MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Expedited Assessment for extension of scope Public Certification Report

Hastings Fleet Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) Trammel Net, Gill Net and Trawl Fisheries

On behalf of Hastings Fisheries Management Group

Prepared by ME Certification Ltd

JULY 2016

Authors: Dr Mike Pawson

ME Certification Ltd 56 High Street, Lymington Hampshire SO41 9AH United Kingdom Tel: 01590 613007 Fax: 01590 671573 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.me-cert.com

MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Contents GLOSSARY ...... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 5 1. AUTHORSHIP AND PEER REVIEWER ...... 7 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE FISHERY ...... 8 2.1 Unit of Assessment (UoA) and Scope of Certification Sought ...... 8 2.2 Overview of the fishery ...... 10 2.3 Principle One: Target Species Background ...... 14 2.4 Principle two: Ecosystem Background ...... 22 2.5 Principle three: Management system background ...... 27 3. EVALUATION PROCEDURE ...... 28 3.1 Harmonised Fishery Assessment ...... 28 3.2 Previous assessments ...... 28 3.3 Assessment Methodologies ...... 28 3.4 Evaluation Processes and Techniques ...... 29 4. TRACEABILITY ...... 31 4.1 Eligibility Date ...... 31 4.2 Traceability within the Fishery ...... 31 4.3 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody ...... 34 4.4 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practically Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to Enter Further Chains of Custody ...... 34 5. EVALUATION RESULTS ...... 35 5.1 Principle Level Scores ...... 35 5.2 Summary of PI Level Scores ...... 36 5.3 Summary of Conditions ...... 38 5.4 Recommendations ...... 38 5.5 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement ...... 38 6. REFERENCES ...... 39 APPENDICES ...... 42 APPENDIX 1. SCORING AND RATIONALES ...... 42 APPENDIX 2. CONDITIONS ...... 70 APPENDIX 3. PEER REVIEW REPORT ...... 72 APPENDIX 4. STAKEHOLDER SUBMISSIONS ...... 78 APPENDIX 5. SURVEILLANCE FREQUENCY ...... 79 APPENDIX 7. STAKEHOLDERS ...... 80

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 2 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Glossary

Term/acronym Definition

CEFAS Centre for Environment Fisheries and Aquaculture Science CFP Common Fisheries Policy (EU) CoC Chain of Custody CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort DEFRA Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ETP Endangered Threatened Protected (species) EU European Union F Fishing mortality FAD Defra Fishing Activity Database FAM Fishery Assessment Methodology (MSC scheme document) FCR Fisheries Certification Requirements (MSC scheme document) FLAG Hastings Fishery Local Action Group HCR Harvest Control Rule HFMG Hastings Fishery Management Group ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea IFCA Inshore Fishery and Conservation Authority IUU Illegal, Unreported, Unregulated LRP Limit Reference Point LTL Low Trophic Level (species) MCS Monitoring Control and surveillance MEC ME Certification Ltd MEP MacAlister Elliott and Partners Ltd MLS Minimum Landing Size MMO Marine Management Organisation Nm Nautical mile PCR Public Certification Report PI Performance indicator (of the MSC Standard) RBF Risk-Based Framework RFMO Regional Fisheries Management Organisation SCA Statistical catch-at-age (model) SIFCA Sussex Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority SG Scoring Guidepost SSB Spawning Stock Biomass STECF Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (EU) TAC Total Allowable Catch

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 3 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

TRP Target Reference Point UoA Unit of Assessment UoC Unit of Certification VME Vulnerable marine ecosystems VMS Vessel Monitoring System WG Working Group WGNSSK ICES Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak YFS Young Fish Surveys

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 4 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Executive Summary

This expedited assessment of the Hastings plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.) fishery was conducted by Dr Mike Pawson on behalf of ME Certification Ltd (MEC).

The geographical area of the Unit of Certification lies within the Eastern English Channel (ICES Division VIId) and specifically between Beachy Head and Dungeness and offshore to the UK six-mile limit. The fishery proposed for certification uses demersal trawl, trammel net and gill net (three separate units of assessment) and is a relatively small part of the overall fishing pressure on the Eastern Channel plaice stock within ICES Division VIId. Whilst the status of the stock as a whole is assessed, fishing practices, and their consequences, are evaluated within the Hastings fleet only. This comprises vessels identified by the Hastings Fisheries Management Group, and the eligible fishers are those registered on the Hastings Stade. The fishery is managed under the EC CFP by DEFRA and SIFCA.

The assessment was announced according to MSC procedure on the 14th July 2015, and a site visit was carried out on 17-18 August 2015, which included meetings with Hastings Fishery Management Group (Joy Collins, Yasmin Ornsby, Paul Joy) and Sussex IFCA (Tim Dapling).

Being an expedited assessment, only Principle 1 (the status and management of the target species, in this case plaice) and Performance Indicators 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 (other species caught in the fishery along with plaice and retained onboard the fishing vessels) were assessed.

In the re-assessment of the Hastings sole fishery (see IMM, 2012), the Risk-Based Framework (RBF) was used to determine the effects of the very small Hastings fishery on retained species. At that time, stakeholder meetings were held with members of the Hastings Fishery Local Action Group (FLAG) – representing a wide range of interested and affected stakeholders. The use of the RBF in the re-assessment confirmed the low level of significance of interactions with retained species in this fishery identified by the original MSC assessment in 2005.

The main strengths of the client’s operation are that the fishery is small in size and uses low- impact gear. The effects of the fishery on the target stock, other retained species and wider ecosystem are therefore not significant.

The main weakness of the fishery is the paucity of information on catch discarded at sea, but the RBF was used in the re-assessment to score this performance indicator at 100 implying that there is a partial strategy in place for managing by-catch species at levels which are highly likely to be within biologically based limits or to ensure that the fishery does not hinder their recovery. In relation to management of the target species (Eastern Channel plaice), the absence of a management plan, and of a harvest control rule that would maintain the reproductive capacity of the stock should recruitment fail in future, requires a condition on the fishery.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 5 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

It should be noted that no other plaice fisheries have been MSC certified in the eastern English Channel. Three plaice fisheries in the North Sea using twin-rig trawl are MSC certified (the Ekofish Group, Osprey Trawlers and Danish Fish Producers Organisation) were certified in 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively: www.msc.org). In accordance with MSC guidance on harmonisation, other relevant assessment documents were reviewed and taken into account when undertaking this assessment (including Ekofish, Osprey & DFPO).

Under the assessment, the aggregate scores for this fishery are shown in the table below:

Final Principle Scores (Plaice UoAs)

Principle Score

Trammel net Gill net Trawl

Principle 1 – Target Species 90.6 90.6 90.6

Principle 2 – Ecosystem 85.3 85.3 84

Principle 3 – Management System (from 84 84 84 Hastings sole fishery re-assessment, 2012)

No PI scored below 60. MEC has therefore provisionally concluded that the fishery should be certified as MSC subject to peer and stakeholder review. One condition was raised in relation to PI 1.2.1 (Harvest Strategy) as summarised below:

The actions necessary to achieve the stated long-term (MSY) objectives for the Division VIId plaice stock need to be clearly defined via a management plan or by some other suitable method, which includes explicit controls on the exploitation rate in relation to the stock’s status (against biomass and fishing mortality management targets) that are consistent with the harvest strategy and ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached (SG80 scoring issue a).

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 6 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

1. Authorship and Peer Reviewer

The author of this report (MEC assessment team) was:

Dr Mike Pawson: Mike Pawson has 45 years’ experience as a fisheries scientist carrying out biological research and providing expert advice in relation to fish stock assessment and fisheries management and regulation to the UK government and the EC. Between 1974 and 1980 Mike initiated and led acoustic surveys on blue whiting and mackerel west of UK and trawl surveys in the North Sea, worked as UNESCO expert with the Libyan fisheries laboratory 1979 to 1981, and from 1980 – 1990 initiated and managed Cefas’ coastal fisheries programme. From 1990 – 2002 Mike led the Western demersal team comprising 17 scientific and technical staff providing analytical assessments and management advice for 12 finfish stocks, including plaice in the English Channel, Irish Sea and Celtic Sea. He was chairman of ICES Southern Shelf Demersal Stock Assessment Working Group 1996-98, Seabass Study Group 2000-04 and Elasmobranch Study Group 2001-02, and initiated and co-ordinated EC- funded multi-national projects on methods for egg-production stock biomass estimation in the Irish Sea (plaice, sole and cod:1995 & 2000), bio-geographical identity of English Channel fish stocks, bio-economic modelling of Channel fisheries, development of assessment methods for elasmobranchs, marine recreational fishing etc. Between 2002 and 2007 Mike directed and managed monitoring and assessment of England and Wales salmonid and eel stocks. In 2007 Mike retired from his post as the senior advisor to the UK government on salmonid and freshwater fisheries, and marine inshore fisheries, but continues to acts as scientific consultant, including specialist input to MSC assessments (14 to date) and peer review of research papers, project applications and MSC assessments (50 to date).

The peer reviewer for this assessment was Dr Richard Millner. Richard was assessor of the CVO North Sea Plaice and Sole fishery and is a fisheries biologist with 34 years’ experience working for the UK government as an advisor on fish stocks. He has wide experience of flat fish and inshore fisheries around the UK. He has been a member of ICES working groups on flatfish and demersal stocks in the North Sea and was chairman of the ICES Beam Trawl Survey Working Group. He has carried out MSC peer reviews on a number of fisheries assessments including Hastings trammel and trawl fisheries for sole and twin-rig trawling for plaice in the North Sea. He has published on flatfish fisheries and the biology and growth of flatfish.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 7 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

2. Description of the Fishery

2.1 Unit of Assessment (UoA) and Scope of Certification Sought

2.1.1 UoA and Proposed Unit of Certification (UoC)

MEC confirms that the fishery under assessment is within the scope of the MSC Fisheries Standard (7.4 of the MSC Certification Requirements v2.0):

 The target species is not an amphibian, reptile, bird or mammal;  The fishery does not use poisons or explosives;  The fishery is not conducted under a controversial unilateral exemption to an international agreement;  The client or client group does not include an entity that has been successfully prosecuted for a forced labour violation in the last 2 years;  The fishery has in place a mechanism for resolving disputes, and disputes do not overwhelm the fishery;  The fishery is not an enhanced fishery as per the MSC FCR 7.4.3; and  The fishery is not an introduced species-based fishery as per the MSC FCR 7.4.4.

The UoC and UoA are the same in this assessment as there are no other eligible fishers.

This report covers the extension to the scope of certification of the Hasting Fleet Dover Sole (Solea solea) Trammel Net, Gill net and Trawl fishery (MEP-F-025) to also include European plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) fished by Trammel Net, Gill net and Trawl. The three gear types represent separate UoAs chiefly because these gears have characteristic effects on the wider ecosystem rather than on the target stock. Details of the Hastings plaice fishing fleet with descriptions of the Trammel net, Gill net and Trawl operation can be found in Section 2.2. The scope extension therefore involves three additional UoAs as per Table 1.

Table 1. New UoAs to be added to the scope of certification of the Hasting Fleet Dover Sole Trammel Net, Gill net and Trawl fishery (MEP-F-025).

Species European plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.) Geographical range Within the Eastern English Channel (ICES Division VIId) and specifically between Beachy Head and Dungeness and offshore to the six mile limit, Figure 1. Method of capture UoA1: Trammel Net UoA2: Demersal trawl UoA3: Gill Net Stock The fishery proposed for certification is part of the overall fishing pressure on the Eastern Channel plaice stock within ICES Management Area VIId. Though this fishery represents a small proportion of the total fishing pressure on this stock, the status of the

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 8 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

stock as a whole is assessed. However, fishing practices, and their consequences, are evaluated within the Hastings fleet only. Management system The fishery is managed under the EC CFP by DEFRA and Southern IFCA Client group Vessels identified by Hastings Fisheries Management Group and registered on the Hastings Stade Other eligible fishers None

Figure 1. Area covered by the UoAs evaluated as part of this expedited assessment, within the UK 6-mile limit between Beachy Head and Dungeness in the eastern English Channel, ICES Division VIId. Inset map shows ICES divisions.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 9 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

2.1.2 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and Catch Data

Table 2. ICES Division VIId plaice TAC and Catch Data

TAC Year 2015 Amount 4 787 UoA share of TAC Year 2015 Amount N/a* UoC share of total TAC Year 2015 Amount N/a* Total green weight Year (most recent) 2014 Amount 103.5 tonnes catch by UoC Year (second most recent) 2013 Amount 103.2 tonnes * Vessels in the UoC have monthly catch limitations (see https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/480381/Pool_ December_worksheets.csv/preview and Section 2.2.3)

2.2 Overview of the fishery

2.2.1 General fishery description

Fishing has taken place at Hastings for at least 400 years and today Hastings is home to a thriving fleet of modern and traditional fishing vessels. There is no harbour at Hastings, and all of the fishing boats are launched and recovered from the shingle beach, locally referred to as the “Stade”. This practice has a significant effect on the Hastings fleet – all of the vessels are small, and fishing here is highly weather-dependent. A history of the Hastings fleet is set out in detail at the Hastings Fishermen’s Protection Society website (www.hastingsfish.co.uk), which mentions ongoing disputes between the council and fishermen over the use of the Stade by fishermen.

A maximum number of 43 vessels are allowed in the fleet working from the Stade at Hastings at any one time, but there are now 27 boats, all under 10 m in length, of which 26 are currently fishing for sole and plaice. The fishermen of Hastings are very versatile and are able to adapt their fishing methods, gear and target species to changes in conditions and availability. Dover sole and plaice are the most valuable species caught and are taken mainly in trammel nets, though a few vessels use light otter trawl gear (formerly some vessels used beam trawls) and gill nets as an alternative at certain times of the year.

Though the plaice fishery is small-scale (104 tonnes landed in 2014, compared to total international plaice landings of almost 4,000 tonnes in VIId), together with the high-value sole fishery it generates relatively high local employment. Approximately 100 people are employed directly on the boats or as shore hands and another 250 in the local fish market and other associated service activities. A high quality product is assured through extra care of the catch at sea by boxing and icing, and daily landings. There is little by-catch or discarding in these fisheries and they have a fairly low impact on the environment.

Many of the vessel owners and the businesses involved in the fishing industry locally are members of the Hastings Fishermen’s Protection Society (FPS), which exists to represent their interests and protect the right of fishermen to use the beach to launch their vessels and store their gear. The fishery is managed under the EC Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) by the

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 10 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Marine Management Organisation of DEFRA and the Southern IFCA. The fishing vessels involved in this fishery are shown in Table 3.

Observations of inshore vessel distributions have independently shown Hastings vessels fishing in the area from Beachy Head to the western part of Rye Bay (Vanstaen et al., 2010).

Table 3. Fishing Vessels Based at Hastings Beach and fishing for sole and plaice in 2015

Vessel name Vessel Overall length Trawl Trammel Gill net Number (where known) net Alfie Elliot RX60 9.2    Amethyst DR171 5.9    Bethan Louise RX389 9.95    Bloodaxe RX37 6.75    Christine WH717     Christine RX11     Evie Rose RX53     Fairtrade RH5590     Felicity RX58 9.63    Four brothers RX77 9.96    Frederick Rose NN201 8.4    Danny Boy NN736    Jack Henry RX403 9.95    Kaya RX89    Kitty Wake RX439    Lucky Lucy RX442    Maizie Georgia RX100    Moonshine RX118 6.28    My Sara RX419 9.95    Oliver Henry RX427 8.3    Our Holly RX55 7.5    Pioneer NN200 7.94    Roys Boys RX150 9.9    Senlac jack RX1066 9.83    Tia Lily RX445    Valerie Ann RX142   

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 11 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

2.2.2 Gear types

The gears covered by this expedited assessment are the trammel net, trawl and the gill net, each of which is further described in the following sections.

Trammel net

Trammel netting is a very old method of fishing and it has recently become the main method used by the Hastings fleet, set anchored to the sea bed when directed at sole and plaice. The nets are 1.2 - 1.5 m deep and 45 - 55 m long and consist of three walls of nets in which a monofilament or multi-mono filament “gill net” is flanked by two outer walls of large-meshed netting (Figure 2). Fish pass through the outer mesh and become enmeshed or tangled in the inner mesh. Trammel nets are fished in groups (or ‘fleets’) of around eight nets. These are anchored at both ends and are placed in the direction of the tide. The nets are usually left to fish for 24 – 48 hours but occasionally might be retrieved after a single 6-hour tidal cycle, but this is unusual for flatfish such as plaice.

Figure 2. Section of trammel net showing inner and outer facing nets (from IMM, 2012).

When fishing for sole and plaice the Hastings fleet use an inner mesh size of around 100 mm (knot to opposite knot when stretched), which is good practice and is 10 mm above the legal requirement for sole (the most valuable species for the Hastings fleet). The Sussex IFCA minimum legal size for trammel nets is 90 mm (see http://www.sussex- ifca.gov.uk/fishing_instruments.html and the General Fisheries Technical Conservation Rules.).

Whilst the 100 mm mesh size used is designed to minimise the number of sole below the legal minimum size of 24 cm caught in trammel nets, plaice under the minimum size of 27 cm are more likely to be retained. There is no quantitative information available on this (though

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 12 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

estimates of plaice discards are included in the ICES assessment of the Division VIId plaice stock), and a full assessment of the Hastings Plaice fishery (due in 2017) should bear this in mind.

Trawl

The trawl net used by the Hastings vessels is designed for use on soft ground (mainly sand) and has a ground rope of light chain either wrapped in sacking or with a series of four inch diameter rubber bobbins. As a consequence, the impact with the sea bed is light and reported catches of benthic species such as starfish are low. There are a few floats on the headline, producing a low headline height of about 1.5 m to reduce the potential for taking unwanted by- catch species such as cod (for which quota allocations are very low). On some vessels the trawls may be double- or triple-rigged to increase the area of seabed swept during a tow. Although the minimum mesh size is 80 mm, the Hastings fleet tend to use mesh of 85/87mm in order to reduce the potential for catching undersized sole, though this does result in relatively high plaice discards (again, there is no quantitative information available on this, but see Section 2.3.3 below).

Gill net

The gill net is fished in a similar way to the trammel net, though a gill net consists of just a single layer of net with a mesh size of 100 mm normally preferred by the Hastings fleet. The top of the net is set lower in the water compared to the trammel net in order to reduce the by- catch of unwanted species, in particular cod.

The gill nets used in the plaice fishery are rigged with a low “hanging ratio” so that the net hangs loosely between the headrope and footrope when it is in operation. This tends to result in increased fishing effectiveness, at the expense of selectivity by fish size and may result in an increasing amount of discarding of undersize plaice and other species.

2.2.3 Fisheries management framework

Although this expedited assessment does not cover MSC Principle 3 (management of the fishery), a brief outline of the main approach to controlling exploitation - catch quotas – is presented here, whilst more plaice-specific management measures are discussed in Section 2.3.7. The UK quota share of the Total Allowable catch (TAC) is shared among the UK fleet by Fisheries Ministers, who make Fixed Quota Allocations associated with individual fishing licences based on track records of fishing vessels during a reference period from 1994 to 1996. Once allocated, these quota units represent a permission to catch quota stocks. For vessels under 10m (applies to all vessels in the Hastings fleet), however, there is no quota allocation to an individual vessel; instead there is an up-take limit for the under-10m fleet in a particular area for a period of time. This process is currently under review.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 13 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

2.3 Principle One: Target Species Background

2.3.1 Biology of plaice

Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) are a flatfish that are generally found on sandy substrates though the species may also occur on mud and gravel. The species is easily identified: the eyes are located on the right-hand side which is greenish-brown with bright red to orange spots while the underside is a pearly white. This coloration varies with the substrate into which it merges (Wheeler, 1969).

Plaice are found from the near coast as juveniles down to around 150 m in northern waters, and are widely distributed on the continental shelf from the Bay of Biscay in the south through the English Channel, North Sea and Irish Sea to the Baltic, Iceland, the Norwegian coast and Barents Sea in the north. The is some mixing between the population in the eastern English Channel and in the North Sea, where a complex of small sub-populations has been shown to have a strong homing behaviour to specific spawning grounds (Rijnsdorp and Pastoors, 1995; Hunter et al., 2003; 2004).

The biology of plaice has been extensively studied for over one hundred years and there is well-found knowledge about all aspects of its life history (Gibson, 2005). The spawning behaviour, location of spawning and the nursery grounds are all described throughout the species range (Rogers et al., 1998; Fox et al., 2005). The principal spawning areas of the Division VIId plaice stock are in the eastern English Channel and the southern Bight of the North Sea. Prior to spawning there is some movement of fish between the southern North Sea and eastern Channel. Spawning begins in December in the southern North Sea and English Channel and continues through to March.

Plaice eggs are planktonic, around 2 mm in diameter, and are easily distinguished from other eggs present in the plankton at the same time, due to their large size. The larvae are also easily distinguished from other fish larvae by their general shape, size and pigmentation (Russell, 1976). During the planktonic phase, which lasts two to three months, the eggs and larvae are transported by the residual drift of tidal currents into shallow nursery areas along the Channel coast and in the southern North Sea. The level of recruitment to the plaice stock is mainly determined by high mortality during the egg and larval phase and is driven by environmental factors such as sea temperature, predation, and the suitability of nursery areas into which larvae drift.

Settling post-larval plaice can be found on most sandy and sandy/muddy beaches around the Channel and in the southern North Sea (Harlay et al., 2001; Rogers et al., 1998), though the nursery areas on the eastern side of the North Sea contribute most of the total recruitment (ICES, 2010a). They then spend their first year in the shallow coastal areas followed by a gradual offshore migration into deeper water, though a portion of 1-group and even 2-group fish may return to shallow productive waters in successive years (Gibson et al., 2002). In common with most other northern hemisphere teleost species, plaice have a nominal ‘birthdate’ of 1st January and will therefore remain as 0-group fish until 31st December after which they become 1-group fish. Male plaice mature at around 2 to 3 years whilst female fish mature a year or two later.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 14 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

The diet of juvenile plaice is dominated by polychaetes, crustaceans and molluscs, whilst adult plaice feed on larger molluscs including Mactra spp., small scallops and razor shells, worms including Aphrodite, small crabs, brittle stars (Ophiura spp.) and even small fish such as sandeels (Ammodytes spp.) (Amara et al., 2001).

The plaice is not a low-trophic level (LTL) species (FCR Annex SA 2.2.9).

2.3.2 Stock identity of Eastern Channel plaice

Pawson (1995) summarises information that has been used to identify and separate stocks of plaice in the English Channel and adjacent waters. As mentioned above, plaice spawn from December to March in the Channel, with the peak of spawning being in January and February. Three main areas have been recognised (from egg and larval surveys) in the central eastern Channel from Dungeness to the Isle of Wight, where the distribution of eggs is often continuous with that in the North Sea. Furthermore, hydrographic studies have indicated that a large proportion of the eggs produced in the Channel enter the North Sea before larval metamorphosis occurs. The recruitment of newly metamorphosed plaice into nurseries in the North Sea has been shown to involve changes in the vertical distribution of larvae, such that they move into mid-water during flood tides and return to the seabed at high water slack where they remain during the ebb tide. Similar transport processes are ultimately used by juvenile and adult fish during feeding and spawning migrations.

Analysis of juvenile plaice taggings in the North Sea and eastern Channel indicates that 38% of plaice in the eastern Channel came from nursery grounds in the North Sea, though eastern Channel nursery grounds supplied only 0.3% of recruits to the North Sea.

A review of plaice taggings in the Channel at different times of the year showed that 20-30% of the plaice catch from the eastern Channel in winter contained migratory North Sea fish, which entered the Channel in autumn, and left rapidly after spawning.

It is concluded, from extensive tagging programmes and ichthyoplankton surveys, that plaice which spawn in the eastern Channel may use the southern North Sea at many stages in their life history, whilst other plaice, which spawn in the same areas of the eastern Channel at the same time, are clearly a resident Channel stock, as are most plaice which spawn in the western Channel. For the purposes of fishery management, therefore, two plaice stocks, which probably have sufficient integrity to be considered as largely self-perpetuating units, are recognised in the eastern Channel: the resident eastern Channel stock and a migratory eastern Channel/southern North Sea stock. This mixing of North Sea and Channel plaice populations is accounted for in ICES management advice by assuming that 13% of the plaice landed in Division VIId originate from the North Sea and Western English Channel (ICES, 2015a). However, separate stock assessments are carried out on plaice populations in the North Sea (ICES Sub-area IV – which since 2015 includes Division IIIa), western Channel (Division VIIe) and the eastern Channel (Division VIId), and only the latter is relevant to this MSC expedited assessment.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 15 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

2.3.3 Discarding of plaice

In the eastern Channel, plaice are caught mainly as part of a mixed fishery with sole. Since the minimum landing size (MLS) of sole is 24 cm, the minimum mesh size for sole is set at 80 mm (EU Regulation 850/98). This results in a high level of discarding of plaice which have a broader body shape and grow to a larger size than sole.

There is a number of management measures within the North Sea flatfish fishery that attempt to reduce discarding of plaice; specifically, the use of mesh >120 mm in fisheries directed at plaice. Because plaice are taken chiefly in a sole-directed fishery in the eastern Channel, however, mesh size increases are inevitably constrained by the need to retain marketable sole, and the forcoming implementation of the EU “landing obligation” that is being introduced under the CFP (probably in 2018 for this fishery) will bring this issue into sharper focus.

A number of studies have been undertaken in the North Sea to elucidate the levels of plaice discards in different gears and mesh sizes. Van Keeken et al. (2004), for example, showed that twin-rigged trawlers with 95mm mesh discarded 377 plaice/hr compared to 979 plaice/hr discarded by 80mm beam trawl fishing at the same time. IMARES (Röckmann et al., 2011) compared data from sampling on twin-rig vessels and on beam trawlers using 80mm and 100mm mesh sizes along the Dutch coast during summer. The results were discard rates of 397 and 56 plaice/hr in 80mm and 100mm twin-rig respectively, and 923 and 148 plaice/hr in 80mm and 100mm beam trawls respectively. Clearly, twin-rig trawls (similar to the gear used by the Hastings fleet) had much lower discard rates than beam trawls, though the relatively high levels of discarding by 95mm gear (van Keeken et al., 2004, above) suggest that selectivity of plaice and consequently the level of discarding is not substantially improved until the mesh size is 100mm or larger.

There was no information on discarding specific to the Hastings fishery (or, indeed, small boat inshore fishweries in the Eastern Channel) presented in either of the two Hastings sole fishery assessment reports, in which stakeholder consultation was used to identify potentially discarded species. A Cefas study in 2013 confirmed previous findings that netters produce relatively very little discards (Catchpole et al, 2014). The University of Brighton has a project to sample discards in the Hastings demersal fisheries in order to estimate discard levels and discarding practices ahead of the implementation of the EU Landings Obligation, and this information will be available for the fishery’s re-assessment in 2016/17.

Van Keeken et al. (2004) also investigated the survival of discarded plaice in twin-rig trawlers and estimated that up to 75% of lightly damaged plaice were alive after 60h, though more heavily damaged fish (which make up >80% of the catch in both twin-rig and beam trawls) did not survive after 60h. The inference is that the landings obligation, when applied to plaice, will not result in substantially higher mortality than discarding them at sea. However, plaice discarded from small inshore trawlers tend to be in van Keeken’s lightly damaged category, and Millner et al. (1993) found high survival of plaice from from inshore trawlers in VIId. Plaice discarded by the Hastings fleet may, therefore, have a relatively high survival.

Plaice discards are included in the ICES assessment of Division VIId plaice so that full catch mortality is estimated for the stock, in estimating stock status and in setting TACs (Aarts and

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 16 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Poos, 2009). The catch mortality is also used in determining precautionary and long-term target reference levels for the stock. ICES estimated that an annual average of 3,406 tonnes of plaice was discarded in Division VIId in 2012-14, compared with mean landings of 3,984 tonnes. Although the Division VIId plaice fishery remains sustainable, reducing discarding (by better selectivity) would not only make the stock more resilient to fluctuations in recruitment, but would also enable the human consumption landings to increase without increasing the overall exploitation level.

2.3.4 Plaice Assessments and stock status

2.3.4.1 Plaice Assessment

The ICES Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK) uses a statistical catch-at-age model (SCA) developed by Aarts and Poos (2009) to assess the stock status of Division VIId plaice (ICES, 2015a, 2015b), which is in scientific data category 1 (includes stocks with full analytical assessments in which several year classes contribute to the fishery). The Working Group does not carry out a full assessment of the stocks in its portfolio every year, but has a rolling programme of a ‘Benchmark’ assessment followed by a series of ‘Update’ assessments. The most recent benchmark for eastern Channel plaice was carried out in 2015 (ICES, 2015c).

Careful consideration is given to the appropriateness of the assessment model in relation to the species’ dynamics and data availability. The SCA model is considered to have an advantage over the extended survivors analysis (XSA) model used for North Sea plaice in that it includes data on landings and discards separately and allows for observational errors on data sources. The output from this model provides SSB estimates with 95% probability bounds around the median.

The assessment uses age and length frequencies of plaice in commercial catches, derived from catch sampling by metier (a fishery unit comprising a gear type that has a consistent catch composition by species and size structure, for example trawl, gill net), as recorded by all countries participating in the fishery (essentially France, Belgium and England), together with the total landings estimated by the Working Group. Discards are included in the assessment and unallocated landings, which represent the difference between the official landings and the WG estimate, have averaged less than 1.5% of the total over the past six years.

The model is calibrated with three fishery-independent survey abundance indices in the form of age-disaggregated catch per unit of effort series (CPUE, the quantity of fish caught by a standard amount of fishing effort). These are derived from the UK beam-trawl survey and French and UK young fish surveys (YFS), though the UK component of the YFS was halted in 2007. Since then, estimation of recruitment has been less certain.

The most recent benchmark (ICES, 2015c) estimated new natural mortality values (set at 0.1 for all ages), which resulted in a substantial rescaling of spawning stock biomass (SSB), fishing mortality (F) and recruitment values compare to the 2014 assessment. The fixed maturity ogive is based on biological sampling and is set at 0.5 for ages 2 and 3 and 1.0 from age 4 onwards (sexes combined). Incorporation of historic changes has been shown to have little effect on the estimation of SSB, which is used to assess biological sustainability.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 17 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

There are two main sources of uncertainty in the assessment. The main uncertainty concerns the landing statistics for Division VIId plaice because of migration between the eastern Channel (VIId) and the North Sea (IVb,c) and the western Channel (VIIe) during the spawning period. ICES consider that new data are needed to determine if the current mixing rate estimates are still valid given the general increase of plaice stocks. The current assessment results are dependent on the proportion of quarter 1 removals estimated from historic tagging surveys (ICES, 2010b).

At present, ICES management advice is based on catch forecasts that assume the recent average proportion of the (combined) TAC for Divisions VIId and VIIe landed in Division VIId is 77%, and that 13% of the plaice landed in Division VIId are assumed to originate from the North Sea and Western English Channel (average over 2003–2014).

Another uncertainty is the level of discarding. As discussed above, there is significant discarding of plaice, in particular in the beam trawl and other fisheries targeted at sole, but discards levels cannot be well established from the low sampling levels at present. The most recent benchmark (ICES, 2015c) incorporated discard estimates (2006–2014) in the assessment based on sampling of all major fleets (92% of landings were sampled in 2014). Discard data for earlier years are not available and are reconstructed internally in the assessment model.

2.3.4.2 Plaice stock status

Figure 3. Summary of the 2015 ICES stock assessment results for eastern Channel plaice (ICES, 2015a)

Figure 3 presents the results of the latest ICES stock assessment for eastern Channel plaice (ICES,2015a (November update)). Total annual landings of plaice in the eastern Channel have fluctuated around 4-5,000 tonnes since the mid-1980s, fluctuating in line with recruitment and SSB, though landings have been constrained by the TACs (at ca. 5,000 tonnes) set since 2005, despite historically high SSB (reflecting the currently very strong North Sea stock).

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 18 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Estimates of abundance of fish recruiting to the stock at age one show a period of increased recruitment starting in 2009 which continues at least until 2014.

The trend in SSB suggests that the Division VIId plaice stock remained below the

Precautionary Approach level (Bpa – the level of spawning biomass that should avoid recruitment failure with a high degree of certainty) of 25,800 tonnes during the period 1980- 2009, but has shown strong signs of a recovery in recent years: the SSB at the start of 2015 was estimated at around 81,000 tonnes by ICES (2015a). This is well above the BMSYtrigger level. Although the estimates of the SSB and fishing mortality are considered uncertain, it is evident that the stock has increased considerably and the fishing mortality has been reduced. The increase in the stock has occurred in response to increased recruitment and the reduction of fishing mortality under the present management regime (essentially, a constraining TAC). The perception of SSB is consistent with last year’s (2014) ICES assessment, though the estimated SSB has increased using the new assessment model.

Total fishing mortality, which includes both human consumption and discard mortality, has shown a steady decrease since 1983 with the exception of a brief increase between 1993 and

1997. It is estimated to have fallen below the long-term management objective of FMSY (0.25) since 2008.

2.3.5 Reference points

ICES derivation of reference points for Division VIId plaice is summarised in Table 4 (see ICES

(2015b) for the technical details). ICES has defined Blim (SSB = 18,500 t), the level below which there is a raised probability of impaired recruitment, as the break point in the segmented regression and Beverton and Holt stock-recruitment relationship, and has used the conventional definition of Bpa (the precautionary level of SSB that will ensure that the stock remains above the level below which recruitment could be impaired with a high probability) as

1.4 x Blim (= 25,800 tonnes). This has been adopted as BMSYtrigger. The fishing mortality reference point is designated as FMSY = 0.25, calculated based on the same S/R relationship as Blim.

Table 4. Plaice in Division VIId. Reference points, values, and their technical basis (ICES 2015b).

Framework Type Value Technical basis

MSY BMSYtrigger 25,800 t Bpa

Approach FMSY 0.25 Computed with EqSim based on the current assessment and the segmented regression and Beverton and Holt relationships

Blim 18,500 t Break point of the segmented regression SRR.

Precautionary Bpa 25,800 t 1.4 x Blim

Approach Flim Not defined

Fpa Not defined

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 19 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

2.3.6 ICES advice

Based on the most recent estimate of SSB (in 2015) and fishing mortality (in 2014), ICES classifies eastern Channel plaice as having full reproductive capacity, since SSB is estimated to have increased to a historical high since 2010, and is currently well above the precautionary

(Bpa) and MSY biomass (MSYBtrigger) reference levels (as is North Sea plaice). Fishing mortality is estimated to have declined since the mid-1990s and is presently among the lowest in the time-series, well below the long-term MSY fishing mortality target level (FMSY), and the stock is being exploited sustainably below any possible reference points (ICES, 2015a). Recruitment to the stock has increased strongly since 2009.

When the MSY approach is applied, ICES indicates that catches of Division VIId plaice in 2016 should be no more than 16,923 tonnes. Assuming the same proportions of Division VIIe and Sub-area IV plaice stocks are taken in Division VIId as during 2003–2014, this will correspond to catches of plaice in Division VIId in 2016 of no more than 19,506 tonnes. If this stock is not under the EU landing obligation in 2016 and discard rates do not change from the average (2012–2014), this implies landings of plaice in Division VIId of no more than 12,512 tonnes. Note that the Division VIId TAC has been around 5,000 tonnes since 2005, and that landings averaged 4,000 tonnes in 2012-2014.

ICES also provides advice on the consequences of setting TACs for single species which are exploited in a mixed-species fishery, and explores a range of scenarios which provide insight on the overall balance between the various single-species TACs (ICES, 2015b). Assuming fishing patterns and catchability in 2015 and 2016 are unchanged from those in 2014, and in the case of a strictly implemented discard ban, North Sea whiting and Nephrops Functional Unit (FU) 6 (if it was managed with its own TAC) would be the most limiting stocks, constraining 46% and 34% of the 2014 effort, respectively. There are no implications for the eastern Channel plaice fishery.

2.3.7 Management

The fishery in which plaice are caught in the eastern Channel is chiefly directed at sole, for which the MLS is 24 cm against which demersal beam and otter trawl gears are permitted to catch sole with a mesh size 80 mm. For trammel nets the minimum mesh size is 90 mm. This can result in high discards of small plaice, which have an MLS of 27cm for plaice and are wider-bodied than sole.

The European Commission have embraced the principle of limiting fishing to sustainable levels by maintaining or restoring stocks to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yields (MSY: EC, 2010) and this has now been taken up by the MSC in relation to their certification of fisheries. MSY, expressed either as biomass or fishing mortality, has now become the target reference point both for the certification of new fisheries and at annual surveillance of certified fisheries.

Currently, there is no management plan specifically for plaice in the eastern Channel, where it is managed by the EU with a TAC determined at an EU level and allocated to Member States on a proportional basis based on historic fishing practices. In the case of these UoAs, the participating vessels being under 10m, the UK manages an up-take limit (the so-called “non-

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 20 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

sector quota”) in a particular area that is seasonally adjusted to reflect the pattern in the fishery.

The UoAs are also subject to further restrictions under the Long Term Plan for cod stocks (Council Regulation (EC) No. 1342/2008), which limits the type of gear that can be used, the number of days fishing permitted with that gear in certain areas of the North Sea (including the eastern Channel), and the amount of cod able to be retained as by-catch. There is also a multiannual management plan for plaice and sole in the North Sea (Council Regulation (EC) No. 676/2007).

The implementation of these two management plans has seen a switch in management of fishing effort, from days-at-sea to a system in which different amounts of kW-days are allocated to different groups of vessels, depending on gear and mesh size (Council Regulation (EC) No. 43/2009). A minor part of the fleets exploiting plaice, i.e. otter trawls with a mesh size equal to or larger than 100 mm included in TR1 and (occasionally) trammel net gears, have been affected by the regulation since 2009. The outcome is that overall nominal effort (kW- days) by EU demersal gears in the North Sea and Eastern Channel has been substantially reduced since these plans were implemented (−38% between 2003 and 2013, −17% between 2008 and 2013).

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 21 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

2.4 Principle two: Ecosystem Background

2.4.1 The ecosystem relating to the fishery

This expedited plaice assessment was carried out alongside an annual Surveillance Audit of the Hastings sole fishery, which has the same operational characteristics as the Hastings plaice fishery UoAs and is, therefore, covered by the Hastings sole fishery re-assessment carried out in 2012 (IMM, 2012) and subsequent annual Surveillance Audit updates. Consequently, only Performance Indicators 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 (other species caught in the fishery along with plaice and retained onboard the fishing vessels) have been reported on in the context of ecosystem impacts of the fishery.

2.4.2 Retained species

At the re-assessment of the Hastings sole fishery in 2012 (IMM, 2012), information about the quantity of non-target species retained and discarded in the fishery was limited, and the assessment team at that time elected to use the Risk-Based Framework (RBF) to evaluate this aspect of the fishery. Consultation with fishers and stakeholders at the Hastings FLAG meeting in 2012 identified the species indicated in Table 5 as being potentially retained in the Hastings trawl, trammel net and gill net fisheries, although numbers may be extremely low. Table 5 also shows the quantities of retained species landed by each UoA in 2014 (MMO data, pers comm.), and this has been used to score PI 2.1 in this expedited assessment.

Table 5. Species indentified as being potentially retained in the Hastings trawl, trammel net and gill net fisheries by fishers and stakeholders at the Hastings FLAG meeting in 2012, and the quantities of retained species (tonnes) landed by each UoA in 2014 (MMO data, pers comm.).

Species name Trammel net Gill net Otter trawl Grand total % of total

Seabass 4.8 20.6 14.3 39.7 11.7 Bream Brill 0.1 0.6 0.3 1.0 + Cod 1.0 14.4 2.9 18.3 5.4 Conger eel Edible crab 1.6 0.5 0.8 2.9 0.1 Cuttlefish 0.2 6.9 5.6 12.7 3.7 Dabs 0.1 0.5 1.0 1.6 + Flounder 0.0 3.8 0.6 4.4 0.1 Grey mullet 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.9 + Gurnard 0.3 0.8 1.8 2.9 0.1 Haddock Herring 1.3 0.1 1.4 + Horse mackerel John Dory Lemon sole 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.8 + Small-spotted catshark 1.1 3.9 8.0 13.0 3.8 Lobster 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 + Mackerel 0.0 2.4 0.1 2.5 0.1

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 22 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Species name Trammel net Gill net Otter trawl Grand total % of total

Monkfish (Lophius spp) Plaice 8.3 74.2 21.0 103.5 30.4 Pollack Pout Red mullet 0.0 0.0 0.0 + + Smoothound 1.8 4.3 4.9 11.0 3.1 Sole 12.7 61.3 23.2 97.2 28.6 Sprat 0.1 0.1 + Spider crab Squid 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 + Thornback ray 0.9 6.6 2.0 9.5 2.7 Tope 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 + Tub gurnard 1.5 1.5 3.0 0.1 Turbot 0.1 1.0 0.5 1.6 + Whelks 0.2 3.9 6.2 10.3 3.0 Whiting 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.8 + Wrasse Grand Total 34.2 210.5 96.6 340.1 = denotes less than 0.1% of total

Because some of the Hastings vessels may use both nets and trawls on a particular trip, splitting landings by gear is somewhat problematic. Nevertheless, it is apparent that most of the species identified in 2012 as being retained were landed in 2014, albeit in relatively small quantities compared to international landings for the eastern Channel as a whole (e.g. 104 tonnes of plaice against 4,000 tonnes). The main retained species (comprising > 5% of the total catch) alongside plaice are sole, seabass and cod (all of which have assessments of stock status), whilst cuttlefish, small-spotted catshark, smoothhound, thornback ray and whelks are the more important minor retained species and for which stock status information is generally lacking.

2.4.2.1 Sole (Solea solea)

ICES provide an annual analytic assessment for the sole stock in the eastern Channel (Division VIId), which was benchmarked in 2015. ICES (2015d) considered that the SSB has fluctuated without trend and has been above BMSYtrigger since 2002, though recruitment in 2012 and 2013 are the lowest of the time series, which has resulted in a decrease in recent SSB to just above Bpa /MSYBtrigger in 2015 (and see MEC, 2016)

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 23 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Figure 3. Summary of ICES’ stock assessment for sole in Division VIId (Eastern Channel) (landings and biomass in ‘000 tonnes). Assumed values are not shaded (source ICES, 2015a).

Fishing mortality has always been above the FMSY estimated by ICES and the agreed TAC in 2014 and 2015 was higher than the advised catch (almost twice in 2015), which led to F in

2015 increasing to Flim. ICES advised that, if sustained, this could result in rapid stock decline and that moving towards the MSY approach will require a significant TAC reduction (Figure 3).

Despite the declining SSB and increasing F, there is a high degree of certainty (defined as 95% probability) that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired and it has been above the biomass target over recent years (2002-2014). However, F has been above both Fpa and FMSY since ~2006. Though the biomass reference points are considered to be appropriate for the stock and can be estimated with sufficient precision, FMSY (at 0.3) is set at a level below any observed in the time series.

Between 2011 and 2014 the advised and agreed TACs for Division VIId sole have been on the basis of the ICES transition to FMSY. There is no formal management plan for Division VIId sole, but the elements of the harvest strategy (information, stock assessment, management framework including reference points and a TAC constraint, scientific advice, management decision-making) work together to achieve stock management objectives, in the sense that the TAC follows ICES advice but is subject to a de facto inter-annual TAC constraint (as is common for EU stocks). Although the SSB has a low risk of falling below MSYBtrigger, and the MSY approach has been the basis of scientific advice since 2012, F has consistently been well above FMSY and it appears that MSY objectives cannot be met by management of the stock as it is at present. Furthermore, and though overall effort aimed at sole has been controlled and reduced in recent years, the harvest control rules (HCR: TAC and other measures) have not so far been successful at bringing the exploitation rate down to the target level (FMSY). As a consequence, two conditions have been set against PIs 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 for the Hastings sole fishery, and their implementation will apply to the plaice fishery (though they are not conditions on these UoAs).

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 24 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy, and there is an adequate assessment of the stock status.

2.4.2.2 Seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax)

ICES now considers that there is a quantitative assessment of this stock which was benchmarked in 2014 (ICES, 2014), though the assessment currently treats all seabass in the North Sea, English Channel, eastern Celtic Sea, and the Irish Sea as a single, homogeneous stock. Nevertheless, ICES considers that improvements to the data and assessment allow estimates of fishing mortality, biomass, recruitment and biological reference points that are robust. Despite an increase in annual landings to around 4,000 tonnes from 2006 though 2014, the assessment indicates a general trend of poor recruitment and increasing F associated with a rapid decline in biomass from historic high levels between 1995 and 2010, and SSB and is now estimated to be below BMSYtrigger (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Summary of stock assessment for seabass in Divisions IVbc, VIIa, and VIId–h. (weights in kt). Fishing mortality for combined commercial and recreational fisheries. Predicted values are shaded (ICES, 2015e). Note that the reduced landings in 2014 are due to bad weather hindering the offshore spawning fishery, and not the prohibition on this fishery which did not commence until 2015.

Three reference points have now been defined: FMSY (0.13) based on 35% SPR, a default for species such as bass; Blim (5250 tonnes, the lowest observed SSB, since there is no stock/recruitment relationship) and Bpa (= BMSYtrigger = 8000 t) based on the usual multiplier

(~1.5x Blim). The combined stock had fallen just below MSYBtrigger in 2014, and F has been above FMSY for the whole of the time series back to 1985.

In 2014 and 2015 ICES advice was based on the MSY approach and implies fishing mortality to be reduced to 0.13 with total landings (commercial and recreational) no more than 1155 tonnes in 2015 (note that this is 25-30% of the mean landings for the last 10 years). ICES advises that a management plan is urgently needed to develop and implement measures to substantially reduce F throughout the range of the stock, which is likely to decline further in the short term due to recent low recruitment.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 25 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

In light of the above ICES assessments and advice, and recognising that a TAC may not be the most suitable means to effectively control mortality for this stock (which is exploited by recreational fisheries, targeted commercial fisheries (mid-water pair trawls and lines, mainly from France and UK) and commercial fisheries that take seabass as by-catch for account for 26%, 33%; and 41% of the overall catch respectively (based on 2010-2013 data), the STECF observed that in order to achieve FMSY, a combination of national measures to reduce effort in the directed inshore fisheries, combined with measures to manage the offshore international fisheries on spawning seabass, is urgently needed.

In January 2015, a Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/111 established emergency measures (under Article 12 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013) effectively prohibiting fishing for seabass between 28th January 2015 and 30 April 2015 in ICES Divisions IVb,c, VIIa,d-k using pelagic trawls (mid-water otter trawls and mid-water pair trawls) and thereby protecting spawning aggregations of seabass in the Celtic Sea, Channel, Irish Sea and southern North Sea. Subsequently, a three-fish daily bag limit has been introduced for all recreational fishers, and the legal minimum landing size has been increased from 36 to 42 cm.

The seabass fishery remains without a harvest control rule, and ICES advises that a management plan is urgently needed to develop and implement measures to substantially reduce fishing mortality throughout the range of the stock.

2.4.2.3 Cod (Gadus morhua)

ICES provide an annual analytic assessment for the (combined) cod stock in the North Sea and eastern Channel (IIIa, IV and VIId), which was benchmarked in 2015. ICES (2015f) estimates that F is still above FMSY, but that B has recovered above Blim, although it remains below MSYBtrigger (

Figure 5).

Figure 5. ICES 2015 assessment of the North Sea and eastern Channel cod stock. Source: ICES (2015g). There is an agreed EU-Norway long-term management plan for North Sea cod, based on an initial recovery phase followed by a long-term phase: ICES considered that the stock had switched from the recovery to long-term phase in 2013. During the 2015 stock assessment,

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 26 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

ICES re-estimated the values for reference points, and the management plan is now inconsistent with this (FMP long-term = 0.4, ICES 2015 estimate of FMSY = 0.33). Consequently, ICES provided advice in 2015 based on the MSY framework rather than the management plan reference point (ICES, 2015f). Since from 2010 (the first year in which the eastern Channel was included in the advice), the TAC has been set broadly consistent with ICES advice, although in 2015 it was set higher while ICES recommended a decrease; the reason for this is unknown.

2.5 Principle three: Management system background

The plaice landed from the Hastings fishery are all taken in the same UoCs that are primarily directed at sole (annually, the most valuable species), and management of the plaice fishery is therefore the same as that for sole. This has been scrutinised at each of the three surveillance audits of the sole fishery conducted since 2012. In February 2014 it was noted that trials were underway on four Hastings vessels to determine total catches in advance of implementation of the EU landings obligations directive, including at-sea sampling by CEFAS. The Hastings FLAG initiative and other arrangements continued as at the main assessment in 2012, including the Shingle Bank sole monitoring surveys to determine whether aggregate extraction affects the sole fishery (no adverse effects were apparent).

The second Surveillance Audit in August 2014 did not raise any issues regarding Principle 3. The fleet is comprised of under-10 m vessels operating within the Sussex IFCA boundaries of 6 nautical miles, for which a Compliance Risk Register exists, published in 2014. The highest risk for the sole (and plaice) fishery comes from incursions of larger stern-trawl and beam- trawl vessels in prohibited areas between March and October. For the three Hastings fleet UoCs using Trammel Net, Gill Net or Trawl in the sole/plaice fishery, the risks of impact to the management system were estimated overall to be medium, and this has guided Sussex IFCA’s surveillance communication, observation, monitoring and inspection efforts between the months of April and October.

The third Surveillance Audit in August 2015 did not raise any new issues regarding Principle 3. It was concluded that no changes in management had taken place since 2012 that would detrimentally affect the performance of this fishery against the MSC standard and that the fishery continued to meet the requirements of the MSC Standard.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 27 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

3. Evaluation Procedure

3.1 Harmonised Fishery Assessment

There are no certified fisheries exploiting the Division VIId plaice stock other than the Hastings fleet Dover sole fishery, of which this is an expedited assessment. It is noted that there is also a French trammel net fishery for sole operating in the Eastern English Channel (though not within the UoA specified for the Hastings fishery) that is currently undergoing assessment (FROM Nord sole trammel net fishery), and any harmonisation issues are being considered as part of the Hastings fleet Dover sole fishery certificate. There are, therefore, no additional harmonisation issues for this expedited assessment.

3.2 Previous assessments

The Hastings fleet Dover sole trammel net fishery was originally certified in October 2005, whilst the Hastings fleet Dover sole trawl and gill net fisheries were certified in July 2009. The re-assessment and certification carried out in 2012 merged all three fisheries into one. .

Conditions were raised on all three fisheries relating primarily to the recording of interactions with by-catch species (including ETP species) and habitats; the small scale of the fishery means that interactions of the Hastings fishery have not been specifically investigated. Whilst these conditions have now been closed, two new conditions have been set against PIs 1.2.1 and 1.2.2, and their implementation will apply to the plaice fishery (though they are not conditions raised for this UoA specifically).

3.3 Assessment Methodologies

The reassessment of the Hastings fleet Dover sole trammel net, gill net and trawl fisheries was carried out in accordance with the MSC Certification Requirements v1.1. This expedited assessment was therefore carried out against the same assessment tree, in accordance with Annex CB of the MSC Certification Requirements version 1.1.

Procedurally, the expedited assessment was conducted in line with the MSC Fisheries Certificatiion Requirements v2.0. The MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v2.0 was used to produce the report, with amendments to accommodate for the expedited assessment and for scoring against the CR v1.1 as required.

In relation to retained species (PIs 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3), the previous assessments reported that information has been collected on all catches in the Hastings fishery, notably by CEFAS as part of monitoring for the aggregate extraction industry. However, due to the size of the Hastings fleet in comparison with the wider fleet fishing in the English Channel, it is not possible to interpret the effects of the Hastings fleet (e.g. in hindering or not the recovery of depleted species) from other sources of fishing-related mortality. The MSC risk-based framework (RBF) gives an opportunity to consult with a wide rage of stakeholders to understand the likely outcome effects of the Hastings fishery alone, and the RBF was used in the re-assessment of the Hastings sole fishery in 2012 for specific indicators (including 2.1.1) due to a lack of information on these issues in relation to the Hastings fleet. This confirmed the low level of significance of interactions with retained species in this fishery. As a

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 28 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

consequence, the RBF has not been used in this expedited assessment, but information on the stock status of the three main retained species - sole, seabass and cod – is available and was used to score PIs 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3.

3.4 Evaluation Processes and Techniques

3.4.1 Site Visits

The site visit for the expedited assessment was held simultaneously with the Year 3 Surveillance Audit for the Hastings Fleet Dover sole fishery on the 17th and 18th Agust 2015 in Hastings (Table 6).

Table 6. Stakeholders consulted during the Hastings site visit

Name Organisation Communication

Joy Collins Hastings Fishery Management Group Site visit participant

Yasmin Ornsby Hastings Fishery Management Group Site visit participant

Paul Joy Hastings Fishery Management Group Site visit participant

Mike Pawson Hastings Fishery Management Group Site visit participant Met during site visit, plus later Tim Dapling Sussex IFCA correspondence

3.4.2 Consultations

Consultations were carried out with the organisations and individuals listed above. A full list of stakeholders has been provided in Appendix 7. The information gathered was supplemented with that contained in the references listed in Section 6.

3.4.3 Evaluation Techniques a) Media announcements

The fishery’s expedited assessment was announced on the MSC website on the 14th July 2015, as well as through an advertisement placed in Fishing News International; both platforms targeting a wide range of stakeholders within the seafood industry. b) Methodology for information gathering

Information for the assessment was gathered prior to and during the site visit and through further correspondence with individual stakeholders as detailed in Table 6. In addition to the surveillance audit of the sole fishery (covered by MEC, 2016), the main information for the expedited plaice fishery assessment was obtained from the report of the 2015 meeting of the Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion (WGCSE: ICES 2015e) and the ICES advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort for plaice in Division Vlld (ICES, 2015a). Background information on the biology, migrations and population dynamics of plaice in the eastern English Channel was obtained from published sources listed in References (8), chiefly Amara et al. (2001); Gibson (2005); Harlay et al. (2001); Hunter et al. (2004). Pawson (1995);Rijnsdorp &

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 29 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Pastoors (1995) and Rogers et al. (1998), and on discarding of plaice from Van Keeken et al. (2004) and Röckmann et al. (2011). The client provided vessel composition and catch statistics for the Hastings fleet, and Sussex IFCA considerable background information on the UoA area, its ecology, local management issues and monitoring. c) Scoring

There was only member in the assessment team; a scoring meeting was therefore not required. The scores were decided as follows:

How many scoring issues met? SG60 SG80 SG100

All 60 80 100 Half FAIL 70 90 Less than half, most not met FAIL 65 85 More than half, many or most FAIL 75 95

Note that where there is only one scoring issue in the Scoring Guidepost (SG), the issue can be partially scored – in this case the team used judgement to determine what proportion of it was met, e.g. at the 100 level, a small part met = 85, about half met = 90, nearly all met = 95. d) Decision rules for final outcome

A UoA cannot be certified if:

 the weighted average score for all PIs under each Principle is less than 80 for any of the three Principles  any individual scoring issue is not met at the SG60 level, contributing to a score of less than 60 on any PI.

The aggregate score for each Principle is calculated by taking the average score for each Component (e.g. 1.1 – Principle 1 Outcome), followed by the average of all the Component scores (see Section 5.2).

Table 7. Scoring elements Component Scoring elements Main/ not main Data-deficient or not 1 - Target species Plaice Target No 2.1 - Retained Sole Main No species Seabass Main No Cod Main No Minor species Not main N/A

The Risk Based Framework (RBF) was not used in this assessment.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 30 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

4. Traceability

4.1 Eligibility Date

The eligibility date for this fishery shall be the date of certification.

4.2 Traceability within the Fishery

The extent of the fishery proposed for certification is the fleet based on the Hastings Stade (vessel list in Table 3), composed of small inshore vessels making day trips. Although the vessels are not equipped with VMS (some do have VMS on a voluntary basis), they are highly unlikely to go outside the bounds of the UoA (.e. outside the UK 6-mile limit between Beachy Head and Dungeness in ICES Division VIId). In fact, the vessels rarely fish outside 3 to 4 nm as this is where the fishing grounds are located (the fish are caught as they migrate into coastal waters); additionally there is an increased risk of damage to gear due to gear conflicts with nomadic trawlers outside the 6nm limit. The vessels are under 10m in length and are therefore exempt from EC logbook requirements. Although there are no requirements for the fishermen to log their catches, a detailed record of landed catch is obtained at the fish market owned by the Community Interest Company: all catches are stored in boxes by species type onboard the vessels; upon landing at the beach in Hastings, these boxes are unloaded onto a truck and transported to the Hastings fish market (Community Interest Company) where the fish are weighed, graded and iced and a triplicate sales record is produced detailing the date, vessel name, species, volume and grading of the landing. This is also where ownership changes from the vessel owner to the Community Interest Company. The triplicate record includes a copy for the vessel owner, the Community Interest Company and the Marine Management Organisation (MMO), who cross-checks sales notes against the landed catch and determines quota uptake by individual vessels. This is in accordance with the ‘Registered Buyers and Sellers' Act which requires that all transactions at the first point of sale are fully recorded, allowing immediate traceability between the fishery and the first point of the chain of custody. Note that the Community Interest Company is CoC certified.

The Hastings fishermen own the rights to the beach and the grounds at Hastings Stade and only fishermen registered at the Hastings Town Hall are eligible for landing there (this is in accordance with a 1947 legal agreement). The beach is under close supervision by the MMO, the Sussex IFCA and the Fishermen’s Protection Society (with personnel based in offices at the Stade, and regularly present on the shore during landing); there is therefore a minimal risk of vessels from outside the UoC landing to the Hastings Stade. Some vessels within the UoC land occasionally at Rye or other ports; in those instances their catch is not MSC certified.

There is no at-sea processing or transhipment.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 31 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Table 8. Traceability Factors within the Fishery

Traceability Factor Description of risk factor if present. Where applicable, a description of relevant mitigation measures or traceability systems (this can include the role of existing regulatory or fishery management controls) Potential for non-certified gear/s to be used The scope of certification for this fishery includes all gears used by the vessels under assessment. within the fishery The risk of a non-certified gear being used is therefore extremely low.

Potential for vessels from the UoC to fish The vessels in the UoA are small under-10 metre inshore vessels. Their capacity to venture outside the UoC or in different geographical outside the UoA (i.e. outside the UK 6-mile limit between Beachy Head and Dungeness in ICES areas (on the same trips or different trips) Division VIId) is extremely limited. In fact, the vessels rarely fish outside 3 to 4 nm as this is where the fishing grounds are located (the fish are caught as they migrate into coastal waters); additionally there is an increased risk of damage to gear due to gear conflicts with nomadic trawlers outside the 6nm limit. The risk is therefore negligible. Potential for vessels outside of the UoC or Plaice in the eastern English Channel (ICES Div. VIId) are regarded as a unit management stock client group fishing the same stock by ICES and the EC, though there is some mixing with plaice in both the North Sea and western Channel which is taken into account in the stock assessments and setting of TACs. There is, therefore, a high potential for vessels outside of the UoC or client group fishing the same stock. However, the risk of plaice caught by vessels outside the UoC being landed at the Hastings Stade is extremely small, owing to the unusual nature of the local fleet of beach-launched boats and close supervision of the fishery by the MMO, the Sussex IFCA and the Fishermen’s Protection Society (with personnel based in offices at the Stade, and regularly present on the shore during landing), preventing risk of introduction of non-certified fish. The European Commissions 'Buyers and Sellers' Act requires that all transactions at the first point of sale are fully recorded, allowing immediate traceability between the fishery and the first point of the chain of custody. The Hastings fishermen own the rights to the beach and the grounds at Hastings Stade and only fishermen registered at the Hastings Town Hall are eligible for landing there (this is in accordance with a 1947 legal agreement). There is very little risk of certified product becoming mixed with non- certified product.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 32 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Risks of mixing between certified and non- All members of the Hastings fleet (i.e. vessels registered at the Hastings Stade, as listed in Table certified catch during storage, transport, or 3) are included within this certification, and all gear types used to catch plaice by the Hastings handling activities (including transport at sea fishery are included in the scope of this MSC assessment. This fishery lands at the Hastings and on land, points of landing, and sales at Stade though, exceptionally, some fish may be landed at nearby ports (Rye) where it is not sold auction) through the Community Interest Company and where it is therefore not MSC certified. There is no at-sea processing or transhipment. The fishery certification extends to the point of sale at the fish market at Hastings. Risks of mixing between certified and non- There is no at-sea processing or transhipment and all fish is landed and sold as ‘whole’. Since certified catch during processing activities (at- only the Hastings fleet is allowed to land at the Stade, the risk of mixing between certified and sea and/or before subsequent Chain of non-certified product during processing is seen to be minimal. Custody)

Risks of mixing between certified and non- No transhipment occurs within this fishery and so the risk is seen as minimal. Transhipment at sea certified catch during transhipment is not permitted by the EU in Community waters (Article 20 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009). Any other risks of substitution between fish No other risks have been identified. Product is landed directly and chain of custody will be from the UoC (certified catch) and fish from required from the first change of ownership (i.e. at the fish market – the Community Interest outside this unit (non-certified catch) before Company which has separate MSC CoC certification). Risk of mixing of certified and non-certified subsequent Chain of Custody is required product here is therefore minimal.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 33 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

4.3 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody

The fishery certification extends to the first point of sale at the fish market at Hastings (Community Interest Company) which has separate MSC CoC certification. Product from the Hastings fishery landed in Hastings after the date of certification, is then eligible to enter further certified chains of custody. Fish landed at ports other than Hastings will not be eligible for MSC certification. All members of the Hastings fleet (i.e. vessels registered at the Hastings Stade, as listed in Table 3) are included within this certification.

4.4 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practically Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to Enter Further Chains of Custody

No IPI stocks are involved in this fishery.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 34 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

5. Evaluation Results

5.1 Principle Level Scores

Final Principle Scores (Plaice UoAs)

Principle Score

Trammel net Gill net Trawl

Principle 1 – Target Species 90.6 90.6 90.6

Principle 2 – Ecosystem 85.3 85.3 84

Principle 3 – Management System (from 84 84 84 Hastings sole fishery re-assessment, 2012)

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 35 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

5.2 Summary of PI Level Scores

Table 9. Summary of PI level scores for the plaice UoAs (scores in red indicate those that were scored as part of this expedited assessment; scores in orange indicate a condition). The scores for the sole UoAs have also been provided for comparison. Princ Component PI nb. Performance Indicator Score sole fishery Score plaice fishery iple Trammel Gill net Trawl Tramme Gill net Trawl

net l net 1 Outcome 1.1.1 Stock status 90 90 90 100 100 100 1.1.2 Reference points 80 80 80 90 90 90 1.1.3 Stock rebuilding N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a Management 1.2.1 Harvest Strategy 70 70 70 85 85 85 1.2.2 Harvest control rules and tools 75 75 75 75 75 75 1.2.3 Information and monitoring 80 80 80 90 90 90 1.2.4 Assessment of stock status 90 90 90 95 95 95 2 Retained 2.1.1 Outcome 100 100 100 85 85 85 species 2.1.2 Management 80 80 80 85 85 85 2.1.3 Information 80 80 80 90 90 90 By-catch 2.2.1 Outcome 100 100 100 100 100 100 species 2.2.2 Management 80 80 80 80 80 80 2.2.3 Information 80 80 80 80 80 80 ETP species 2.3.1 Outcome 80 80 80 80 80 80 2.3.2 Management 80 80 80 80 80 80 2.3.3 Information 80 80 80 80 80 80 Habitats 2.4.1 Outcome 100 100 80 100 100 80 2.4.2 Management 80 80 80 80 80 80 2.4.3 Information 90 90 90 90 90 90 Ecosystem 2.5.1 Outcome 80 80 80 80 80 80 2.5.2 Management 80 80 80 80 80 80 2.5.3 Information 90 90 90 90 90 90 3 3.1.1 Legal and customary framework 90 90 90 90 90 90

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 36 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Princ Component PI nb. Performance Indicator Score sole fishery Score plaice fishery iple Trammel Gill net Trawl Tramme Gill net Trawl

net l net Governance 3.1.2 Consultation, roles and responsibilities 90 90 90 90 90 90 and Policy 3.1.3 Long term objectives 80 80 80 80 80 80 3.1.4 Incentives for sustainability 80 80 80 80 80 80 Fishery- 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives 80 80 80 80 80 80 specific 3.2.2 Decision making processes 80 80 80 80 80 80 management 3.2.3 Compliance and enforcement 85 85 85 85 85 85 system 3.2.4 Research plan 90 90 90 90 90 90 3.2.5 Management performance evaluation 80 80 80 80 80 80

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 37 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

5.3 Summary of Conditions

The Perfomance Indicator 1.2.1 (Harvest Strategy) received a score of 75 and a condition was therefore raised, as summarised below. For more details, see Appendix 2.

Condition Performance Conditon number Indicator The actions necessary to achieve the stated long-term 1.2.1 (Harvest (MSY) objectives for the Division VIId plaice stock need to Strategy) be clearly defined via a management plan or by some other suitable method, which includes explicit controls on 1 the exploitation rate in relation to the stock’s status

(against biomass and fishing mortality management targets) that are consistent with the harvest strategy and ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached (SG80 scoring issue a).

5.4 Recommendations

The Assessment Team does not have any recommendations for the fishery.

5.5 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement

Following consideration of all stakeholders’ inputs and comments to the Public Comment Draft Report (PCDR), the fishery assessment team concludes that the fishery should be certified against the MSC standard. This Final Report determination remains a recommendation pending the completion of the formal objections process and the final certification decision by the MEP official decision making entity.

The MEC Certification Decision Making entity was informed of the intention to certify the fishery on the 5th July 2016. The final certification decision was also made on the 5th July 2016 with the Certification Decision Maker approving the decision to certify the fishery.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 38 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

6. References

Aarts, G., and Poos, J. J. 2009. Comprehensive discard reconstruction and abundance estimation using flexible selectivity functions. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 763– 771. Amara, R., P. Laffargue, J.M. Dewarumez, C. Maryniak, F. Lagardère & C. Luczac. 2001. Feeding ecology and growth of 0-group flatfish (sole, dab and plaice) on a nursery ground (Southern Bight of the North Sea). Journal of Fish Biology 58: 788-803. EC 1998. Council Regulation (EC) No. 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms Catchpole, T., S. Elliott, D. Peach, S. Mangi (2014). Final Report: The English Discard Ban Trial, Cefas report, pp65. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1342/2008. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1342/2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks and repealing Regulation (EC) No. 423/2004. Council Regulation (EC) No. 676/2007 establishing a multiannual plan for fisheries exploiting stocks of plaice and sole in the North Sea. Official Journal of the European Union L 157/1. Council Regulation (EC) No. 43/2009 fixing for 2009 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required. De Veen, (1978). On selective tidal transport in the migration of North Sea plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.) and other flatfish species. Neth. J. Sea Res. Vol. 12 (2), 1978 pp 115-147. European Commission (2010) fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non EU waters. COM(2010) 658 final Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/111 of 26 January 2015 establishing measures to alleviate a serious threat to the conservation of the seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax) stock in the Celtic Sea, Channel, Irish Sea and southern North Sea. European Commission (2015) 559 final 2015/0259 (NLE) Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION fixing for 2016 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union vessels, in certain non-Union waters Fox, C., M. Taylor, M. Dickey-Collas, C.J.G. van Damme, L. Bolle, N. Daan, N. Rohlf, G. Kraus, P. Munk, P. Fossum & N. Bailey. 2005. Initial results from the 2004 ichthyoplankton survey of the North Sea. International Council for the Exploration of the Seas, ICES CM 2005/AA:04, 40 pp. Gibson, R.N., Robb, L., Wennhage, H. & Burrows, M.T. 2002. Ontogenetic changes in depth distribution of juvenile flatfishes in relation to predation risk and temperature on a shallow- water nursery ground. Marine Ecology Progress Series 229, 233-244. Gibson, R.N. 2005. The behaviour of flatfishes. In Flatfishes: Biology and exploitation. (Ed Gibson, R.N) p213-239. Blackwell Science Oxford. 391pp. Harlay, X., P. Koubbi & A. Grioche. 2001. Ecology of plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) in fish assemblages of beaches of the Opale coast (North of France) during spring 1997. Cybium 25: 67-80. Hunter, E., J.D. Metcalfe & J.D. Reynolds. (2003). Migration route and spawning area fidelity by North Sea plaice. Proceedings of the Royal Society London Series B 270: 2097-2103.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 39 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Hunter, E., J.D. Metcalfe, G.P. Arnold & J.D. Reynolds. (2004). Impacts of migratory behaviour on population structure in North Sea plaice. Journal of Animal Ecology 73: 377-385. ICES. 2010a. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of the Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak-Combined Spring and Autumn (WGNSSK). ICES C.M. 2010/ACOM: 13, 1058pp. ICES. 2010b. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Flatfish (WKFLAT). ICES CM 2010/ACOM:37, 270pp. ICES. 2014. Report of the Inter-Benchmark Protocol for Bass in the Irish Sea, Celtic Sea, English Channel, and Southern North Sea (IBP–Bass). By correspondence. ICES CM 2014/ ACOM:46. ICES 2015a. Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) in Division Vlld (Eastern English Channel). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Book 6 (update). Published 30 November 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/ple-eche.pdf ICES. 2015b. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), 28 April–7 May 2015. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:13. ICES. 2015c. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Plaice (WKPLE), 23–27 February 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015\ACOM:33. 200 pp. ICES 2015d. Sole (Solea solea) in Divison Vlld (Eastern English Channel). ICES advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Published 30 June 2015. ICES Advice 2015, Book 6. Eastern Channel sole advice 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/sol-eche.pdf ICES. 2015e. Report of the Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion (WGCSE), 12–21 May 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:12. ICES 2015f. Cod (Gadus morhua) in Subarea IV and Divisions Vlld and IIIa West (North Sea, Eastern English Channel, Skagerrak). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Book 6. Published 30 June 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/cod-347d.pdf IMM. Intertek Moody Marine. 2012. MSC Public Certification Report. Hastings Fleet Dover Sole Trammel Net, Gill Net and Trawl Fisheries. 151 pp. Available online at: https://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/north-east- atlantic/Hastings-fleet-Dover-sole-trawl-and-gill-net/reassessment-downloads- 1/20120803_PCR_SOL55.pdf MEC 2016. Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) 3rd Annual Surveillance Audit of the Hastings Fleet Dover Sole Trammel Net, Gill Net and Trawl Fisheries. On behalf of the Hastings Fisheries Management Group. 29pp. Available online at: https://www.msc.org/track-a- fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/north-east-atlantic/Hastings-fleet-Dover-sole-trawl-and- gill-net/reassessment-downloads-1/20151123_SR_SOL55.pdf Millner, R.S., Whiting, C.L., Howlet, G.J., 1993. Estimation of discard mortality of plaice from small otter trawlers using tagging and cage survival studies. ICES CM 1993/G:24. Pawson, M.G. 1995. Bio-geographical identification of English Channel fish and shellfish stocks. MAFF Fisheries Research Technical Report No. 99. Lowestoft. Rijnsdorp, A.D. and Pastoors, M. A. 1995. Modelling the spatial dynamics and fisheries of North Sea plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.) based on tagging data. ICES J. Mar. Sci. Vol.52, no. 6, pp. 963-980

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 40 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Röckmann, C., Quirijns, F., van Overzee, H., & Uhlmann, S., 2011. Discards in fisheries – a summary of three decades of research at IMARES and LEI. IMARES Report Number C068/11. 41pp.

Rogers, S.I., R.S. Millner & T.A. Mead. (1998). The distribution and abundance of young fish on the east and south coast of England (1981 to 1997). The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Science Series Technical Report, 108, 130 pp. Russell, F.S. 1976. The Eggs and Planktonic Stages of British Marine Fishes. London: Academic Press, 524 pp Van Keeken, O., Quirijns, F. and Grift, R. E. 2004. Discards in de Nederlandse twinrigvisserij. Nederlands Instituut voor Visserij Onderzoek, Animal Sciences Group, Wageningen UR. IJmuiden. Report Nr. C011/04. 50 pp. Van Keeken, O.A., van Hoppe, M., R.E. Grift, R.E., and Rijnsdorp, A.D. 2007. Changes in the spatial distribution of North Sea plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) and implication for fisheries management. Journal of Sea Research (57): 187-197. Wheeler A. 1969. The fishes of the British Isles and North-west Europe. MacMillan, London: 1-529.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 41 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Appendices

Appendix 1. Scoring and Rationales

Principle 1 Outcome (1.1), Harvest Strategy (1.2) and Principle 2 Retained species (2.1)

Evaluation table 1 - PI 1.1.1

PI 1.1.1 The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidepost It is likely that the stock is above the point It is highly likely that the stock is above the point There is a high degree of certainty that the stock is where recruitment would be impaired. where recruitment would be impaired. above the point where recruitment would be impaired. Met? Y Y Y Justification ICES’ assessment of the plaice population in the eastern Channel (Div. VIId) shows a strong upward trend in SSB to an historical high above Bpa and MSYBtrigger since 2010 as a result of above-average recruitment since 2009, and that fishing mortality is presently among the lowest in the time-series, well below FMSY. ICES consider that the stock is at ‘full reproductive capacity’ and is being exploited sustainably below any possible reference points (ICES, 2015a). Consequently, there is a high degree of certainty that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired, and SG60a, 80a and 100a are met. b Guidepost The stock is at or fluctuating around its target There is a high degree of certainty that the stock has reference point. been fluctuating around its target reference point, or has been above its target reference point, over recent years. Met? Y Y

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 42 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.1.1 The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing

Justification

Trends in fishing mortality (left) and SSB (right) of Division VIId plaice in relation to reference points (ICES 2015a).

The reference points are defined for the Division VIId plaice fishery in terms of F (FMSY = 0.25) and SSB (Bpa and BMSYtrigger set at 25,800 tonnes) – details given in PI 1.1.2 below. There is no management plan to provide official targets, so ICES provides advice based on the MSY approach. Here we consider that FMSY and Bpa /Btrigger represent target reference points for the purpose of scoring. SSB is estimated to be well above MSYBtrigger/ Bpa in 2013-15, and F has been below FMSY since ~2009. On this basis SG100 is met. ICES 2015a. Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) in Division Vlld (Eastern English Channel). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Book 6. Published 30 June 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/ple-eche.pdf

References ICES. 2015b. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), 28 April–7 May 2015. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:13.

ICES. 2015c. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Plaice (WKPLE), 23–27 February 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015\ACOM:33. 200 pp. Stock Status relative to Reference Points

Type of reference point Value of reference point Current stock status relative to reference point

Reference point Blim 18,500 t (break point of the segmented [Include current stock status in the same units as the used in scoring regression S/R relationship) reference point e.g. 90,000/BLOSS=1.8] stock relative to B2015 = 81.1 kt/ Blim = 4.4 recruitment not defined Flim impairment (SIa)

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 43 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.1.1 The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing

Reference point Bpa / BMSYtrigger 25,800 t (1.4 x Blim) B2015 = 81.1/ Bpa = 3.14 used in scoring stock relative to FMSY (under MSY framework) 0.25 (FMSY computed with EqSim based on the F2014 = .112/ FMSY = 0.45 MSY (SIb) current assessment and the segmented regression and Beverton and Holt S/R relationship) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 44 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Evaluation table 2 - PI 1.1.2

PI 1.1.2 Limit and target reference points are appropriate for the stock

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidepost Generic limit and target reference points are Reference points are appropriate for the stock based on justifiable and reasonable practice and can be estimated. appropriate for the species category.

Met? Y Y Justification ICES derivation of reference points for Division VIId plaice is summarised in Table 4. Biomass reference points

ICES has defined Blim, the limit SSB level below which there is a raised probability of impaired recruitment, as the break point of the segmented regression S/R relationship (@18,500 tonnes), and has defined Bpa (the precautionary level of SSB that will ensure with a high probability that the stock remains above the level below which recruitment could be impaired) at ~1.5 x this level (as is conventional). MSYBtrigger (@ 25,800 tonnes, a ‘trigger’ to management action under the MSY framework) is defined as equivalent to Bpa, though WKFRAME (2011) acknowledge that this is a short- term solution to implementing the MSY approach, but lack data (noting the poorly defined stock-recruit relationship) to define a reference point based on BMSY. Fishing mortality reference points

Fishing mortality reference points under the precautionary approach (Flim and Fpa) have not been defined, but FMSY is set at 0.25, based on the current assessment and the segmented regression and Beverton and Holt S/R relationship and computed with EqSim. FSMY is estimated so as to act as a target reference point such that the stock is maintained at a level consistent with BMSY or a similar outcome. Here we take the target reference point to be FMSY, since this is the basis for management advice provided by ICES. SG80 is met.

Note that FMSY for plaice in Division VIId is set at a level below that for sole in Division VIId (@0.3), and that opposite trends have been recently observed, with F increasing for sole and decreasing for plaice.

b Guidepost The limit reference point is set above the level The limit reference point is set above the level at which at which there is an appreciable risk of impairing there is an appreciable risk of impairing reproductive reproductive capacity. capacity following consideration of precautionary issues. Met? Y Y

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 45 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.1.2 Limit and target reference points are appropriate for the stock

Justification See 1.1.2.a above. The biomass limit reference point has been defined as Blim, which is considered by ICES to be above the point at which there was a risk of recruitment impairment, and hence was used to define Bpa (and subsequently MSYBtrigger). This is based on runs with three stock- recruitment relationships which led to the selection of the hockey-stick and the Beverton and Holt models shown in the figure below, and can be regarded as including a consideration of the precautionary issue. SG 100 is met.

Flim is not defined.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 46 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.1.2 Limit and target reference points are appropriate for the stock

c Guidepost The target reference point is such that the stock The target reference point is such that the stock is is maintained at a level consistent with BMSY or maintained at a level consistent with BMSY or some some measure or surrogate with similar intent measure or surrogate with similar intent or outcome, or or outcome. a higher level, and takes into account relevant precautionary issues such as the ecological role of the stock with a high degree of certainty. Met? Y N

Justification As noted above, there is a disconnect between the estimation of Bpa/MSYBtrigger and FMSY, in that Bpa is estimated on the basis of sustaining the reproductive capacity of the stock, and MSYBtrigger as a ‘trigger’ to management action under the MSY framework, whilst FSMY is estimated so as to act as a target reference point such that the stock is maintained at a level consistent with BMSY or a similar outcome. Here we take the target reference point to be FMSY, since this is the basis for management advice provided by ICES. SG80 is met. There is no evidence that estimation of the target takes into account precautionary issues such as the ecological role of the stock with a high degree of certainty, and various issues around the stock’s dynamics and its assessment (e.g. stock-recruit relationship, mixing with North Sea plaice stock) are uncertain. SG 100 is not met. d Guidepost For key low trophic level stocks, the target reference point takes into account the ecological role of the stock. Met? N/A Justification Division VIId plaice is not a key LTL stock ICES (2010b). Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Flatfish (WKFLAT). ICES CM 2010/ACOM:37, 270pp.

ICES 2015a. Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) in Division Vlld (Eastern English Channel). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Book 6. Published 30 June 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/ple-eche.pdf References ICES. 2015b. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), 28 April–7 May 2015. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:13.

ICES. 2015c. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Plaice (WKPLE), 23–27 February 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015\ACOM:33. 200 pp. OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 47 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.3 – not applicable, only scored if PI 1.1.1 60-80

Evaluation table 3 - PI 1.2.1

PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidepost The harvest strategy is expected to The harvest strategy is responsive to the state The harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the achieve stock management objectives of the stock and the elements of the harvest stock and is designed to achieve stock management reflected in the target and limit reference strategy work together towards achieving objectives reflected in the target and limit reference points. management objectives reflected in the target points. and limit reference points. Met? Y Y N Justification The elements of a harvest strategy as defined by MSC are information; stock assessment; harvest control rule and management actions. The management strategy is based on an annual TAC and technical measures linked to defined reference points for SSB and F. Although there is no formal management plan for Division VIId plaice, the management system aims to maintain SSB above the precautionary level through control of fishing mortality, which is reduced as limit reference points are approached (see PI 1.2.2 below). The ICES advice defines the options, in terms of a range of fishing mortalities and the consequences for SSB in the short term, and clearly informs all elements of the harvest strategy. SG 60a is met.

The TAC is the key element of the harvest strategy (since it is how the stock assessment is translated into management actions via the harvest control rule, and fishing mortality on plaice is more likely to be constrained by considerations of the status of the sole and cod stocks), and ICES advice is now given against the MSY approach, with assumptions about the proportions of the Division VIIe and Subarea IV plaice stocks taken in catches in Division VIId and the implications of the EU landing obligation (not yet applied to plaice). In 2016, this implies landings of plaice in Division VIId of no more than 12 512 t (total catches would be around 19,500 t), which is much higher than the average value of around 4,000 t over the last decade and reflects the strong increase in the stock’s biomass. However, the plaice TAC covers the whole of the English Channel (ICES Divisions VIId and VIIe) and, though it has tracked the ICES catch advice over the three years 2013, 2014 and 2015; falling by 16% and 11% compared to 9% and 12% respectively, landings in VIId have risen over this period (in line with the SSB increase). Nevertheless, it is clear that the TAC been varied to respond to ICES advice following the MSY approach, which is based on estimates of the biomass level (lower biomass = lower TAC). On this basis, it is responsive to the state of the stock (SG80a is met).

Although there is no formal management plan, the Fisheries Council (who decides the TAC annually) is following a de facto management plan following ICES advice, which is predicated against an assessment of stock status in relation to reference points (FMSY). Cpnsequently, the elements of the harvest strategy (information, stock assessment, management framework including reference points, scientific advice, management decision-making) work together to achieve stock management objectives (see PI 1.1.1 for an evaluation of whether objectives are being achieved in relation to stock status). SG80a is met.

Since there is no formal management plan, and no apparent TAC constraint (if the 2016 advice is followed), it is not reasonable to conclude that the management strategy was ‘designed’. SG100a is not met.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 48 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place

b Guidepost The harvest strategy is likely to work The harvest strategy may not have been fully The performance of the harvest strategy has been fully based on prior experience or plausible tested but evidence exists that it is achieving its evaluated and evidence exists to show that it is argument. objectives. achieving its objectives including being clearly able to maintain stocks at target levels.

Met? Y Y N Justification Until recently (2010), TACs and technical measures have not enabled SSB to be maintained at or above the defined precautionary level for this stock (see rationale for PI1.1.1), in part because there has been no robust analytical assessment of stock status, the plaice TAC covers VIId and VIIe, and there are high levels of discarding due to the fishery being directed at sole (small mesh size). Fortuitously, perhaps, recent strong recruitment has boosted stock biomass and, combined with effort controls implemented through the cod recovery plan and the sole and plaice long-term management plan (see 1.2.2),has led to a reduction in F (given the relatively low TACs), and there is sufficient evidence that the harvest strategy is achieving its objectives of SSB being above BMSYtrigger and F below FMSY. SG60b and SG80b are met.

Evaluation of the performance of the harvest strategy is an integral part of the formulation of the annual advice on the stock from ICES (ACOM) and the eventual agreement on the annual TAC by the EC Fisheries Council. SSB in the medium term is estimated to be well above BMSYtrigger, and it is not forecast to drop below MSYBtrigger in 2017 under any of the management scenarios set out by ICES in their 2015 advice. Similarly, fishing mortality has been estimated to be well below FMSY, which is the formal target reference point (see rationale for PI1.1.2 above). SG 100b is partially met but not completely.

Over the next two – three years it should be possible to see whether the harvest strategy is working, in the sense that the TAC follows ICES advice, is subject to inter-annual TAC constraints (as is common for EU stocks), and F is kept below the target level so that there is a low risk of it falling below MSYBtrigger (see rationale for PI1.1.1).

c Guidepost Monitoring is in place that is expected to determine whether the harvest strategy is working. Met? Y

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 49 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place

Justification c Justification Annual landings, technical measures, SSB, fishing mortality and compliance with the annual TAC are all well monitored, and the TAC is enforced through national legislation. Technical measures are rigorously enforced through at sea inspections and inspections at the point of landing. ICES

estimated landings have not exceeded the TAC since 1987, F is below FMSY and SSB well above BMSYtrigger. SG60c is met. (cont ’d) d Guidepost The harvest strategy is periodically reviewed and improved as necessary. Met? Y Justification All elements of the harvest strategy are kept under regular review by the ICES assessment working group, by the ICES advisory committee (ACOM) and by the scientific and technical committee of the EC (STECF), and improved as necessary. SG100d is met ICES 2015a. Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) in Division Vlld (Eastern English Channel). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Book 6. Published 30 June 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/ple-eche.pdf

ICES. 2015b. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), 28 April–7 May 2015. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:13. EC 1998. Council Regulation (EC) No. 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms Council Regulation (EC) No. 676/2007 establishing a multiannual plan for fisheries exploiting stocks of plaice and sole in the North Sea. Official References Journal of the European Union L 157/1.

Council Regulation (EC) No. 1342/2008. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1342/2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks and repealing Regulation (EC) No. 423/2004.

Council Regulation (EC) No. 43/2009 fixing for 2009 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required.

European Commission (2010) fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non EU waters. COM(2010) 658 final

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 50 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 51 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Evaluation table 4 - PI 1.2.2

PI 1.2.2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep Generally understood harvest rules are in place Well defined harvest control rules are in place ost that are consistent with the harvest strategy that are consistent with the harvest strategy and and which act to reduce the exploitation rate as ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached. limit reference points are approached.

Met? Y N Justific The annual TAC is set on the basis of advice from ICES, which is based on the MSY approach given the state of the stock in relation to reference points ation that are set with the explicit purpose of maintaining a fully reproductive stock and a sustainable fishery on that stock. Given that F is currently well below FMSY and SSB is predicted to remain well above MSYBtrigger in the medium term, the MSY approach sets the TAC at a level corresponding to FMSY (F 0.25 = 12,789 landed catch), whilst fishing at status quo F (0.11 in 2014) would produce landings of 5973 t in 2016. Either of these harvest controls would satisfy the MSY approach to management. SG60a is met

The allocation of national shares through the European Commission’s CFP is effective and well understood nationally and at local levels through producer organisations etc. Enforcement of technical measures, in particular the minimum landing size and effort controls also support control of the exploitation rate. The TAC has not been exceeded by landings within the last ~20 years. As such, the harvest rules are consistent with the harvest strategy and are likely to act to reduce the exploitation rate as limit reference points are approached. However, in the absence of a management plan the HCR is not well defined, and a condition to delelop and implement a management plan adressing realistic long-term objectives is required. b Guidep The selection of the harvest control rules takes The design of the harvest control rules takes into ost into account the main uncertainties. account a wide range of uncertainties. Met? Y N

Justific The main uncertainties that affect the HCR have been the levels of underreporting and misreporting between adjacent areas (Divisions IVc, VIId and ation VIIe). These uncertainties in the overall catch have reduced in recent years and they are taken into account in the stock assessment process which underpins the setting of the annual TAC. Discards have also been taken into account in the assessment since 2014. SG80b is met. However, there is no evidence that a wide range of uncertainties has been explored in relation to the HCR. Some fundamental uncertainties about the stock remain; e.g. drivers of recruitment, stock-recruit relationship – these were considered in relation to the definition of reference points (see PI 1.1.2) but are not well understood. SG100b is not met. c Guidep There is some evidence that tools used to Available evidence indicates that the tools in Evidence clearly shows that the tools in use are ost implement harvest control rules are appropriate use are appropriate and effective in achieving effective in achieving the exploitation levels required and effective in controlling exploitation. the exploitation levels required under the under the harvest control rules. harvest control rules.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 52 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.2.2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place

Met? Y Y N Justific The annual landings as assessed by ICES, taking into account area misreporting, have been below the combined VIId/VIIeTAC since 1987, but F in ation Division VIId exceeded FMSY until 2007. Recently, however, the TAC has a track record of maintaining F below FMSY, though the increase in SSB above BMSYtrigger since 2010 is probably due in large part to high recruitment. ICES advise a low risk of SSB dropping below MSYBtrigger for 2016-17. This indicates that the tools specifically used to implement harvest control rules for VIId plaice are appropriate and effective in controlling exploitation.

To complement the TAC there are also technical measures in force, though the minimum mesh size of 80mm for beam and otter trawls and 100mm for trammel nets (90mm if landing >70% sole) contribute to high levels of plaice discards. More important, possibly, are the effort controls implemented through the cod recovery plan and the sole and plaice long-term management plan (Council Regulation (EC) No. 676/2007) in form of limitations on effort (kW-days) by EU demersal gears in the North Sea and Eastern Channel. Overall effort has been substantially reduced since the implementation of these two management plans (−38% between 2003 and 2013, −17% between 2008 and 2013). Effort by the beam trawl fleet in the small mesh size (80–120 mm, BT2) category, that targets sole and takes plaice as a by catch, has shown a sharp decline (−52% between 2004 and 2013).

Overall, given that biomass is successfully being maintained above MSYBtrigger and effort has been controlled and reduced in recent years to exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules, at SG60c and SG80c are met. However, there is a lack of evidence that the harvest control rules (TAC and other) are able to maintain the exploitation rate at or belowthe target level (F>FMSY) and the SSB above BMSYtrigger if recruitment levels return to those observed prior to 2009, when F> FMSY and SSB< BMSYtrigger. Therefore, SG100c is not met.

ICES 2015a. Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) in Division Vlld (Eastern English Channel). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Book 6. Published 30 June 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/ple-eche.pdf

References Council Regulation (EC) No. 676/2007 establishing a multiannual plan for fisheries exploiting stocks of plaice and sole in the North Sea. Official Journal of the European Union L 157/1.

European Commission (2010) fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non EU waters. COM(2010) 658 final OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 75 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 1

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 53 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Evaluation table 5 - PI 1.2.3

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidepost Some relevant information related to Sufficient relevant information related to stock A comprehensive range of information (on stock stock structure, stock productivity and structure, stock productivity, fleet composition structure, stock productivity, fleet composition, stock fleet composition is available to support and other data is available to support the abundance, fishery removals and other information the harvest strategy. harvest strategy. such as environmental information), including some that may not be directly related to the current harvest strategy, is available. Met? Y Y Y Justification Stock identity: The geographical range of plaice stocks is well described for the eastern English Channel and the neighbouring areas in the southern North Sea and western English Channel. Immigration and emigration between these areas is sufficiently well described for stock assessment and stock management purposes. Environmental information related to plaice distribution and migration has been collected and studied over many years. A wealth of data has also been collected as a result of extensive planktonic egg surveys which show the distribution of spawning areas and likely recruit pathways.

Stock productivity: Regular routine sampling of all landings provides sufficient information on growth changes. Information on maturity is obtained from research vessel surveys and is kept under regular review in assessing the age structure of the spawning stock. Information on the stock and recruitment relationship is updated retrospectively from the assessment once the strength of a particular year class has been established.

Fleet composition : The composition of the fleets exploiting plaice in the English Channel is complex and ranges from small inshore vessels using fixed gear to the large beam trawlers. The activities of each sector are well monitored and described and are reviewed annually by the ICES assessment working group. Similarly, the types of gear in use are also well known and described at national levels. All of this information is used to inform and support the technical measures which form a part of the harvest strategy.

Stock abundance: There are three fishery-independent surveys available to support the assessment of stock abundance. The assessment is also supported by landings per unit of effort data monitored from two independent commercial fleets.

Fishery removals: Landings data are accurately recorded at national level and are biologically sampled by Belgium, France and the UK at levels that comply with current EC regulation requirements. With sampling as a part of the fishery-independent bottom trawl surveys this provides data on the age and sex structure of the stock. The ICES assessment working group have access to confidential data which allows for corrections in the assessment to be made to the landings data for misreporting into and out of ICES Division VIId (associated with sole data), though this is now considered to be less of an issue than previously. The information on fishery removals is sufficient for management of the fishery via the annual TAC and also adequate for stock assessment purposes. Discarding of plaice in the Eastern Channel flatfish fisheries is monitored and is likely to become a management concern when the landings obligation comes into force. However, this is being kept under review.

All of the relevant information listed above satisfies the requirements of this scoring issue at SG60 and SG80, and is sufficiently comprehensive in terms of stock structure, stock productivity, fleet composition, stock abundance, fishery removals and other information such as environmental

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 54 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy

information to satisfy SG100a. All the information required to monitor and enforce the TAC and technical measures is obtained at level which is sufficient for management and enforcement purposes, and SG100a is met.

b Guidepost Stock abundance and fishery removals Stock abundance and fishery removals are All information required by the harvest control rule is are monitored and at least one indicator regularly monitored at a level of accuracy and monitored with high frequency and a high degree of is available and monitored with sufficient coverage consistent with the harvest control certainty, and there is a good understanding of inherent frequency to support the harvest control rule, and one or more indicators are available uncertainties in the information [data] and the rule. and monitored with sufficient frequency to robustness of assessment and management to this support the harvest control rule. uncertainty. Met? Y Y N Justification 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. SG60b and 80b are met. However, it is doubtful whether the high frequency and a high degree of certainty level required to satisfy SG100b is achieved across the whole fishery, which is complex in terms of both the fleets and the multiplicity of gear types and potential high level of discarding. Whilst there is reasonable confidence in the ICES’ interpretation of the stock assessment in terms of stock status and reference points, it is less certain that management is robust to changes in recruitment that would result in a reduction in productivity of the stock , and SG100b is not met.

c Guidepost There is good information on all other fishery removals from the stock. Met? Y Justification As described above

De Veen, (1978). On selective tidal transport in the migration of North Sea plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.) and other flatfish species. Neth. J. Sea Res. Vol. 12 (2), 1978 pp 115-147.

Hunter, E., J.D. Metcalfe & J.D. Reynolds. (2003). Migration route and spawning area fidelity by North Sea plaice. Proceedings of the Royal Society London Series B 270: 2097-2103. References Hunter, E., J.D. Metcalfe, G.P. Arnold & J.D. Reynolds. (2004). Impacts of migratory behaviour on population structure in North Sea plaice. Journal of Animal Ecology 73: 377-385.

ICES. 2015b. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), 28 April–7 May 2015. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:13.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 55 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy

ICES. 2015c. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Plaice (WKPLE), 23–27 February 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015\ACOM:33. 200 pp.

ICES. 2015e. Report of the Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion (WGCSE), 12–21 May 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:12.

Pawson, M.G. (1995). Bio-geographical identification of English Channel fish and shellfish stocks. MAFF Fisheries Research Technical Report No. 99. Lowestoft.

Rijnsdorp, A.D. and Pastoors, M. A.(1995). Modelling the spatial dynamics and fisheries of North Sea plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.) based on tagging data. ICES J. Mar. Sci. Vol.52, no. 6, pp. 963-980

Rogers, S.I., R.S. Millner & T.A. Mead. (1998). The distribution and abundance of young fish on the east and south coast of England (1981 to 1997). The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Science Series Technical Report, 108, 130 pp.

Van Keeken, O.A., van Hoppe, M., R.E. Grift, R.E., and Rijnsdorp, A.D., 2007. Changes in the spatial distribution of North Sea plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) and implication for fisheries management. Journal of Sea Research (57): 187-197. OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 56 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Evaluation table 6 - PI 1.2.4

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidepost The assessment is appropriate for the stock The assessment takes into account the major features and for the harvest control rule. relevant to the biology of the species and the nature of the fishery.

Met? Y Y Justification The ICES WGNSSK uses a statistical catch-at-age model (SCA) to assess the stock status of VIId plaice, which is in scientific data category 1 (includes stocks with full analytical assessments and several year classes contribute to the fishery). The assessment uses ages and length frequencies of plaice in commercial catches by metier, appropriate biological parameters (including a revision of natural mortality), and abundance indices from Belgium and UK beam trawlers and from the UK beam-trawl survey and UK and French young fish surveys. The assessment takes into account the major features relevant to the biology of plaice and the nature of the fishery. SG60a, SG80 a and SG100a are met.

b Guidepost The assessment estimates stock status relative to reference points. Met? Y Justification The assessment estimates stock status relative to reference points (biomass and fishing mortality) as described at 1.1.2 above, and is used for catch forecasts and advice to managers in relation to the HCR (essentially TAC control of F against FMSY and BMSYtrigger points). SG60b is met c Guidepost The assessment identifies major The assessment takes uncertainty into account. The assessment takes into account uncertainty and is sources of uncertainty. evaluating stock status relative to reference points in a probabilistic way. Met? Y Y Y Justification The major sources of uncertainty are identified and taken into account (historic misreporting of plaice between the western and eastern Channel; discards are estimated). SG60c and 80c are met. The assessment evaluates stock status relative to reference points in probabilistic way, and SG100c is also met. d Guidepost The assessment has been tested and shown to be robust. Alternative hypotheses and assessment approaches have been rigorously explored. Met? N

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 57 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status

Justification The assessment has been tested and shown to be robust through a stock benchmark in 2015, but it is unlikely that alternative hypotheses and assessment approaches (other than VPA catch-at-age models) have been rigorously explored. SG100d is not met

e Guidepost The assessment of stock status is subject to The assessment has been internally and externally peer review. peer reviewed. Met? Y Y Justification The stock assessment is subject to peer review through the normal ICES quality assurance process (SG80c in met). ICES advice is also periodically peer-reviewed by STECF (e.g. in 2014), and SG100e is met.

Aarts, G., and Poos, J. J. 2009. Comprehensive discard reconstruction and abundance estimation using flexible selectivity functions. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 763–771 ICES. 2015b. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), 28 April–7 May References 2015. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:13.

ICES. 2015c. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Plaice (WKPLE), 23–27 February 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015\ACOM:33. 200 pp. OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 58 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Evaluation table 7 - PI 2.1.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained PI 2.1.1 species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidepost Main retained species are likely to be within Main retained species are highly likely to be within There is a high degree of certainty that retained biologically based limits (if not, go to biologically based limits (if not, go to scoring issue species are within biologically based limits and scoring issue c below). c below). fluctuating around their target reference points. Met? Sole – Y Sole – Y Sole – N Seabass – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – N Cod – Y Cod – Y Cod – N Minor species – N Justification At the re-assesment of the Hastings sole fishery in 2012 (IMM, 2012) (of which this is an expedited assessment), it was considered that the limited information available on retained species required that the RBF was used to score this PI. The outcome of that analysis was that a SICA consequence score of 1 was appropriate for the Hastings fishery (i.e. the quantities of retained species were sufficiently low that any change in population size due to the UoAs is unlikely to be detected against background variability for the populations affected),and the MSC score was therefore 100.

Data on the quantities of retained species reported by each UoA in 2014 are presented in Table 5 (MMO data, pers comm.). Because some of the Hastings vessels may use both nets and trawls on a particular trip, splitting landings by gear is somewhat problematic. Nevertheless, it is apparent that most of the species identified in 2012 as being retained were landed in 2014, albeit in relatively small quantities compared to international landings for the eastern Channel as a whole. The main retained species (comprising > 5% of the total catch) alongside plaice are sole, seabass and cod, whilst cuttlefish, small-spotted catshark, smoothhound, thornback ray and whelks are minor retained species.

Sole: ICES provide an annual analytic assessment for the sole stock in the eastern Channel (Div. VIId) (ICES, 2015a) which indicated that SSB has been above BMSYtrigger since 2002. Though low recruitment in 2012 and 2013 has resulted in a decrease in recent SSB, and fishing mortality has been increasing, there is a high degree of certainty (defined as 95% probability) that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired. However, F has been above both Fpa and FMSY since ~2006 and the stock is not fluctuating around its target reference point. Score 80.

Seabass: ICES conducted a quantitative assessment which currently treats all seabass in the North Sea, English Channel, eastern Celtic Sea, and the Irish Sea as a single, homogeneous stock. The assessment indicates a general trend of poor recruitment and increasing F associated with a rapid decline in biomass from historic high levels between 1995 and 2010 and SSB and is now estimated to be below BMSYtrigger but still above Blim (the lowest observed SSB, since there is no stock/recruitment relationship). Score 80.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 59 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained PI 2.1.1 species

Cod: ICES provide an annual analytic assessment for the (combined) cod stock in the North Sea and eastern Channel (IIIa, IV and VIId), which estimates that that B has recovered above Blim, although it remains below MSYBtrigger. Score 80. Minor species: None of the more important (>1% of total landings) minor retained species - cuttlefish, small-spotted catshark, smoothhound, thornback ray and whelks - are subject to a formal stock assessment, and it is not possible to know whether their stocks are within biologically-based limits. SG100 is therefore only partially met.

b Guidepost Target reference points are defined for retained species. Met? Sole, seabass, cod – Y Minor species - N Justification MSY reference points are defined for the main species (sole, seabass and cod), but no target reference points are defined for cuttlefish, small-spotted catshark, smoothhound, thornback ray or whelks. SG100b is only partially met c Guidepost If main retained species are outside the If main retained species are outside the limits limits there are measures in place that are there is a partial strategy of demonstrably expected to ensure that the fishery does not effective management measures in place such hinder recovery and rebuilding of the that the fishery does not hinder recovery and depleted species. rebuilding. Met? N/a N/a

Justification All three main retained species are within biological limits.

d Guidepost If the status is poorly known there are measures or practices in place that are expected to result in the fishery not causing the retained species to be outside biologically based limits or hindering recovery. Met? Y

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 60 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained PI 2.1.1 species Justification The re-assesment of the Hastings sole fishery in 2012 (of which this is an expedited assessment) used the RBF to score this PI, on the basis that there was limited information available on most retained species. The outcome of this analysis was that a SICA consequence score of 1 was appropriate for the Hastings fishery (i.e. the quantities of retained species were sufficiently low that any change in population size due to the UoA is unlikely to be detected against background variability for the populations affected), which implies that SG60d is met. Whilst the status of sole, sea bass and cod (the main retained species) is now known, it is not known for most of the minor retained species. However, the quantities of minor retained species remain sufficiently low that any change in population size due to the UoA is unlikely to be detected against background variability for the populations affected, and there are measures in place (mesh sizes, licensing control on fishing effort etc) that aim to limit the catch of the target species and main retained species close to biological targets, and these will also limit the catch of minor retained species so that the fishery does not pose a risk of serious harm nor hinder recovery of depleted stocks. SG60d is met.

According to Table C2 (MSC Certification Requirement 27.10.7.4), a score of 85 is awarded, since all scoring elements meet SG 80 and a few achieve a higher performance, but most do not meet SG100.

IMM (2012)

MEC (2013)

ICES 2015d. Sole (Solea solea) in Divison Vlld (Eastern English Channel). ICES advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Published 30 June 2015. ICES Advice 2015, Book 6. Eastern Channel sole advice 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/sol-eche.pdf References ICES 2015f. Cod (Gadus morhua) in Subarea IV and Divisions Vlld and IIIa West (North Sea, Eastern English Channel, Skagerrak). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Book 6. Published 30 June 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/cod-347d.pdf

ICES. 2015e. Report of the Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion (WGCSE), 12–21 May 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:12. Score sole 90

Score seabass 90

Score cod 90

Score minor species 80

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 61 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained PI 2.1.1 species

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 62 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Evaluation table 8 - PI 2.1.2 There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or PI 2.1.2 irreversible harm to retained species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidepost There are measures in place, if There is a partial strategy in place, if necessary, There is a strategy in place for managing retained necessary, that are expected to maintain that is expected to maintain the main retained species. the main retained species at levels species at levels which are highly likely to be which are highly likely to be within within biologically based limits, or to ensure the biologically based limits, or to ensure the fishery does not hinder their recovery and fishery does not hinder their recovery rebuilding. and rebuilding. Met? Sole – Y Sole – Y Sole – N Seabass – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – N Cod – Y Cod – Y Cod – Y Minor species – Y by default Minor species – Y by default Minor species – N

Justification There is a partial strategy in place which would maintain the main retained species at levels which are highly likely to be within biologically based limits, or to ensure the fishery does not hinder their recovery and rebuilding, depending on the species considered. The partial strategy can be characterised by an overall low level of fishing effort and restriction of fishing to the Rye Bay area. Sole (VIId): There is not a specific management plan for VIId sole, but measures include TAC, as well as a MLS, a minimum mesh size (Reg. 850/98) and effort restrictions on the fishery (licences, authorisations and max. net length per vessel). This constitutes a partial strategy so 80 is met. Seabass: There is an EU emergency measure that includes spatial and seasonal prohibitions on fishing for seabass (particulary to ptotect spawning aggregations), by-catch and monthly catch limits, a bag limit for recreational fishermen and an increased legal landing size, all of which constitute a partial strategy. SG80 is met Cod: There is an agreed EU-Norway management strategy for North Sea and eastern Channel cod, which is now in its long-term phase according to ICES – i.e. recovery has finished and management following the MSY approach can start. SG100 is met. Minor species: There is no strategy in place for most of the minor retained species in relation to this fishery – 100 is not met, default score of 80 (since minor species are not covered by SG60 or SG80) b Guidepost The measures are considered likely to There is some objective basis for confidence that Testing supports high confidence that the strategy work, based on plausible argument the partial strategy will work, based on some will work, based on information directly about the (e.g., general experience, theory or information directly about the fishery and/or fishery and/or species involved. comparison with similar species involved. fisheries/species).

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 63 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or PI 2.1.2 irreversible harm to retained species Met? Sole – Y Sole – Y Sole – N Seabass – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – N Cod – Y Cod – Y Cod – Y Minor species – Y by default Minor species – Y by default Minor species – N

Justification Although partial strategies exists for managing the catch of main retained species (sole, seabass and cod), the effectiveness of measures for other retained species was tested at a SICA-orientated workshop at a Hastings FLAG meeting in 2012 (IMM, 2012). The outcome indicator PI 2.1.1 was scored at 100 by attendees (representing a wide stakeholder membership), providing an objective basis for confidence in the effectiveness of the partial strategy. Sole: There is only a ‘partial’ strategy so the maximum score is 80. Trends in fishing mortality and SSB as evaluated by ICES provide confidence that the partial strategy is working. 80 is met. Seabass: Though trends in fishing mortality and SSB as evaluated by ICES show a worsening stock situation, the tranche of measures introduced in 2015 and proposed for 2016 should reduce F substantially on the spawning stock (this highly targeted fishery has now been severely cutailed since 2014) and provide confidence that the strategy is working. 80 is met. Cod: Trends in fishing mortality and SSB as evaluated by ICES support high confidence that the strategy is working. 100 is met. Minor species: There is no strategy in place for most of the retained species in relation to this fishery so 100 is not met. Default score of 80 c Guidepost There is some evidence that the partial strategy There is clear evidence that the strategy is being is being implemented successfully. implemented successfully. Met? Sole – Y Sole – Y Sole – N Seabass – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – N Cod – Y Cod – Y Cod – Y Minor species – Y by default Minor species – Y by default Minor species – N

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 64 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or PI 2.1.2 irreversible harm to retained species Justification As for b above. There is also ongoing monitoring of the fishing activities of the Hastings fleet by MMO and Sussex IFCA staff.

Sole: Though the EU has set the TAC higher than ICES advice under the MSY framework, and F>FMSY, it is clear that the stock has remained sustainable in recent years, with SSB>MSYBtrigger. On this basis, and from the point of view of the stock, the partial strategy has been implemented successfully. 80 is met. Seabass: There is no management plan for seabass, which has experienced historically high SSB and landings until recently. However, F has increased as the SSB has declined (due to recent poor recruitment), and it has become necessary to constrain fishing effort to protect the spawning stock (juveniles are fully protected). This has been done in 2015, and stronger measures are proposed for 2016, so there is some evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully and SG80 is met. Cod: Fishing mortality on this stock has been systematically reduced over several years following the requirements of the cod recovery plan (days at sea limits, restrictive TACs, juvenile and real-time closed areas etc.). The trends in F and SSB as evaluated by ICES show that this strategy has been successful, and the stock is now in the long-term rather than rebuilding phase of the management plan. 100 is met. Minor species: There is no strategy in place for most of the minor retained species in relation to this fishery so 100 cannot be met. Default score of 80 d Guidepost There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its overall objective. Met? Sole – N Seabass – N Cod – Y Minor species – N Justification Since there is no explicit strategy for managing retained species (except cod, for which the elements of the cod recovery plan - days at sea limits, restrictive TACs, juvenile and real-time closed areas etc – appear to be working), this SI cannot be met.

Hastings FLAG meeting; Sussex IFCA Meeting, HFMG meeting; all covered in re-assessment report 2012. EC 1998. Council Regulation (EC) No. 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms Council Regulation (EC) No. 676/2007 establishing a multiannual plan for fisheries exploiting stocks of plaice and sole in the North References Sea. Official Journal of the European Union L 157/1.

Council Regulation (EC) No. 1342/2008. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1342/2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks and repealing Regulation (EC) No. 423/2004.

Council Regulation (EC) No. 43/2009 fixing for 2009 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 65 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or PI 2.1.2 irreversible harm to retained species European Commission (2010) fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non EU waters. COM(2010) 658 final

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/111 of 26 January 2015 establishing measures to alleviate a serious threat to the conservation of the seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax) stock in the Celtic Sea, Channel, Irish Sea and southern North Sea.

European Commission (2015) 559 final 2015/0259 (NLE) Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION fixing for 2016 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union vessels, in certain non- Union waters

Score sole 80

Score seabass 80

Score cod 100

Score minor species 80

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 66 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Evaluation table 9 - PI 2.1.3 Information on the nature and extent of retained species is adequate to determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the PI 2.1.3 strategy to manage retained species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep Qualitative information is available on the Qualitative information and some quantitative Accurate and verifiable information is available on ost amount of main retained species taken by the information are available on the amount of main the catch of all retained species and the fishery. retained species taken by the fishery. consequences for the status of affected populations. Met? Sole – Y Sole – Y Sole – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – Y Cod – Y Cod – Y Cod – Y Minor species – Y by default Minor species – Y by default Minor species – Y Justific Discussions with stakeholders in the fishery in 2012 identified (qualitatively) the retained species affected by the fisheries. Retained species are ation primarily sold via the Hastings fishmarket and quantitative information is held by the MMO on such sales – corresponding closely to landings. MMO data have been obtained for 2014 to inform this expedited assessment and which is sufficient to assess the consequences for the status of affected populations (very little, considering the small size of the client fleet). SG100 is met

b Guidep Information is adequate to qualitatively assess Information is sufficient to estimate outcome Information is sufficient to quantitatively estimate ost outcome status with respect to biologically status with respect to biologically based limits. outcome status with a high degree of certainty. based limits. Met? Sole – Y Sole – Y Sole – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – N Cod – Y Cod – Y Cod – Y Minor species – Y Minor species – N Minor species – N Justific Sole: Analytical stock assessment evaluates stock status and exploitation rate against MSY reference points including an assessment of uncertainty. ation Catches by the UoAs are recorded against quota and discards are low. 100 is met. Seabass: Analytical stock assessment evaluates stock status and exploitation rate against reference points, but the catch in Div, VIId is a small part of the overall “stock” area (Sub-area IV and most of Sub-area VII), and status is not estimated with high degree of certainty. 80 is met. Cod: Analytical stock assessment evaluates stock status and exploitation rate against reference points; including an assessment of uncertainty and providing 5% and 95% confidence intervals. SG100 is met. Minor species: Outcome status cannot be estimated quantitatively for many (most) of these species, but there is sufficient information from landings trends to assess outcome status with respect to biologically based limits (i.e.to warn of recruitment failure). SG80 is met.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 67 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Information on the nature and extent of retained species is adequate to determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the PI 2.1.3 strategy to manage retained species c Guidep Information is adequate to support measures to Information is adequate to support a partial Information is adequate to support a ost manage main retained species. strategy to manage main retained species. comprehensive strategy to manage retained species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective. Met? Sole – Y Sole – Y Sole – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – Y Seabass – N Cod – Y Cod – Y Cod – Y Minor species – Y by default Minor species – Y by default Minor species – N Justific Good information is available on landings from the fishery. These are adequate to support a partial strategy for all retained species, and a ation comprehensive strategy for sole and cod, if needed (since these stocks have ICES assessments). However,there is no specific strategy for the Hastings fleet in place and, for most minor species, information is insufficient to evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective. SG80 is met.

d Guidep Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect Monitoring of retained species is conducted in ost any increase in risk level (e.g. due to changes in sufficient detail to assess ongoing mortalities to all the outcome indicator score or the operation of retained species. the fishery or the effectiveness of the strategy)

Met? Y – all species Y – all species

Justific Information is available on landings from the fishery through market sales, SIFCA and monitoring by MMO against quotas. These are adequate to detect ation any increase in risk level due to changes in the outcome indicator score or the operation of the fishery, and provide sufficient detail to assess on-going mortalities (due to the Hastings fleet) for all retained species. SG100 is met. Hastings FLAG meeting; Sussex IFCA Meeting, HFMG meeting. MMO data

ICES 2015d. Sole (Solea solea) in Divison Vlld (Eastern English Channel). ICES advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Published 30 June 2015. ICES Advice 2015, Book 6. Eastern Channel sole advice 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/sol-eche.pdf References ICES 2015f. Cod (Gadus morhua) in Subarea IV and Divisions Vlld and IIIa West (North Sea, Eastern English Channel, Skagerrak). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Book 6. Published 30 June 2015. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/cod-347d.pdf

ICES. 2015e. Report of the Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion (WGCSE), 12–21 May 2015, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:12.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 68 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Information on the nature and extent of retained species is adequate to determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the PI 2.1.3 strategy to manage retained species

Score sole 100

Score seabass 90

Score cod 100

Score minor species 80

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/a

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 69 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Appendix 2. Conditions

The following condition was raised during the expedited assessment:

Performance PI 1.2.2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place Indicator Score 75

The annual TAC is set on the basis of advice from ICES, which is based on the MSY approach given the state of the stock in relation to reference points that are set with the explicit purpose of maintaining a fully reproductive stock and a sustainable fishery on that stock. Given that F is currently well below FMSY and SSB is predicted to remain well above MSYBtrigger in the medium term, the MSY approach sets the TAC at a level corresponding to FMSY (F 0.25 = 12,789 landed catch), whilst fishing at status quo F (0.11 in 2014) would produce landings of 5973 t in 2016. Either of these harvest controls would satisfy the MSY approach to management. SG60a is met Rationale The allocation of national shares through the European Commission’s CFP is effective and well understood nationally and at local levels through producer organisations etc. Enforcement of technical measures, in particular the minimum landing size and effort controls also support control of the exploitation rate. The TAC has not been exceeded by landings within the last ~20 years. As such, the harvest rules are consistent with the harvest strategy and are likely to act to reduce the exploitation rate as limit reference points are approached. However, in the absence of a management plan the HCR is not well defined, and a condition to delelop and implement a management plan adressing realistic long-term objectives is required. The actions necessary to achieve the stated long-term (MSY) objectives for the Division VIId plaice stock need to be clearly defined via a management plan or by some other suitable method, which includes explicit controls on the Condition exploitation rate in relation to the stock’s status (against biomass and fishing

mortality management targets) that are consistent with the harvest strategy and ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached (SG80 scoring issue a).

Meeting this condition will require implementation of an appropriate management plan or strategy for Division VIId plaice. The anticipated milestones are set out below:

Year 1: Evidence that the client is working with the UK authorities, the AC or other suitable stakeholders to encourage the EU and ICES or the relevant coastal states to develop a management plan for Division VIId plaice. Likely resulting PI Score: 70 Milestones Year 2: Evidence that a management plan with appropriate harvest control rules for Division VIId plaice is under development. Likely resulting PI Score: 70

Year 3: Evidence of the management plan being reviewed and evaluated by stakeholders. Likely resulting PI Score: 70

Year 4: Evidence that the management plan has been adopted. Likely resulting PI Score: 70

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 70 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Year 5: Evidence that the fishery is being managed according to the management plan and that it includes an HCR that is capable of maintaining SSB at or above MSYBtrigger and fishing mortality at or below FMSY and (if necessary) can act to reduce the exploitation rate if limit reference points are approached (SG80a is met) Likely resulting PI Score: 80

Year 1 (2016): 1. Participation and discussions with the MMO and North Western Waters Advisory Council (NWWAC) on measures to be included in the management plan. The Hastings Fishermen's Protection Society (HFPS) are members of New under Ten metre Fishermen’s Association (NUTFA) which in turn is represented on the NWWAC by Dave Cuthbert. Paul Joy from Hastings is co-chairman and advises Dave Cuthbert on Division VII d and e plaice. Management options should be discussed with representatives from English, and French and Belgian, fisheries that exploit Division VII d and e plaice. 2. NUTFA is a member of L I F E, low impact fishers of Europe. 3. HFPS will continue to work closely with colleagues via the NWWAC based on good scientific advice.

Client Action 4. Presentation of advice to and discussions with European Commission’s Plan Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF)

5. All decisions from the EU will be implemented.

Year 2 (2017): Provide evidence that the management plan is being developed. Year 3 (2018): Provide evidence that the management plan is being evaluated by the relevant stakeholders. Year 4 (2019): Provide evidence that the management plan has been adopted by the relevant stakeholders. Year 5 (2020): Provide evidence that management of the fishery conforms to the management plan and that it is likely to achieve its objectives.

Consultation on None condition

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 71 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Appendix 3. Peer Review Report

Overall Opinion

Has the assessment team arrived at an Yes Conformity Assessment Body appropriate conclusion based on the evidence Response presented in the assessment report? Justification: The assessment report provides a clear and well Thank you. The text has been amended balanced review of the information in key areas. The overall accordingly. scores are appropriate but there are a number of issues on individual scores which are noted in the scoring section.

Do you think the condition(s) raised are Yes Conformity Assessment Body appropriately written to achieve the SG80 Response outcome within the specified timeframe? Justification:

No comment provided If included: Do you think the client action plan is sufficient Yes/No Conformity Assessment Body to close the conditions raised? Response Justification: The action plan takes a sensible stepped approach which should achieve the aim of closing the condition provided there is adequate response from appropriate authorities.

General Comments on the Assessment Report (optional)

In addition to comments against the scores, I have noted a number of minor issues below:

1) SIFCA missing from acronyms. Now added

2) Section 4.2.2 Gill Net: The low hanging ratio is described as increasing fishing effectiveness at expense of selectivity by fish size. It should be clarified that this in effect means an increasing amount of discarding of generally undersize sole, plaice and other species. Yes, text amended.

3) Section 4.3.2 Stock Identity: The last paragraph needs updating to include the latest NSSK WG information of movement of plaice from North Sea into VIId in relation to the assessment. In Q1, 50% of plaice are considered to be from North Sea. Point noted, but ICES still advises that 13% of the plaice landed in Division VIId are assumed to originate from the North Sea and Western English Channel (average 2003–2014).

4) 4.3.3 Discarding of plaice: The Executive Summary notes that one of the weaknesses of the fishery is the paucity of information on discards. Section 4.3.3 would be more helpful in assessing the impact of discards if it included information from VIId or from small inshore vessels. There is also nothing on trammel or gill nets. If discarding is thought to be relatively low level, some comment backed up by available evidence would be useful. Agreed. The text has been amended accordingly, noting that a discard sampling project is currently

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 72 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

underway (results to inform the Landings Obligation and re-assessment of the fishery in 2016/17).

On discard survival, information quoted from the NS implies that the landings obligation, when applied to plaice, will not result in substantially higher mortality than discarding them at sea. However, this may be the wrong conclusion as plaice discarded from small inshore trawlers tends to be in van Keeken’s lightly damaged category and therefore may have a relatively high survival (see also Millner, R.S., Whiting, C.L., Howlet, G.J., 1993. Estimation of discard mortality of plaice from small otter trawlers using tagging and cage survival studies. ICES CM 1993/G:24. These authors found high survival from inshore trawlers in VIId). Point noted and text amended accordingly.

5) 4.3.4.2 Plaice Stock Status. The information for this section is taken from the ICES advice in June 2015. This was slightly modified in their later advice in November 2015. The only difference is likely to be in small changes to the advice in section 4.3.6. Noted: text has been amended in line with the November 2015 update.

6) 4.4.2: Table 5 – no units provided. Now added.

7) Scoring Principle 2: It was noted that RBF was used in the re-assessment of the Hastings sole fishery in 2012 and that this confirmed the low level of significance of interactions with retained species in this fishery. RBF was not used for this expedited assessment which is reasonable for the main retained species. However, it is not clear why the minor retained species have also been included in the scoring as this has led to a number of issues which have been raised later under the individual scores. Some clarification of why these species have been included in the scoring is needed. The decision not to rely on the existing RBF scores for retained species was made on the basis that the next re-assessment of the Hastings sole (and plaice) fishery is due in 2016/17 and a full scoring of non-target species will be required. This expedited assessment was intended to pre-empt this. The text has been amended to clarify this.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 73 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Performance Indicator Review Please complete the table below for each Performance Indicator which are listed in the Conformity Assessment Body’s Public Certification Draft Report.

Performance Has all the Does the Will the Justification Conformity Assessment Body Indicator relevant information condition(s) Please support your answers by Response information and/or rationale raised improve referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation available been used to score this the fishery’s where possible. Please attach used to score Indicator support performance to additional pages if necessary. this Indicator? the given score? the SG80 level? (Yes/No) (Yes/No) (Yes/No/NA)

Example:1.1.2 No No NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. The 80 scoring guidepost asks for a target reference point that is consistent with maintaining the stock at Bmsy or above, however the target reference point given for this fishery is Bpa, with no indication of how this is consistent with a Bmsy level.

1.1.1 Yes No N/A b) The target reference points for It is a moot point whether F or SSB scoring are defined as Fmsy and reference points are used as targets Bpa/Btrigger. While Fmsy is an for management (since Bmsy can acceptable reference point under the vary according to recruitment ICES strategy for fishing at MSY, patterns) and, lacking a management Bpa/Btrigger are precautionary rather plan it is uncertain what to take as than target reference points. The the target. The amended text score is not affected as F has been explains this. below the target since 2009 and biomass is at historically high levels.

1.1.2 Yes Yes N/A

1.1.3 N/A N/A N/A

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 74 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Performance Has all the Does the Will the Justification Conformity Assessment Body Indicator relevant information condition(s) Please support your answers by Response information and/or rationale raised improve referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation available been used to score this the fishery’s where possible. Please attach used to score Indicator support performance to additional pages if necessary. this Indicator? the given score? the SG80 level? (Yes/No) (Yes/No) (Yes/No/NA)

1.2.1 Yes No N/A I agree that SG 80 (b) is met but this Agreed, and text amended to make is not supported by the first this point paragraph which implies that the harvest strategy (TACs and technical measures) have not been effective and improvement in the stock is the result of strong recruitment. This is also not consistent with the evidence under 1.2.2c which notes the large reduction in demersal effort and with the text in 4.3.4.2.

1.2.2 Yes Yes Provided that any As noted in comment on the action management plan plan, this requires an adequate developed response from appropriate includes specific authorities. reference to ensuring that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached, this should improve performance to SG80

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 75 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Performance Has all the Does the Will the Justification Conformity Assessment Body Indicator relevant information condition(s) Please support your answers by Response information and/or rationale raised improve referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation available been used to score this the fishery’s where possible. Please attach used to score Indicator support performance to additional pages if necessary. this Indicator? the given score? the SG80 level? (Yes/No) (Yes/No) (Yes/No/NA)

1.2.3 Yes Yes N/A

1.2.4 Yes Yes N/A You could argue that the use of Agreed, but the evidence that alternative models to VPA such the alternative hypotheses and statistical catch at age model which assessment approaches have been has been shown to be robust by peer rigorously explored for VIId plaice is review evaluation justifies a score at pretty thin. 100

2.1.1 Yes No N/A There is an inconsistency in the Agreed, there appears to have been scoring of SG100a. Sole, seabsss a typo here. The summary scores and cod are all indicated as meeting have been corrected, and Table C2 SG100 but in the justification below, is now referenced to the MSC they are correctly noted as only Certification Requirements scoring 80 (since there is no 27.10.7.4, showing how to determine evidence that they are fluctuatiing the overall score for the PI from the around target reference points). Also scores of the different scoring in (d), reference is made to table C2 elements. and a score of 85. It is not clear what this refers to.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 76 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Performance Has all the Does the Will the Justification Conformity Assessment Body Indicator relevant information condition(s) Please support your answers by Response information and/or rationale raised improve referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation available been used to score this the fishery’s where possible. Please attach used to score Indicator support performance to additional pages if necessary. this Indicator? the given score? the SG80 level? (Yes/No) (Yes/No) (Yes/No/NA)

2.1.2 Yes No N/A Under the MSC CR, a Partial The default score of 80 is applied to Strategy is defined as “..a cohesive minor retained species because arrangement which may comprise minor species are only dealt with at one or more measures and an SG100. Text amended to clarify understanding of how they work but which may not have been designed to manage the specific impact”. In terms of the minor species it is difficult to see that a partial strategy exists in these terms and so it is unclear why the default score of 80 is applied.

2.1.3 Y N N/A A minor point but under (b) outcome The text has been amended to more status with respect to biologically clearly expalin the score. based limits cannot be estimated for most minor species so score for these spp should be less than 80.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 77 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Appendix 4. Stakeholder submissions

No written stakeholder submissions were received prior to the publication of the Public Comment Draft Report (PCDR). Verbal submissions received during the site visit focused on the provision of information and no concerns were raised about the fishery under assessment.

No stakeholder or MSC TO submissions were received after the publication of the PCDR.

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 78 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Appendix 5. Surveillance Frequency

Table 5.1: Surveillance level rationale Year Surveillance Number of Rationale activity auditors 1 On-site audit 2 auditors on-site The assessment team have determined that the surveillance level for this fishery should be set at the default level 6. (i.e. 4 on-site surveillance audits) as Perfomance Indicator 1.2.1 (Harvest Strategy) received a score of 75 and a condition was therefore raised.

Table 5.2: Timing of surveillance audit Year Anniversary date Proposed date of Rationale of certificate surveillance audit 1 July 2017 July 2017 N/A as it is proposed that the first surveillance is conducted on the certificate anniversary date.

Table 5.3: Fishery Surveillance Programme Surveillance Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Level Level 6 On-site On-site On-site On-site surveillance audit surveillance audit surveillance audit surveillance audit & re-certification site visit

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 79 MSC Fisheries Assessment Template V 1.0 (16th March 2015)

Appendix 6. Stakeholders

Marine Management Marine Management Organisation (MMO) Organisation (MMO)

MMO Hastings Office MMO Hastings Office

Natural England Natural England

Sea Space (Hastings and Sea Space (Hastings and Bexhill Renaissance) Bexhill Renaissance)

Sussex Coast College Sussex Coast College

Alison Lamb Hastings CIC

Paul Carter East Hastings Sea Angling Association

Steve Manwaring Hastings Voluntary Action

Tim Dapling Sussex IFCA

Yasmin Ormsby Hastings Fishermens Protection Society

2813R07A | ME Certification Ltd. 80