual surveillance of the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery.

9 Assessment and review activities

The key focus for the Year 4 audit was to determine progress against the four conditions remaining from the 10 conditions that were set when the fishery was certified.

Checks were also made for changes in the management system, regulations and personnel, and in traceability factors, as well as the general performance of the fishery since it was certified.

1.2 Background A detailed description of the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery is presented in the public certification report for the fishery (Nelson et al. 2016), which is available on the MSC website3.

1.2.1 Changes to the management system There have been no significant changes to the fishery management system since the fishery was certified.

1.2.2 Changes to relevant regulations Several changes to regulations were reported this year. The latest revisions to the Federal Fisheries and Conservation Act of 20.12.2004 N 166-FH requires that fishing companies catch at least 70% of the quota themselves (previously the required level was 50%). Vessels from other companies may be contracted to catch the remainder of the quota. It was noted that this was to promote the use of fishing rights by genuine fishing companies rather than by non-fishing investors, but that it is not specific to Bratsk Reservoir – it applies to all Russian fisheries, including those in the marine environment. It is not thought that this will impact the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery in any significant way.

1.2.3 Changes to Personnel involved in science, management or industry No changes to personnel were reported.

1.2.4 Changes to the scientific base of information, including stock assessments No significant changes in the scientific base of information regarding this fishery were identified. Stock assessments are conducted annually according to standard assessment methods. In general, the scientific base of information has increased since the fishery was certified due to implementation of scientific trapnet studies, closer monitoring of commercial, recreational and IUU activities, and analysis of the food supply of target fish species.

1.2.5 Changes and updates on the ecosystem No significant changes or updates on the ecosystem were noted this year.

1.2.6 Updates on fishery’s position in relation to enhanced fishery scope criteria It is confirmed that perch taken in the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery are from natural populations that are not subject to enhancement. This situation has not changed since the initial assessment of the fishery.

1.2.7 Developments or changes within the fishery which impact traceability or the ability to segregate certified fish from the UoC and non-certified fish from outside the UoC. The traceability system as laid out in the PCR for the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery (Nelson et al. 2016) was confirmed as still being in place. No changes were reported to the Audit Team in the way that the fishery operates that would impact upon traceability. At the Year 4 audit the following was confirmed:

3 https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/bratsk-reservoir-perch/@@assessments 8

 The certified fishery operates trapnets, but fishers are also permitted to use gillnets. This gear type is not assessed nor is it part of the UoC, but traceability risks are minimised because of several reasons:  The UoA (trapnets) operates in the open water, summer season, when maintaining product quality in gillnets is difficult; hence, trapnets are used in preference to catch perch.  The Bratsk region of the reservoir where the trapnet fishery operates is made up predominantly of old flooded forest, and operating gillnets in these areas is difficult.  Fishermen may use gillnets to target carp, bream or pike, but this is a very minor fishery (essentially for personal use, not for sale) and the gear used employs a mesh size that is too large to be effective for perch.  Fishers are required to report daily logbook information, reporting the catch by gear type.  For each consignment, a delivery note is required to go with the fish from boat > truck > factory.  A reception note is made at the client’s factory when a consignment enters the factory.  A batch number is assigned to each consignment for tracking through the factory.  A packing slip and invoice are created when the consignment leaves the factory. As such, it is confirmed that traceability risks associated with using gillnets to catch perch are minimised and managed effectively.

1.2.8 Other changes There were no reports or other evidence provided during the surveillance audit that were of particular note. It was confirmed that no destructive practices or unilateral exemptions have been introduced within the fishery during the audit period.

1.3 Version details Table 2 shows the MSC fisheries programme documents that were employed in undertaking this surveillance audit.

Table 2. Fisheries programme document versions as applied for the Year 4 surveillance.

Document Version number

MSC Fisheries Certification Process Version 2.2

MSC Fisheries Standard Version 2.0

MSC General Certification Requirements Version 2.41

MSC Surveillance Reporting Template Version 2.1

2 Results 2.1 Surveillance results overview 2.1.1 Summary of conditions The ten conditions that were set on the fishery are summarised in Table 3, below, together with their status following the conclusion of the Year 4 surveillance audit.

Table 3. Summary of conditions and progress.

Status at PI PI Number Condition Summary PI Last New Status original revised Surveillance score score

1 Within four years, the Client should demonstrate a regular review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative 1.2.1 Closed 75 80 measures to minimize trap net mortality to Stock status (Year 3) unwanted catch of juvenile perch and implement such measures as appropriate.

2 1.2.2 Within four years HCRs are likely to be robust Closed Reference 75 80 to the main uncertainties. (Year 3) points

3 The MSC Covid- 19 derogation4 Within four years there should be good 1.2.3 for conditions is information on all fishery removals from the On Target 75 N/A Information & applied. There is stock. monitoring no milestone this year.

4 A variation request was applied for and 1.2.4 confirmed, to Within four years, the stock assessment should extend the On Target 75 N/A take uncertainty into account. Assessment of timeline of this stock status Condition by two years to the first audit of a new certificate5.

5 Within four years, the Client should 2.1.2 demonstrate a regular review of alternative Primary Closed measures, as necessary, to minimize UoA species 75 80 (Year 3) mortality on unwanted catch of main primary management species. strategy

6 Within three years the Client should provide adequate information to support measures to manage main primary species. This 2.1.3 information will include data about the catch of Closed Primary 70 85 primary main species (roach, bream and species (Year 3) Prussian carp) in trap nets, the magnitude of information juvenile by-catch, and amounts of IUU and recreational fishing

4 https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program-documents/chain-of-custody-supporting- documents/msc-derogation-6-covid-19-fishery-conditions-extension.pdf 5 https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/bratsk-reservoir-perch/@@assessments 10

7 Within four years the Client should: a) develop and put in place a strategy to ensure that the perch trap net fishery does not hinder the 2.3.2 recovery of ETP species; b) provide objective ETP On Target Closed 65 80 evidence that the strategy works; and c) Management implement a regular review process of strategy alternative measures reduce mortality of ETP species and implement them, as appropriate

8 Within four years, the Client should gather some quantitative information to assess the 2.3.3 UoA-related impacts to ETP species for all On Target Closed 60 80 three districts of the Bratsk Reservoir and ETP species provide adequate information to support a information strategy to manage impacts on ETP species

9 Within three years, the fishery should implement procedures to provide public information relevant to fishery decision-making, 3.2.2 in a transparent and timely manner. Closed Decision 75 80 Information should include results from making (Year 3) research, monitoring, and evaluations along process with explanations of how managers use information to make decisions.

10 Within three years there will be mechanisms in place to evaluate key parts of the fishery- 3.2.4 specific management system and procedures Monitoring and Closed to allow for occasional external review of management 60 80 (Year 3) relevant issues, including the impacts of the performance perch trap net fishery on ETP species and evaluation catch composition by gear types.

2.1.2 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data The data on quota and catches for the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery are presented in Table 4, below. It is noted that the UoA share of the total allowable catch (TAC) is presented as ‘up to’ the total TAC because the entire quota could be taken by the trapnet fishery, #or may be shared between trapnets and other commercial gears used in the reservoir.

Table 4: UoA 1 (Perch) quota and catch data (t) for the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery (Source: client). UoA 1 (Perch gillnet and trapnet)

TAC (Bratsk Region – all gears) Year 2020 Amount 1,900 t

up to 1062.6 UoA share of total TAC* Year 2020 Amount t*

Total green weight catch by UoC Year (most recent) 2020 Amount 272.6 t

Total green weight catch by UoC Year (second most recent) 2019 Amount 326.1 t

 Only trapnets are assessed as the UoA, but the entire catch could be taken in this gear, hence ‘up to’.

2.1.3 Recommendations No Recommendations were set against the Bratsk Reservoir Perch fishery at certification, and none have been added since.

2.2 Conditions 2.2.1 Progress against conditions Conditions 1, 2, 5, 6, 9 and 10 were closed last year; information on those conditions and the revised scoring rationales are provided in the 3rd annual surveillance report (Blyth-Skyrme & Sendek 2019). Progress against the remaining four conditions (3, 4, 7 and 8) is reported in the following tables.

Table 5. Condition 3 progress

Performance 1.2.3. Information and monitoring – Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy Indicator

Score 75

There is good information on fishery removals from the commercial fishery. However, as described in Condition 2, there are data gaps related to fish mortalities associated with recreational and IUU fishing and juvenile by-catch. Moreover, the assessment team found no catch data for trap nets only, the Justification UoA. Rather, available fishery data present aggregated catches for all gear types; trap nets, gill nets, and beach seines. Without catch data for trap nets, it is not possible to know the true impact of the UoA on perch stocks. For this reason, scoring issue (c) “Comprehensiveness of information” scores a 60 and PI 1.2.3 scores a 75 and the assessment team set Condition 3.

Condition Within four years there should be good information on all fishery removals from the stock.

 Surveillance 1: The Client should design a monitoring program to determine the amount of perch caught from trap nets only. It should be part of an integrated monitoring program that also collects data about IUU and recreational fishing, and juvenile by-catch. Prepare Year 1 report describing monitoring program.  Surveillance 2: The Client should implement the monitoring program defined in Year 1. Prepare a Year 2 report to present monitoring data. No change expected in the score.  Surveillance 3: The Client should continue monitoring activities started in Year 2. Also, the Client Milestones should review results with fishermen and fishery managers and discuss possible data gaps and/or changes to HCRs. Prepare Year 3 Report with evidence of discussions in the form of meeting minutes, draft rules, presentations, or other records to demonstrate consideration of monitoring results. No change expected in the score.  Surveillance 4: The Client should prepare Year 4 Report providing comprehensive information about all fishery removals from the stock, including those from trap nets only, recreational and IUU fishing (Condition 2) and juvenile by-catch (Condition 1). Condition 3 expected to be fully met with a score of 80.

Year 1  Design a monitoring program to determine catch composition in trap nets. The program will include a fishery-independent field survey combined with information collected from commercial fishermen.  Gostrybcentr will establish a network of survey trap nets and design monitoring protocols that specify sampling locations, methods, times, and frequencies.  Sign a contract with Gosrybtsentr to manage monitoring for Condition 3.  Select Bratsk Fish fishermen to work with Gosrybtsentr to gather information about catch Client Action composition of trap nets. Plan  Fishermen will record catch composition by gear type in logbooks. Year 2  Determine the catch composition of different species in survey trap nets. Collect data according to the monitoring protocols developed in Year 1.  Analyze survey and logbook catch data for trap nets only and compare them to catches in other gear types. Year 3  Continue monitoring using Year 1 protocols.

 Meet with fishery managers to review data relevant to HCRs s and consider possible modifications. Year 4  Analyze Year 2 - 3 monitoring data and describe trap net catch for at least on year for all three districts in Bratsk Reservoir.  Meet fishery managers to review data about all fishery removals and how they support the harvest strategy. Prepare Year 4 Report with data and recommendations.

The Client arranged with Gosrybtsentr to conduct research and monitoring to support the Client Action Consultation Plan. Marine Certification consulted with Gosrybtsentr to verify their commitment and to ensure that on condition the Client Action Plan (CAP) is reasonable and attainable within the specified timeframe.

Fishery removals from the perch stock associated with recreational and IUU fishing and juvenile by- catch are studied in accordance with monitoring program (see details on progress of Conditions 1 and 2). During 2017 - 2018 monitoring of the species composition and catch volumes of commercial trap nets is carried out in accordance with research protocols developed in the first year by Gosrybtsentr in collaboration with State Fish Inspectorate (Yurin 2019a). Altogether, scientists and the state inspectors inspected about 80 trap nets and 23 brigades of fishermen in 2018. The results of inspection of commercial fishermen in Bratsk and Balagansk administrative districts are provided as acts, containing information on the number of fishing gears actually used by the fishery brigades, on the species composition and catch volumes. Based on the analysis of the primary data obtained by Gosrybcenter for catch in three fishing regions of the Bratsk reservoir, it was shown that in the Balagansk and Usolsk fishing regions the use of trap nets (46 units) is limited compared to the Bratsk fishing region (148 units). At the same time, the share of perch in catches in the Balagansk and Usolsk regions is insignificant, since fishermen try to avoid its capture because of the difficulties in Progress on maintaining the harvest and marketing in these hard-to-reach areas. At the same time, in the Bratsk Condition fishing region, perch is the target species, the share of its catch in the trap nets is 65-75% of the total (Year 3) catch (Yurin 2019a). Also, Gosrybtsentr works with selected fishermen of Bratskaya Ryba conducting a complete biological analysis (species composition and mass measurements of mass species) from commercial trap nets. The proposal of the Baikal branch of VNIRO (Gosrybtsentr) dated 25.04.2019 to improve accounting and control of catch of aquatic biological resources in the Bratsk reservoir by taking into account fishing gear actually used in the fishery instead of the existing practice of recording catch volumes without separation of fishing gear (Yurin 2019c), was supported by the Angara-Baikal Territorial Administration of the Federal Agency for Fisheries and entered into force on July 1, 2019 (FFA 2019). The implementation of this measure in fishery reporting practice will increase the reliability of data on catch per fishery gear type, and thus make it possible to know the true impact of the UoA (trap nets) on perch stocks. However, rather than close the Condition, it is considered appropriate to keep it open this year and to review the data next year to ensure the fishery statistics are collected and reported separately by fishing gear. The Condition is on target.

Fishery removals from the perch stock associated with recreational and IUU fishing and juvenile by- catch are studied in accordance with monitoring program. According to calculations of scientists of Baikal branch of VNIRO, in 2019 the total catch of recreational fishers (108 tons) and IUU catch (136 tons) amounted to 244 tons of perch. Scientific monitoring of the species composition, age composition and catch volumes of commercial trap nets is carried out in accordance with research protocols developed in the first year by Gosrybtsentr in collaboration with State Fish Inspectorate (Yurin 2019a). To reduce the by-catch of juvenile fish a change in the location of gillnets and an increase in the mesh size were applied as alternative measures. These measures made it possible to reduce the value of the catch of juveniles in the catch by 2.4 times (from 6.8% in 2012-2019 to 2.8% in 2020). The catch Progress on of juveniles in the Bratsk fishing area has decreased by half (from 62.2 tons in 2012-2019 to 29.8 tons Condition in 2020) (Yurin, 2021). (Year 4) In terms of habitat and reproduction for certain species of fish, Balaganskiy and Usolskiy regions of Bratsk reservoir differ from Bratskiy region. In the upper and middle fishery regions, fishing dominate with the use of large gill nets with a mesh of 45 - 70 mm, targeted mainly crucian carp, carp, catfish and bream. When using fishing gear with a smaller mesh, fishermen of Balaganskiy and Usolskiy regions specially choose the time and place of setting the gill nets in order to avoid a large by-catch of perch. At the same time in the Bratsk region the main fishing gear is trap nets, the catch of perch in which reaches 65-75% of the total catch (Yurin, 2020). The third surveillance audit report stated that “The proposal of the Baikal branch of VNIRO (Gosrybtsentr) dated 25.04.2019 to improve accounting and control of catch of aquatic biological 13

resources in the Bratsk reservoir by taking into account fishing gear actually used in the fishery instead of the existing practice of recording catch volumes without separation of fishing gear (Yurin 2019c), was supported by the Angara-Baikal Territorial Administration of the Federal Agency for Fisheries and entered into force on July 1, 2019 (FFA 2019)”. However, the implementation of this measure in fishery reporting practice has been postponed. The audit team was informed that the primary information from fishermen about catches by fishing gear goes to the Angara-Baikal Territorial Administration of the Federal Agency for Fisheries (Ulan- Ude city), where it is analyzed and after processing is released in a generalized form - the total catches of users by fishing areas. A consolidated catch database by species / by fishing gear / by fishing area is currently under development. It is understood that the new database will include catch data from 2020 onward. Although this condition is eligible for the MSC’s Covid derogation (see ‘status’, below), it is in any case considered appropriate to keep this Condition open this year and to review the data next certification cycle (recertification) to ensure the fishery statistics are collected and reported separately by fishing gear.

The MSC Covid-19 derogation for conditions is applied6, which extends the timeline and means that there is no milestone this year. However, because the fishery is undergoing reassessment, this Status condition will now be extended into a new certification period and progress will be reviewed at the (Year 4) Year 1 audit of the new certificate. There is no change to the milestone – the existing year 4 milestone is still appropriate but is extended to year 1.

Additional None information

Table 6. Condition 4 progress

Performance 1.2.4. Assessment of stock status – There is an adequate assessment of the stock status. Indicator

Score 75

The stock assessment takes a precautionary approach. In setting RACs (quotas) it does not consider stocks for the entire reservoir. Rather it only considers stocks on the fishing grounds, representing 24% of the total area. Since the fishery operates on only about a quarter of the available habitat, we assume that they also fish on 24 % of the total population because fish densities are the same in 24% (fished) and 76 % (non-fished) parts of the reservoir. Despite this precautionary approach, the Justification assessment team recognizes uncertainties related to sources of all fish mortality. These include data gaps identified in other conditions: juvenile by-catch (Condition 1); recreational and IUU fishing (Condition 2); and perch catch from trap nets only (Condition 3). Other sources of uncertainty may involve significant non-fishery related mortalities, such as those associated with changing water levels in the reservoir. Together these data gaps represent uncertainty in the assessment and scoring issue (c) receives a score of 60.

Condition Within four years, the stock assessment should take uncertainty into account.

 Surveillance 1: The Client should review key information gaps in stock assessment data and consider alternative methods to account for uncertainties related to recreational and IUU fishing, juvenile by-catch, catch in trap nets, and significant sources of non-fishery mortality. Prepare Year 1 Report with analysis of key information gaps. No change in score expected. Milestones  Surveillance 2: The Client should define key uncertainties and recommend possible new methods to account for them in stock assessment analysis. No change in score expected. Prepare Year 2 report describing possible new stock assessment methods or data.  Surveillance 3: The Client should review monitoring data and discuss possible changes to stock assessment methods with fishery managers. Prepare Year 3 report providing evidence of

6 https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program-documents/chain-of-custody-supporting- documents/msc-derogation-6-covid-19-fishery-conditions-extension.pdf 14

discussions in the form of meeting minutes, draft rules, or other records to demonstrate consideration of new data and possible methods. No change expected in the score.  Surveillance 4: The Client should demonstrate improved or considered stock assessment methods and data to account for key uncertainties; including those involving all fishery removals and any significant mortalities from non-fishery impacts. Condition expected to be fully met with a score of 80.

Year 1  Gather and summarize information from the monitoring program for juvenile by-catch, recreational and IUU fishing, and catch composition in trap nets, as described in Conditions 1, 2 and 3, respectively.  Make initial estimates of perch mortality associated with changing water levels in the reservoir.  Review key information gaps in stock assessment data and consider methods to account for uncertainty in all sources of fishery removals and non-fishery mortality. Year 2  Conduct monitoring program developed in Year 1.  Improve estimates of perch mortality associated with changing water levels in the reservoir, if necessary. Client Action  Define key uncertainties and consider new methods to account for them in stock assessment Plan methods. Year 3  Continue Year 3 monitoring program and summarize findings.  Improve estimates of perch mortality associated with changing water levels in the reservoir, if necessary.  Meet with fishery managers to review data, discuss uncertainties, and consider modifications, if necessary. Year 4  Summarize data from the monitoring program and show how it supports stock assessment models.  Demonstrate transparent stock assessment methods and verify that they consider all sources of fishery removals, significant non-fishery mortalities in the UoA, and any other uncertainties associated with stock assessment methods.

The most important sources of mortality of perch, which is not reflected in official statistics, are addressed in Conditions 1 and 2 (see above). It can be expected that with the introduction of a new reporting practice divided catch by fishing gear since July 1, 2019, accounting for perch catch with trap nets only (UoA) will be established and Condition 3 will also be addressed (FFA 2019, and see above). The other potential sources of non-fishery mortality in Bratsk reservoir are seasonal fluctuations of water level of the reservoir, chemical pollution, timber rafting etc. These sources annually monitored by the Institute of Geochemistry, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Science, and according Progress on to Mikhail Pastukhov, empirical data showing that they do not account for significant mortality. Condition (Year 3) The general situation in the reservoir is monitored by the State Fish Inspection, which, due to the general decline in poaching at the Bratsk Reservoir, now has more opportunities to focus on habitat in connection with the activities of industrial enterprises, construction in the water protection zone, etc. According to researchers of Gosrybtsentr and to Alexander Ivanov (ABTU), since the last surveillance audit now cases of significant non-accounted fish mortality were observed, and no new sources of non-fishing mortality of perch have not been identified. It is considered appropriate to keep Condition open this year and to review the data next year to ensure the fishery statistics is carried out separately for special fishing gear, thus all sources of fishing mortality are accounting for with high accuracy.

The most important sources of perch mortality are annually estimated by scientists from the Baikal branch of VNIRO. For example, in 2019 the total catch of amateurs during the ice and open water periods (108 tons) and IUU catch (136 tons) amounted to 244 tons of perch. Thus, the summation of the official statistics on the catch of perch in 2019 (1076.5 tons) with not registered catch (244 tons) gives the total catch of perch in the amount of 1320.5 tons. It was also found that the value of juveniles’ by-catch in the catch with trap nets reduced by 2.4 times (from 6.8% in 2012-2019 to 2.8% in 2020) due to implementation of alternative measures to avoid by-catch of unwanted catch. The third surveillance audit report stated that: “It can be expected that with the introduction of a new reporting practice divided catch by fishing gear since July 1, 2019, accounting for perch catch with trap nets Progress on only (UoA) will be established and Condition 3 will also be addressed”. However, the implementation Condition of this measure in fishery reporting practice has been postponed. A consolidated catch database by (Year 4) species / by fishing gear / by fishing area is currently under development (see above progress for Condition 3). According to researchers of Baikal branch of VNIRO and to Alexander Ivanov (ABTU), since the last surveillance audit no cases of significant non-accounted fish mortality due to water level changing in the reservoir, chemical pollution, timber rafting etc. were observed, and no new sources of non-fishing mortality of perch have not been identified. It is considered appropriate to keep the Condition open this year and to review the data next certification cycle (recertification) to ensure the fishery statistics is carried out separately for special fishing gear, thus all sources of fishing mortality are accounting for with high accuracy (see ‘status’, below).

This Condition is not eligible for the Covid-19 derogation7, however, meeting Condition 4 is clearly linked to the information collected in Condition 3, and that information collection process has been disrupted by Covid-19. A Variation Request for a 2-year extension to the existing timeline for Condition 4 was applied for by Status CAB following the site visit; this request was accepted8. The fishery is undergoing reassessment, so (Year 4) this Condition would be extended into a new certification period and progress would be reviewed at the Year 1 audit of the new certificate. There is no change to the milestone – the existing year 4 milestone is still appropriate but is extended to year 1.

Additional None information

Table 7. Condition 7 progress

Performance 2.3.2 -- ETP Management strategy Indicator

Score 65

The elements of a management strategy to protect ETP species include their listing in the Russian Red Book, fishing rules to prohibit their catch, and loose enforcement of those fishing rules over a large area. And while fishery managers in Bratsk district reported only a few interactions and no recorded logbook interactions, the team was not able to receive comparable information from Usolsk and Balagansk districts. Riverine parts of these environments may contain relatively more taimen, sturgeon, sterlet, lenok, and other ETP species. But the assessment team found a little information Justification about their status and trends and interaction with the perch trap fishery. The team felt that there was no management strategy for ETP species due to: - No records of ETP catch or interactions; - No information about monitoring of ETP populations; - No information about determination of red list status (Matveev, et al 2009); and - No evaluation of a partial strategy based on information about ETP species.

7 https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program-documents/chain-of-custody-supporting- documents/msc-derogation-6-covid-19-fishery-conditions-extension.pdf 8 https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/bratsk-reservoir-perch/@@assessments 16

While it highly unlikely that the perch trap net fishery causes adverse effects to ETP species, there is little information and no cohesive management strategy to manage ETP species. For these reasons, the team assigned PI 2.3.2 an overall score as 65.

Within four years the Client should: a) develop and put in place a strategy to ensure that the perch trap net fishery does not hinder the recovery of ETP species; b) provide objective evidence that the Condition strategy works; and c) implement a regular review process of alternative measures reduce mortality of ETP species and implement them, as appropriate.

 Surveillance 1: The Client should review existing measures to manage ETP species and recommend possible improvements, including procedures to collect information about any ETP catch or interactions with the fishery in all three districts. Prepare Year 1 Report with findings and recommendations. No change in score expected.  Surveillance 2: The fishery should review data about ETP species interactions and start a process to discuss possible measures to minimize mortality. The Client should identify measures to support a management strategy. Prepare Year 2 with evidence of discussions and a summary of recommended management measures. No change of score expected. Milestones  Surveillance 3: The fishery should implement some management measures defined in Year 2 and conduct meetings with stakeholders to review their effectiveness. Also, the fishery should continue to gather information about the status of ETP populations in the reservoir. Prepare Year 3 Report with findings. No change in score expected.  Surveillance 4: The Client should provide objective evidence that management measures implemented in Year 3 and 4 are both adequate and relevant to the fishery, including measures to collect adequate information and to regularly review alternative measures to minimize ETP species mortality in trap nets. Expected score: 80.

Year 1  Review possible elements of a management strategy and discuss them with fishermen, Fishermen Council, and Gosrybtsentr. Elements may include: - Monitoring systems - Scientific research - Monitoring, Control and Surveillance. (MCS) - Participation in national research plans - Consideration of stakeholder input.  Contact fishery (or nature protection) managers in Bratsk, Balagansk and Usolsk districts to request information about ETP species. Gather available data as described in Condition 8 for Usolsk and Balangansk districts.  Within four years, the Client should demonstrate a regular review of alternative measures, as necessary, to minimize UoA mortality on unwanted catch of ETP species. Year 2 Client Action Plan  Evaluate quantities of ETP catch in trap nets based on monitoring protocols for catch composition defined in Condition 3 for Bratsk district.  Conduct stakeholder interviews in Bratsk, Balagansk and Usolsk to gather information about ETP interactions.  Identify measures, or elements, to support a management strategy and discuss them with the Fishermen Council, Gosrybtsentr, and other stakeholders. Year 3  Continue Bratsk district monitoring based on ETP protocols defined in Year 1.  Expand ETP monitoring to Balagansk and Usolsk districts. Continue stakeholder interviews.  Analyze Year 2 - 3 monitoring data and evaluate ETP status based on preliminary results.  Review alternatives measures to minimize mortality of ETP species. Discuss them with the stakeholders such as the Fishermen Council, Gosrybtsentr, FAR, etc. Year 4  Present a management strategy to gather adequate information, reduce ETP interactions, and conduct regular reviews of alternative measures to minimize ETP mortality.

An on-reservoir inspection of the fishery was undertaken during this audit. The gear employed in the fishery is an open trapnet / pound net with total access to the water surface for any air-breathing animal (e.g., birds / mammals). To harvest the catch, the net entrance is raised and the space within the trap is reduced slowly by hauling in the gear by hand from one side. Once the net is drawn in sufficiently that the catch is constrained within a small pocket of the trap, fish are transferred to a tender / punt in quantities of ≈ 10 kg per time via a scoop net. This process would also allow for any prohibited or ETP species to be identified and removed safely. Two reports of relevance to this Condition were provided to the Audit Team at this audit, showing a) quantities of different species taken in commercial trapnet operations in different parts of the Reservoir Progress on as collected by fisheries inspectors during observations of operations, b) quantities of different species Condition taken in scientific trapnets. Interviews were also undertaken with Alexander Ivanov (Chief Fishery (Year 3) inspector for the Bratsk Region), Vadim Yurin (Fishery Scientist, Bratsk Region), and Alexander Li (Fisherman). In all cases, it was reported that there are no interactions with ETP species. At this stage, it appears highly likely that there are no interactions with ETP birds or mammals in the UoA (i.e., the Bratsk Fish LLC trapnet fishery that occurs within the Bratsk region). As such, the ETP management strategy for the UoA can be simply to continue to monitor the fishery and maintain logbooks to detect the possibility of interaction; this is being done. However, rather than close the Condition, it is considered appropriate to keep it open this year and to review the data next year to ensure the fishery continues to not interact with ETP species. The Condition is on target.

The Audit Team again reviewed the latest catch data and potential catches of ETP species with NVIRO scientists (Vadim Yurin and Andrey Bobkov), as well as with the lead fisheries enforcement officer for the Bratsk Region (Alexander Ivanov) and a fisherman (Sergey Oskin). All interviewees confirmed that the trapnet gear employed in the fishery is set in relatively shallow water in essentially lacustrine Progress on regions of the Reservoir, while the ETP fish species present in the Reservoir (taimen, sturgeon, sterlet, Condition lenok and omul) are riverine species that do not occur in such areas. It was reconfirmed that the (Year 4) trapnet gear is open to the water surface and that any mammal or bird species would be able to enter and leave the traps at will. In summary, after four years of having the condition open, it is considered that the fishery has no impact on ETP species, and the existing monitoring processes are adequate to meet SG80 for this PI; therefore, Condition 7 can be closed. A revised scoring rationale is presented in Section 2.4.

Status The condition is closed at the Year 4 audit. (Year 4) Additional None information

Table 8. Condition 8 progress

Performance 2.3.3 – ETP species information Indicator

Score 60

According to catch information, fishing logbook data, and interviews with fishery managers, there is little evidence of significant ETP interactions in the Bratsk district of the Bratsk Reservoir. However, many of the ETP species listed for the Irkutsk region, such as sturgeons and salmonids, occur in river ecosystems that vanished with the establishment of the Bratsk Reservoir. Today, relatively more of these river ecosystems remain in upstream portions of the reservoir in Usolsk and Balagansk districts. Justification However, the assessment team did not find ETP information for the Balagansk and Usolsk districts or catch records for ETP species in any district. As a result, the assessment team concludes that there is some qualitative information to assess the UoA-related mortality of ETP species. But without some quantitative information, especially for Balagansk and Usolsk districts, the team assigns a score of 60 to scoring issues (a) “Information adequacy for assessment of impacts” and (b) “Information adequacy for management strategy” resulting in an overall score of 70 for PI 2.3.3. Data gaps and actions 18

required for Condition 8 overlap with those of Condition 7 (PI 2.3.2 ETP Management Strategy) and both Conditions should be developed together.

Within four years, the Client should gather some quantitative information to assess the UoA-related Condition impacts to ETP species for all three districts of the Bratsk Reservoir and provide adequate information to support a strategy to manage impacts on ETP species.

 Surveillance 1: The Client should gather information about ETP interactions with fishers, including logbook data and results of interviews with fishery managers in all three districts. Prepare Year 1 Report of findings. No change expected in the score.  Surveillance 2: The Client should review Year 1 ETP interaction data and consider innovative procedures to gather information about fishery interactions with ETP species. Prepare Year 2 Report to present findings and recommendations. Milestones  Surveillance 3: The Client should continue to gather data about ETP species and expand information gathering to include all three districts in reservoir. Prepare Year 3 Report to summarize findings.  Surveillance 4: The Client should present some quantitative information to determine impacts of the perch trap net fisheries on ETP species and to support ETP management measures. The Condition shall be fully met to score 80.

Year 1  Review historical logbook data to identify ETP interactions.  Evaluate methods to determine quantities of ETP species interactions with trap nets. Consider stakeholder interviews, fishermen incentive programs, research etc.  Sign a contract with Gosrybtsentr to manage monitoring for Condition 8.  For Bratsk district, integrate ETP monitoring into catch composition protocols described in Conditions 3 and 6.  For Usolsk and Balangansk districts, Gosrybtsentr will develop a questionnaire to survey fishermen about ETP interactions. Year 2  Evaluate quantities of ETP catch in trap nets based on monitoring protocols for catch composition Client Action defined in Conditions 3 and 6 for Bratsk district. Plan  Conduct stakeholder interviews in Bratsk, Balagansk and Usolsk districts. Year 3  Continue Year 3 field surveys in Bratsk district.  Expand survey monitoring sites to Balagansk district.  Conduct stakeholder interviews and questionnaires in Balagansk and Usolsk districts.  Analyze Year 2 monitoring data and evaluate ETP status in all three districts. Year 4  Continue monitoring and information gathering.  Present quantitative information to determine the impacts of trap nets on ETP species.  Recommend measures to support an ETP management strategy; including a methodology to gather quantitative information.

Information for Condition 8 is the same as for Condition 7. Progress on An on-reservoir inspection of the fishery was undertaken during this audit. The gear employed in the Condition fishery is an open trapnet / pound net with total access to the water surface for any air-breathing (Year 3) animal (e.g., birds / mammals). To harvest the catch, the net entrance is raised and the space within the trap is reduced slowly by hauling in the gear by hand from one side. Once the net is drawn in sufficiently that the catch is constrained in a small pocket of the trap, fish are transferred to a tender /

punt in quantities of ≈ 10 kg per time via a scoop net. This process would also allow for any prohibited or ETP species to be identified and removed safely. Two reports of relevance to this Condition were provided to the Audit Team at this audit, showing a) quantities of different species taken in commercial trapnet operations in different parts of the Reservoir as collected by fisheries inspectors during observations of operations, b) quantities of different species taken in scientific trapnets. Interviews were also undertaken with Alexander Ivanov (Chief Fishery inspector for the Bratsk Region), Vadim Yurin (Fisheries Scientist, Bratsk Region), and Alexander Li (Fisherman). In all cases, it was reported that there are no interactions with ETP species. At this stage, it appears highly likely that there are no interactions with ETP birds or mammals. However, rather than close the Condition, it is considered appropriate to keep it open this year and to review the data next year to ensure the fishery continues to not interact with ETP species. The Condition is on target.

The Audit Team again reviewed the latest catch data and potential catches of ETP species with NVIRO scientists (Vadim Yurin and Andrey Bobkov), as well as with the lead fisheries enforcement officer for the Bratsk Region (Alexander Ivanov) and a fisherman (Sergey Oskin). All interviewees confirmed that the trapnet gear employed in the fishery is set in relatively shallow water in lacustrine regions of the Progress on Reservoir, while the ETP fish species found in Bratsk Reservoir (taimen, sturgeon, sterlet, lenok and Condition omul) are riverine species that are very rare or simply do not occur in such areas. It was reconfirmed (Year 4) that the trapnet gear is open to the water surface and that any mammal or bird species would be able to enter and leave the traps at will. In summary, after four years of having the condition open, it is considered that the fishery has no impact on ETP species, and the existing monitoring processes are adequate to meet SG80 for this PI; therefore, Condition 7 can be closed. A revised scoring rationale is presented in Section 2.4.

Status The condition is closed at the Year 4 audit. (Year 4) Additional None information

2.3 Client Action Plan There were no updates to the Client Action Plan at this Year 4 Audit.

2.4 Re-scoring Performance Indicators Where Conditions have been met this year, the scoring text for the SIs has been reviewed and updated with information now available for the fishery (as described in Section 2.2.1, above). The updated scores and text are highlighted in green in the PI scoring rationales, below.

PI 2.3.2 – ETP species management strategy – Rescoring

The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to:  meet national and international requirements; PI 2.3.2  ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species. Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

Management strategy in place (national and international requirements)

There are measures in place There is a strategy in place for There is a comprehensive a that minimise the UoA-related managing the UoA’s impact on strategy in place for Guide mortality of ETP species, and ETP species, including managing the UoA’s impact on are expected to be highly measures to minimise ETP species, including post likely to achieve national and mortality, which is designed to measures to minimise international requirements for be highly likely to achieve mortality, which is designed to the protection of ETP species. national and international achieve above national and

requirements for the protection international requirements for of ETP species. the protection of ETP species.

Met? N/A N/A N/A

Rationale

SIa was not scored in the initial assessment (Nelson et al. 2016).

Management strategy in place (alternative)

There are measures in place There is a strategy in place There is a comprehensive that are expected to ensure that is expected to ensure the strategy in place for b Guide the UoA does not hinder the UoA does not hinder the managing ETP species, to post recovery of ETP species. recovery of ETP species. ensure the UoA does not hinder the recovery of ETP species.

Met? Yes No Yes No

Rationale

Measures to ensure that the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species include:  Definition of ETP species in Russian Katalog of Red Book Species;  Prohibition of ETP species harvest in fishing rules; and  Monitoring and enforcement of relevant fishing rules. Despite these measures, the team does not consider a coherent strategy to be in place without some record of ETP species in the catch. Therefore the team assigns a score of 60. There is no observer coverage of the Bratsk Reservoir Trapnet Fishery, but routine monitoring of catches through fishery enforcement and scientific observation provide independent verification of catches, and confirm that ETP species are not taken in the trapnet fishery. This appears to be because the ETP fish species present in the Reservoir are riverine in nature, whereas the trapnet fishery occurs in lacustrine regions. In any case, fish are caught alive in the trapnets, and are hand-brailed into small vessels for collection, which would give an opportunity to return ETP fish species if they were caught. In addition, mammals and birds, if they were to enter the trapnets, have free access to the air and are free to enter or leave the trapnets. In essence, as applied to the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery, which is low intensity and with a very low probability of capturing ETP species, the measures in place for the fishery, as listed above, are considered sufficient to meet the definition of a strategy that is expected to ensure the UoA does not hinder the recovery of ETP species – SG60 and SG80 are met. SG100 is not met because the measures in place do not comprise a comprehensive strategy.

Management strategy evaluation

The measures are There is an objective basis The strategy/comprehensive considered likely to work, for confidence that the strategy is mainly based on based on plausible argument measures/strategy will work, information directly about the c Guide (e.g., general experience, based on information directly fishery and/or species post theory or comparison with about the fishery and/or the involved, and a quantitative similar fisheries/species). species involved. analysis supports high confidence that the strategy will work.

Met? Yes No Yes No

Rationale

There is no evidence of direct or indirect effects from the UoA to ETP species in Bratsk Reservoir. The team interprets this lack of evidence as a plausible argument that the measures are working. However, without more information directly about the fishery interactions with ETP species, there is no objective basis for confidence that the measures are working. Therefore the team assigns a score of 60. Over two separate site visits, the Audit Team has twice reviewed catch data, observations from enforcement checks, and scientific survey information, with scientists, enforcement officers and fishermen who were knowledgeable about the fishery. In all cases, there has been no evidence or indication of captures of ETP species. In part, this appears to

be because the ETP fish species present in the Reservoir are riverine in nature, whereas the trapnet fishery occurs in lacustrine regions. In addition, mammals and birds, if they were to enter the trapnets, have free access to the air and are free to enter or leave the trapnets. It is considered that there is an objective basis for confidence that the measures/strategy will work, based on information directly about the fishery and/or the species involved – SG60 and SG80 are met. SG100 is not met because there is not a quantitative analysis supporting high confidence that the strategy will work.

Management strategy implementation

There is some evidence that There is clear evidence that the measures/strategy is being the strategy/comprehensive d Guide implemented successfully. strategy is being implemented post successfully and is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a) or (b).

Met? Yes No

Rationale

Since there is no evidence of direct or indirect affects to ETP species in Bratsk Reservoir, the team concludes that there is some evidence that the measures to protect ETP species are working. We assign a score of 80.

Review of alternative measures to minimize mortality of ETP species

There is a review of the There is a regular review of There is a biennial review of potential effectiveness and the potential effectiveness and the potential effectiveness and e Guide practicality of alternative practicality of alternative practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- post related mortality of ETP related mortality of ETP related mortality ETP species, species. species and they are and they are implemented, as implemented as appropriate. appropriate.

Met? Yes N/A No N/A No N/A

Rationale

Review procedures allow federal managers to evaluate the list of ETP species and the fishing rules meant to protect them. However, there is no clearly defined regular review process to review the effectiveness of alterative measures to minimize ETP mortality. This evidence supports a score of 60. There is no evidence that the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery catches or interacts with ETP species. As such, the requirements of this SI, to review the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA- related mortality of ETP species, and to implement those as appropriate, is not scored (GSA 3.5.3, MSC 2014).

References

 Blyth-Skyrme , R. & D. Sendek (2019). Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery, third surveillance report. Marine Certification LLC, Moscow, Russia. 49 pp. Available online: https://cert.msc.org/FileLoader/FileLinkDownload.asmx/GetFile?encryptedKey=3adVoSpQeII59zyOnE+Ox U+Hf2mAnXcNrZVViUcpm8ORmsZfCFqfz3LNW2LdzQxm.  Nelson, S., Sendek, D. & D. Lajus (2016). Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery, MSC public certification report. Marine Certification LLC, Moscow, Russia, 197 pp. Available online: https://cert.msc.org/FileLoader/FileLinkDownload.asmx/GetFile?encryptedKey=3TUfQfdmdEjABE2Pq32E6 zEsizssXciy34YWFLSD2dO7ntWMaQ4QrUiMmBE2+P4J

Overall Performance Indicator score

PI 2.3.3 – ETP species information – Rescoring Relevant information is collected to support the management of UoA impacts on ETP PI 2.3.3 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 Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

Information adequacy for assessment of impacts

Qualitative information is Some quantitative information Quantitative information is adequate to estimate the is adequate to assess the available to assess with a high UoA related mortality on ETP UoA related mortality and degree of certainty the species. impact and to determine magnitude of UoA-related whether the UoA may be a impacts, mortalities and OR threat to protection and injuries and the If RBF is used to score PI recovery of the ETP species. consequences for the a Guide 2.3.1 for the UoA: status of ETP species. OR post Qualitative information is If RBF is used to score PI adequate to estimate 2.3.1 for the UoA: productivity and susceptibility attributes for Some quantitative information ETP species. is adequate to assess productivity and susceptibility attributes for ETP species.

Met? Yes No Yes No

Rationale

Interviews with fishery managers for Bratsk district provide qualitative evidence to show little UoA impact on ETP species. Logbook and catch information data provide some quantitative evidence for Bratsk district. But there are no comparable manager interviews or credible quantitative information from Balagansk and Usolsk districts. Therefore the team determines that there is not adequate information to assess the impact of the perch trap net fishery on ETP species. We assign a score of 60. Over two separate site visits, the Audit Team has twice reviewed catch data, observations from enforcement checks, and scientific survey information, with scientists, enforcement officers and fishermen who were knowledgeable about the fishery. In all cases, there has been no evidence or indication of captures of ETP species. In part, this appears to be because the ETP fish species present in the Reservoir are riverine in nature, whereas the trapnet fishery occurs in lacustrine regions. It is considered that some quantitative information is adequate to assess the UoA related mortality and impact and to determine whether the UoA may be a threat to protection and recovery of the ETP species – SG60 and SG80 are met. However, the data are not comprehensive enough to meet the ‘high degree of certainty’ requirement at SG100.

Information adequacy for management strategy

Information is adequate to Information is adequate to Information is adequate to support measures to manage measure trends and support a support a comprehensive the impacts on ETP species. strategy to manage impacts strategy to manage impacts, b Guide on ETP species. minimize mortality and injury post of ETP species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving its objectives.

Met? Yes No Yes No

Rationale

Interviews with fishery managers for Bratsk district provide qualitative evidence to demonstrate little UoA impact on ETP species. Logbook data and catch information plus records of violations provide some quantitative evidence for ETP impacts in Bratsk district. But there are no comparable manager interviews or credible quantitative information logbook data or violation information from Balagansk and Usolsk districts. Moreover, without a record of ETP interactions in the fishery, the team does not consider a management strategy to be in place. Therefore the team assigns a 60 to scoring issue (b). 23

Catch data are collected by fishermen on a daily basis, and observations from enforcement checks and scientific survey information are collected routinely. At the Year 3 Surveillance the Audit Team met with Alexei Perepelkin (Acting Chief Inspector, Irkutsk Region Fishery Enforcement), where ETP species interactions with the trapnet fishery were discussed, as well as with Alexander Ivanov (Chief Inspector, Bratsk Region Fishery Enforcement (Blyth-Skyrme & Sendek 2019). Further interviews were conducted at the Year 4 Surveillance Audit (Table 9) with scientists and a fisherman who were knowledgeable about the fishery. These interviews provided the Audit Team with the opportunity to review and verify the data that are available from various sources, confirming that the fishery does not interact with ETP fish species, and that if mammals or birds were to enter the trapnets, they have free access to the air and may enter or leave the trapnets freely. With the scientific data and enforcement data confirming the absence of interactions, it is considered that information is adequate to measure trends and support a strategy to manage impacts on ETP species – SG60 and SG80 are met. However, the data are not sufficiently comprehensive to meet the ‘high degree of certainty’ requirement at SG100.

References

Overall Performance Indicator score 60 80

3 Appendices 3.1 References Blyth-Skyrme, R.E. & D. Sendek (2019). Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery – surveillance report. Marine Certification LLC, Moscow, Russia. 49 pp. Available at: https://cert.msc.org/FileLoader/FileLinkDownload.asmx/GetFile?encryptedKey=3adVoSpQeII59zyOnE+OxU+Hf2 mAnXcNrZVViUcpm8ORmsZfCFqfz3LNW2LdzQxm

Blyth-Skyrme, R, Sendek, D. & M. Samy-Kamal (2019). MSC sustainable fisheries certification: Russian Lake Peipus Perch and Pike-Perch Fishery; Public Certification Report. Marine Certification LLC, Moscow, Russia, April 2019, 262 pp. Available at: https://cert.msc.org/FileLoader/FileLinkDownload.asmx/GetFile?encryptedKey=K/wPa2QgmobjSIHcWSdXtg+anes POKIwVNsBk9OHNOvjjulJvQxMrDfIejNa4JMc.

MSC (2014). MSC fisheries certification requirements and guidance, v.2.0, 1st October 2014. Marine Stewardship Council, London, 528 pp.

MSC (2020). MSC Fisheries Certification Process, v.2.2, 25 March 2020. Marine Stewardship Council, London. Available at: https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program- documents/fisheries-program-documents/msc-fisheries-certification-process-v2-2.pdf?sfvrsn=9294350_7.

Nelson, S., Sendek, D. and D. Lajus (2016). Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery. MSC Public Certification Report. Marine Certification LLC, Moscow, 10 May 2016. 197 pp. Available at: https://cert.msc.org/FileLoader/FileLinkDownload.asmx/GetFile?encryptedKey=3TUfQfdmdEjABE2Pq32E6zEsizs sXciy34YWFLSD2dO7ntWMaQ4QrUiMmBE2+P4J

Yurin V.A. (2020) Materials justifying the recommended volume of harvest (catch) of aquatic biological resources, the TAC of which is not established, in water bodies of the Irkutsk region for 2021. Baikal branch of VNIRO, Ulan-Ude, 97 pp,

Yurin V.A. (2021). Catch of immature perch in 2012-2020. Baikal branch of VNIRO, Bratsk, 3 pp.

3.2 Evaluation processes and techniques 3.2.1 Site visits Details of the meetings held during the site visit for the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery are provided in Table 9, below. It is noted that the site visit was extended because of the limited availability of some stakeholders, and that the site visit covered both the Year 4 audit of the existing certificate of the fishery, and the reassessment.

Table 9: Summary of stakeholder meetings held.

15th March 2021 – Office of Bratsk Fish LLC, Bratsk (Audit Team remote) Name Representing Subjects discussed United Certification Systems Ltd. Dr. Rob Blyth-Skyrme (UCSL) Dr. Dmitry Sendek UCSL  Certification process. Dr. Mohamed Samy-Kamal UCSL  Management / regulatory changes. (for reassessment)  Fishery seasonality and catch patterns. Mariya Letunovskaya UCSL (translator)  New catch data for 2020.  Traceability. Sergey Romanov Bratsk Fish LLC Vadim Yurin Federal Agency for Fisheries 16th March 2021 – Office of Bratsk Fish LLC, Bratsk (Audit Team remote) Name Representing Subjects discussed Dr. Rob Blyth-Skyrme UCSL Dr. Dmitry Sendek UCSL  Progress against Condition milestones. Dr. Mohamed Samy-Kamal UCSL  Catch separation by gear type. (for reassessment)  ETP and other rare species catches. Mariya Letunovskaya UCSL (translator)  Fishery compliance, including recreational and IUU fishing activity. Sergey Romanov Bratsk Fish LLC Vadim Yurin Federal Agency for Fisheries 18th March 2021 – Office of Bratsk Fish LLC, Bratsk (Audit Team remote) Name Representing Subjects discussed Dr. Rob Blyth-Skyrme UCSL Dr. Dmitry Sendek UCSL Dr. Mohamed Samy-Kamal UCSL  Certification process. (for reassessment)  Management / regulatory changes. Mariya Letunovskaya UCSL (translator)  ETP and other rare species catches. Andrey Bobkov VNIRO  Catch separation by gear type.  Daily fishing practices. Sergey Romanov Bratsk Fish LLC Sergey Oskin Foreman of fishermen Vadim Yurin Federal Agency for Fisheries 26th March 2021 – Office of Bratsk Fish LLC, Bratsk (Audit Team remote) Name Representing Subjects discussed Dr. Rob Blyth-Skyrme UCSL Dr. Dmitry Sendek UCSL Dr. Mohamed Samy-Kamal UCSL  Certification process. (for reassessment)  Fishery compliance, including recreational and Mariya Letunovskaya UCSL (translator) IUU fishing activity. Chief Inspector, Bratsk Region  ETP and other rare species catches. Alexander Ivanov Fishery Enforcement  New enforcement resources. Sergey Romanov Bratsk Fish LLC Vadim Yurin Federal Agency for Fisheries

2nd April 2021 – Office of Bratsk Fish LLC, Bratsk (Audit Team remote) Name Representing Subjects discussed Dr. Rob Blyth-Skyrme UCSL Dr. Dmitry Sendek UCSL Dr. Mohamed Samy-Kamal UCSL  Certification process. (for reassessment)  Progress against Condition milestones.  MSC Covid-19 Derogation. Mariya Letunovskaya UCSL (translator)  Reporting timelines. Sergey Romanov Bratsk Fish LLC Vadim Yurin Federal Agency for Fisheries

3.2.2 Stakeholder participation No other stakeholder participation was received this year.

3.3 Harmonised fishery assessments

The Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery overlaps with the following Russian lake fisheries (Table 10).

Table 10. Overlapping fisheries

Fishery name Certification status and date Performance Indicators to harmonise

Russian and Estonian Lake Peipus Principle 3 for Russian elements Certified – January 2020 Fishery (Governance and Policy PIs, only) Russian Lake Peipus Perch and Pike- Principle 3 (Governance and Policy Certified – April 2019 Perch Fishery (RLPPPF) PIs, only) Principle 3 (Governance and Policy Irikla Reservoir Perch (IRP) Certified – April 2016 PIs, only) Principle 3 (Governance and Policy Lake Chany perch and pike-perch In assessment PIs, only)

A full harmonisation analysis was undertaken in writing the PCR for the RLPPPF (Blyth-Skyrme et al. 2019). At that time, there were no significant differences between the Bratsk Reservoir Perch Fishery scoring and that of the other fisheries considered. The Lake Chany fishery has entered its first MSC assessment since that time, but there is no indication that there is any further need for harmonisation discussions, currently.