Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

MSC SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES CERTIFICATION

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Public Comment Draft Report

October 2016

Prepared For: Heiploeg, Member of the PP Group Prepared By: Acoura Marine Ltd

Acoura Marine Full Assessment Template per MSC V2.0 02/12/2015 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Public Comment Draft Report

October 2016

Authors: Tristan Southall, Rob Blyth-Skyrme and John Tremblay

Certification Body: Client: Acoura Marine Heiploeg, Member of the PP Group

Address: Address: 6 Redheughs Rigg Heiploeg Edinburgh Member of the PP Group, Heiploeg International BV EH12 9DQ P.O. Box 2 Scotland, UK NL – 9974 ZG Zoutkamp Netherlands Name: Fisheries Department Name: Mark Nijhof Tel: +44(0) 131 335 6601 Tel: +31 (0)595 40 55 55 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Web: www.Acoura.com

Page 2 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Contents

Glossary ...... 5 1. Executive Summary ...... 7 2. Authorship and Peer Reviewers ...... 9 2.1 Assessment Team ...... 9 2.1.1 Peer Reviewers ...... 10 2.1.2 RBF Training ...... 10 3. Description of the Fishery ...... 11 3.1 Unit(s) of Certification and scope of certification sought ...... 11 3.2 Overview of the fishery ...... 11 3.2.1 Area Under Evaluation ...... 11 3.2.2 The Fishery Client ...... 12 3.2.5 The Target Species ...... 14 3.3 Principle One: Target Species Background ...... 16 3.3.1 Biology and ecology in Suriname waters ...... 16 3.3.2 Trophic status of seabob in Suriname waters ...... 17 3.3.3 Stock Status & Assessment Methodology ...... 18 3.3.4 History of fishing and management...... 20 3.4 Principle Two: Ecosystem Background ...... 22 3.4.1 Retained species ...... 23 3.4.2 Bycatch species ...... 23 3.4.3 ETP Species ...... 24 3.4.4 Habitat ...... 25 3.4.5 Ecosystem ...... 27 3.5 Principle Three: Management System Background...... 29 3.5.1 Jurisdiction ...... 29 3.5.2 Recognised Groups ...... 29 3.5.3 Management Plan ...... 29 3.5.4 Decision-making process ...... 30 3.5.5 Objectives ...... 31 3.5.6 Monitoring Control & Surveillance ...... 31 4. Evaluation Procedure ...... 32 4.1 Harmonised Fishery Assessment ...... 32 4.2 Previous assessments ...... 32 4.3 Assessment Methodologies ...... 33 4.3.1 Assessment Tree ...... 33 4.4 Evaluation Processes and Techniques ...... 33 4.4.1Site Visits...... 33 4.4.2 Consultation outcomes...... 34

Page 3 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

4.4.3 Evaluation Techniques ...... 35 4.4.4 RBF Use ...... 36 5. Traceability ...... 37 5.1 Eligibility Date ...... 37 5.2 Traceability within the Fishery ...... 37 5.2.1 Tracking, Tracing and Segregation Systems ...... 37 5.2.2 Evaluation of Risk of Vessels Fishing Outside of UoC ...... 37 5.2.3 Risk of Substitution of Mixing Certified / Non-Certified Catch prior to point of landing ...... 37 5.2.4 At-Sea Processing ...... 37 5.2.5 Trans-Shipment ...... 37 5.3 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody ...... 37 5.3.1 Eligible points of landing ...... 38 5.3.2 Parties eligible to use the fishery certificate ...... 38 6. Evaluation Results ...... 39 6.1 Principle Level Scores ...... 39 6.2 Summary of Scores ...... 39 6.3 Summary of Conditions ...... 40 6.3.1 Recommendations ...... 40 6.4 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement ...... 41 7. References ...... 42 Appendix 1. Scoring & Rationale ...... 44 MSC Principles & Criteria ...... 44 Appendix 1.1 Performance Indicator Scores and Rationale ...... 47 Principle 1 ...... 47 Principle 2 ...... 67 Principle 3 ...... 103 Appendix 1.2 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs ...... 129 Appendix 1.3 Conditions ...... 134 Condition 1 ...... 134 Condition 2 ...... 135 Appendix 2. Peer Review Reports ...... 138 Peer Reviewer 1 ...... 138 Peer Reviewer 2 ...... 152 Appendix 3. Stakeholder submissions ...... 167 Appendix 3.1 Amendments made to the PCDR following stakeholder consultation ...... 167 Appendix 4. Surveillance Frequency ...... 168 Appendix 5. Client Agreement ...... 169 Appendix 5.1 Objections Process ...... 169

Page 4 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Glossary

Bpa Precautionary reference point for spawning stock biomass

Blim Limit biomass reference point. BRD Bycatch reduction Device CoP Code of Practice CLME Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CPUE Catch per Unit Effort CR Council Regulation (of the European Union) CRFM Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism EC European Commission EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ETP Endangered, threatened and protected species EU European Union F Fishing Mortality

Flim Limit fishing mortality reference point

Fpa Precautionary fishing mortality reference point FAC Fishery Advisory Council (referred to as RvO by Dutch speakers) FAM MSC’s Fisheries Assessment Methodology FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation FMP Fisheries Management Plan HCR Harvest Control Rule IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature IUU Illegal, Unregulated & Unreported fishing LME Large Marine Ecosystem LOA Length Over All LVV Suriname Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance MPA Marine Protected Area MSC Marine Stewardship Council MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield NGO Non-Governmental Organisation P1 MSC Principle 1 P2 MSC Principle 2 P3 MSC Principle 3 PI MSC Performance Indicator PSA Productivity Susceptibility Analysis RBF Risk Based Framework RFMO Regional Fishery Management Organisation SICA Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis SG Scoring Guidepost SONAR Sound navigation and ranging

Page 5 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

SSB Spawning Stock Biomass SWG Seabob Working Group TAC Total Allowable Catch TED Turtle Excluder Device UK United Kingdom UoC Unit of Certification – i.e. Definition of the fishery. UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea VMS Vessel Monitoring System VPA Virtual Population Analysis WEAFC Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission WWF World Wide Fund For Nature

Page 6 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

1. Executive Summary » This report provides details of the MSC assessment process for the Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp fishery. The assessment was carried out by the conformity assessment body (CAB) Acoura Marine on behalf of Heiploeg International BV. The assessment process began in 11th February 2016 and was concluded (to be determined at a later date). » This fishery was first MSC certified in 2011 and this report is therefore the recertification report for the fishery after 5 years of successful certification during which considerable progress has been achieved on addressing conditions highlighted at the time of the original assessment. Full details of these historic conditions and the steps taken by the fishery to fully address these requirements is detailed in surveillance reports from 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2016 which are available on the MSC website. » For interested readers, the report also provides background to the target species and fishery covered by the assessment, the wider impacts of the fishery and the management regime, supported by full details of the assessment team, a full list of references used and details of the stakeholder consultation process. » The assessment team for this fishery assessment comprised of Tristan Southall who acted as team leader and primary Principle 3 specialist; Rob Blyth-Skyrme who was primarily responsible for evaluation of Principle 2 and John Tremblay who was primarily responsible for evaluation of Principle 1. Paul MacIntyre was the traceability expert advisor. » As part of this recertification exercise a comprehensive programme of stakeholder consultations was carried out, complemented by a full and thorough review of relevant literature and data sources. » A rigorous assessment of the wide ranging MSC Principles and Criteria was undertaken by the assessment team and a detailed and fully referenced scoring rationale is provided in the assessment tree provided in Appendix 1.1 of this report. » The Target Eligibility Date for this assessment is 28th February 2017, when the current certificate expires to ensure unbroken certification. Client strengths » The client fishery has a number of strengths which are highlighted in the MSC scoring. This is evidenced by the continuous MSC certified status since first achieving this in 2011. » The target stock is being exploited at a level consistent with Maximum Sustainable Yield. This is assured by a harvest strategy and harvest control rules which effectively limit the rate of exploitation in the fishery. » Although the fishery uses a demersal trawl, which has the potential to impact seabed habitats, it has been demonstrated that the impact comparatively lightweight gear on the highly dynamic seabed sediments is highly unlikely to be serious or irreversible. » Fishing by demersal trawls is spatially restricted and inshore areas which are important to artisanal fisheries and act as important nursery areas are closed to mobile gears. » Bycatch, including the potential capture of endangered species is mitigated against by the use of bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) and Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs). Both of which have been shown to be effective in reducing the level of unwanted catch. » The client fishery has facilitated considerable scientific research in recent years, in particular in relation to ecosystem impacts (many in response to conditions in the original MSC assessment of 2011). This has contributed to greatly improved understanding of the seabed and ecosystem in the area of the fishery. » The fishery’s management is defined in a species-specific fishery management plan, which clearly sets out the objectives for the fishery and the decision-making process. This includes a key role for a management / stakeholder advisory body – the Seabob Working Group. This group play a key role in oversight of the fishery. Further details about the Seabob Working Group are available at www.seabob.sr

Page 7 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

» The fishery is supported by an effective system of monitoring, control and surveillance, including a vessel monitoring system. In recent year the enforcement capacity within Surinamese waters has been greatly enhanced by the provision of new patrol vessels. Client weaknesses / Conditions » A number of criteria which contribute to the overall assessment score scored less than the unconditional pass mark, and therefore trigger a binding condition to be placed on the fishery, which must be addressed in a specified timeframe (within the 5 year lifespan of the certificate). Full explanation of these conditions is provided in Appendix 1.3 of the report, but in brief, the areas covered by these conditions are: » The assessment identified some instances where the level of fishing effort was not determined by strict application of the harvest control rule. In fact, management applied a greater level of precaution and reduced fishing effort by more than required by the harvest control rule. Whilst this management precaution was commendable, the assessment team conclude that this may reflect be some uncertainty in how the HCR rule is applied and this should therefore be clarified (PI1.2.2). » The assessment team also note that the period for the Seabob Management Plan has now concluded. Whilst this does not affect the operation of the fishery and the plan still applies, it is noted that this is now an opportunity for an overall evaluation of the Management Plan and that this evaluation should include some external review (PI3.2.5). It is likely that the latest stock assessment may also lead to a change in the harvest control rule, which will therefore need to be included in an updated management plan, therefore a completed evaluation should also help to shape the development of this management plan updating process. » In addition, the assessment team made two recommendations. As these are not the result of a failure to meet the unconditional pass mark, they are non-binding; however, in the opinion of the assessment team, they would make a positive contribution to ongoing efforts to ensure the long term sustainability of the fishery. Details of these recommendations are provided in Section 6.3.1 of this report. Determination » On completion of the assessment and scoring process, the assessment team concluded that the Suriname Seabob Atlantic Shrimp fishery meets the MSC standard. » Finally, Acoura Marine Ltd. confirm that this fishery is within scope of the MSC standard.

Page 8 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

2. Authorship and Peer Reviewers

2.1 Assessment Team All team members listed below have completed all requisite training and signed all relevant forms for assessment team membership on this fishery. Assessment team leader: Tristan Southall Primarily responsible for assessment under Principle 3 Tristan Southall is a highly experienced fisheries assessor who has worked as both MSC principles 2 and 3 expert on a number of previous MSC assessments, including the original 2011 MSC assessment of Suriname Seabob. Tristan has led MSC assessment teams in a wide range of fisheries and areas including Scottish, Irish and Swedish pelagic fishery assessments, small scale shellfish fisheries in the North of the UK, static gear fisheries and demersal trawl fisheries. Tristan has also contributed to the testing and refining of various new MSC assessment methodology approaches – including leading the assessment of one of the first pilot fisheries to use the new RBF methodology (in the Gambia) and calibrating the new habitats risk based approach. Tristan was also one of the lead authors on the newly published MSC Capacity Building Toolkit and has since been contracted by the MSC Developing World Team to deliver MSC Capacity Building Training. When not assessing the sustainability of fisheries Tristan specialises in fishing and marine industry consultancy, combining detailed understanding of marine ecosystems with broad experience of fishing industry operations, infrastructure, management and legislation. This expertise has been put to use on a wide range of projects - from coordinating the delivery of EU fisheries training and promotion activities in pre-accession countries (Turkey) to assessing the environmental and economic impacts of proposed offshore developments on the fisheries sector, advising on how best to mitigate such impact and liaising with the fisheries sector to try to minimise disruption during construction phases. Expert team member: Rob Blyth-Skyrme Primarily responsible for assessment under Principle 2 Rob has broad fisheries and environmental science, management and policy knowledge, having gained over nearly 20 years of postgraduate work in the marine field. Rob previously led the marine fisheries and aquaculture work of Natural England, the UK Government’s statutory advisor on nature conservation in England. Rob has also worked as Deputy Chief Fishery Officer for the Eastern Sea Fisheries Joint Committee, co-managing the activities of a staff of 16 Fishery Enforcement, Research and Environment Officers. He has been involved in assessing numerous MSC fisheries, including international shrimp fisheries. Expert team member: John Tremblay Primarily responsible for assessment under Principle 1 Dr. Tremblay has over 35 years of experience in marine fisheries ecology and biology. He has a Ph.D. in Marine Biology from Dalhousie University (1991), and M.Sc. (1982) and B.Sc. Degrees (1979) from the University of Guelph. From 1983 to 2015 he was with the Science Branch of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). His areas of expertise include the population ecology of invertebrates, stock assessment of decapod crustacea, and communication of fisheries science with stakeholders and peers. He has participated extensively in peer review processes as a team leader and as a reviewer. As head of the Maritimes Region Lobster Unit at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography (BIO) for 10 years, he was responsible for regular assessments of the most valuable commercial species in Canada. John has 32 publications in peer-reviewed journals covering topics such as the early life history of scallops and lobsters, trends in populations of invertebrates and fish in relation to the environment, catchability in traps, and lobster growth and movement. The topics of over 50 technical publications which he co-authored include assessments of lobsters, crabs and scallops, and methods for estimating abundance of decapod crustacea. He retired from DFO in 2015 and is currently a Scientist Emeritus at BIO. Expert advisor: Paul MacIntyre Paul started working in the Aquaculture sector in 1975, managing salmon farms and processing factories for a large multi-national before transferring in 1990 to aquaculture audit and inspection.

Page 9 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

During the last 25 years Paul has carried out over 3,000 audits and inspections of aquaculture and fish processing operations across the UK salmon and trout industry and internationally in the cod, tilapia and shrimp aquaculture sectors. Paul’s primary interest is salmonids however his role as Aquaculture Director with Acoura Marine has involved him in the development and trial audit of a number of new aquaculture and agricultural standards. Paul is a qualified Lead Assessor and approved to audit BRC, MSC / ASC Chain of Custody, GlobalGAP, Organic Aquaculture, Freedom Food, Label Rouge, Best Aquaculture Practices, ASC Salmon and Friend of the Sea. Paul also audits to UK and French retailer standards.

2.1.1 Peer Reviewers Peer reviewers used for this report are presented below. A summary CV for each is available in the Assessment downloads section of the fishery’s entry on the MSC website.

Suzuette Soomai Suzuette Soomai has extensive practical experience in tropical marine fisheries resource assessment and management and considerable experience in research on information use at the science-policy interface. As a former government fisheries scientist in the Caribbean, she was primarily responsible for assessing groundfish resources, maintaining fisheries information systems, and for managing national technical programs in collaboration with regional and global intergovernmental organizations. She has worked closely with commercial/large-scale and small-scale fishers in the Caribbean in a range of research activities including freshwater aquaculture farming and at-sea gear testing aimed at reducing bycatch and discards from shrimp trawlers. She is currently engaged in interdisciplinary research on the role of scientific information, produced by national, regional, and global governmental organizations based in North America and Europe, in policy-and decision-making in fisheries management. Her research is contributing to increased understanding of evidence-based decision- making and the science-policy interface in marine environmental contexts in the Northwest Atlantic. Suzuette Soomai holds an Interdisciplinary PhD and a Master in Marine Management from Dalhousie University. She also holds a Master of Philosophy in Zoology and a BSc (Hons) from the University of the West Indies.

Fiona Nimmo Fiona Nimmo is an Associate Director with Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Ltd and has over 10 years’ experience in commercial fisheries, marine environmental and renewable energy consultancy. Fiona is an MSC Principle 2 expert and assessor and has worked on full and pre-assessments in the UK, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Spain and in the Asian region. She has worked on six MSC full assessments as the Principle 2 expert and has also adopted Team Leader responsibilities for one of these assessments. Fiona expertise includes the role that fisheries policy can play in mitigating against impact on environmental and ecological features. She has also undertaken a number of independent studies looking at MSC fisheries including a recent value chain analysis of the Scottish haddock supply chain to determine quantitative and qualitative benefits of a fishery being MSC certified. She also undertook work for the OECD examining the distribution and transmission of costs and benefits in different types of capture fisheries certification schemes, including the MSC. In other areas of expertise, Fiona leads Poseidon’s work in the renewable energy market having project managed EIAs for wind and tidal developments, and undertaken numerous commercial fisheries impact assessments for offshore wind and tidal EIAs, feasibility and scoping studies. Projects involve extensive consultation with the industry, data gathering, analyzing and quantification to determine the impacts of proposed developments on the commercial fisheries sector. This provides very practical experience in the use of economic impact assessment and valuation results by both the fishing industry and marine developers.

2.1.2 RBF Training Tristan Southall and Rob Blyth-Skyrme have been fully trained in the use of the MSC’s Risk Based Framework (RBF).

Page 10 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

3. Description of the Fishery Figure 3.1: Chart showing approximate positions of the national territorial limits 3.1 Unit(s) of Certification and scope of and fishing zones. certification sought Acoura Marine Ltd confirm that the fishery is within scope of the MSC certification sought for the assessment as defined1. Prior to providing a description of the fishery it is important to be clear about the precise extent of potential certification. The MSC Guidelines to Certifiers specify that the unit of certification is “The fishery or fish stock (biologically distinct unit) combined with the fishing method / gear and practice (= vessel(s) and / or individuals pursuing the fish of that stock)”. This clear definition is useful for both clients and assessors to categorically state what was included in the assessment, and what was not. This is also crucial for any repeat assessment visits, or if any additional vessels are wishing to join the certificate at a later date. The unit of certification for the fishery under consideration is as set out below. Please note that whilst the Unit of Certification details the full extent of what is being assessed, it is the full and complete Public Certification Report that precisely defines the exact nature of certification for this fishery. Table 3.1: The Unit of Assessment as defined for MSC certification.

Species: Atlantic Seabob Shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) Stock: Suriname Geographical area: Surinamese waters (FAO Statistical area 31) – seabob trawl zone as designated by annual Ministerial Decree (typically 10 - 15 Fathoms (approx. 18m – 27m) with extension east of Matapica to 18 fathoms). Harvest method: ‘Florida’ twin rig demersal shrimp trawl. Client Group: The client group includes the companies of Heiploeg Suriname and SAIL, the seabob vessels that are owned and operated by Heiploeg Seafoods and SAIL, and such other independently owned vessels as are nominated by either Heiploeg Suriname or SAIL as meeting their fishing and supply standards. Other Eligible Fishers: N/A

This Unit of Certification was used as it is compliant with client wishes for assessment coverage and in full conformity with MSC criteria for setting the Unit of Certification.

3.2 Overview of the fishery

3.2.1 Area Under Evaluation This assessment covers only those vessels and those catches as described above in the Unit of Certification – i.e. Surinamese twin rig demersal shrimp trawls, fishing for seabob Xiphopenaeus kroyeri in the designated seabob trawl zone within Surinamese waters. The designated seabob trawl zone is

1 Furthermore, the Suriname Seabob Fishery is not an enhanced fishery nor does the fishery feature any introduced species, therefore particular MSC policy considerations in relation to these special cases does not apply.

Page 11 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

stipulated as an appendix to the fishing license and is bounded by a line nominally equivalent to 10 fathom depth contour to a line nominally equivalent to 15 fathom depth contour (Figure 3.1). The inshore extent of the permitted fishing grounds is roughly 20km from shore (varying between approximately 15 – 35km offshore, depending on seabed profile). Inshore of this zone is a coastal artisanal fishing zone, where fishing with mobile gears is prohibited. Beyond the 15 fathom contour, trawl fishing is permitted with larger vessels and heavier trawl gear, including vessels from other nations, typically targeting either finfish of penaeus sp. Any catches of seabob from either the artisanal inshore fishery or the offshore trawl fishery are not covered by this assessment, although consideration of any seabob mortality resulting from these fisheries is considered as part of the Principle 1 assessment.

3.2.2 The Fishery Client The client for this certification is Heiploeg International BV, a Member of the Dutch ‘Parlevliet & Van der Plas’ (PP) Group. However, the Unit of Assessment includes 2 fishing operations in Suriname: Heiploeg Suriname and SAIL (Suriname American Industries Limited). Heiploeg Suriname and SAIL own all vessels covered by this assessment. Table 3.2: List of member vessels2 Vessel Name Vessel Vessel Year Made Vessel Vessel Registration Engine overall overall (PLN) power (hp) length (m) breadth (m) Heiploeg NOBLE STAR SB-63 365 1975 22.9 6.6 Suriname N.V EVENTIDE SB-60 365 1984 22 6.6 TROPICS SB-62 365 1984 22.9 6.6 SUNDOWNER SB-65 365 1984 22 6.6 COBIA SB-54 360 1976 20.1 6.6 ROCKSHRIMP SB-61 425 1983 20.7 6.6 NEPTUNE #7 SB-58 425 1976 21 6.6 NEPTUNE #5 SB-56 425 1975 20.9 6.6 NEPTUNE #2 SB-55 425 1976 20.9 6.6 NEPTUNE #6 SB-57 425 1975 20.9 6.6 NEPTUNE #8 SB-59 425 1976 20.9 6.6 WORLDFRIEND - 508 SB-68 385 1974 20.6 6.6 SAIL Sugam 23 SB - 74 425 1991 22.8 6.7 Se Chong -29 SB-70 425 1976 20.3 7 Sugam 35 SA-16 425 1974 20.8 7 Mona 81 SB-68 425 1975 20.9 7 Ranmar 5 SB-26 365 1988 20.3 7 Ranmar 7 SB-25 365 1988 20.3 7 Shin Wha 25 SB-49 425 1976 22.9 7 Cayenne Stephanie SA-118 425 1990 22.3 6.7 Cayenne Hadassa SA-117 425 1987 22.5 6.6 Shin Wha 35 SB 50 425 1976 22.9 7

2 An up to date vessel list can be obtained by contacting Acoura Marine Ltd. ([email protected] or +44(0)131 335 6662)

Page 12 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

3.2.3 History of the Fishery The Suriname seabob fishery is a relatively recent fishery, beginning with the licensing of 5 boats in 1995. Catches and fleet size grew to a peak of 30 licenses (although typically some licenses remained inactive on ‘standby’), occurring periodically since 2001 and 2008. Peak landings were of nearly 14,000t in 2003. Since 2008 there has been a 33% reduction in licenses, with 20 licenses being issued for the 2010 season. Since then a further 2 licenses have been issued. Since 2010, the level of fishing has been controlled by means of harvest control rule with the potential to limit days at sea, this has resulted in a reduction in landings. Key to the management and administration of the Suriname Seabob fishery has been the formal adoption, by means of Ministerial Approval, of the Seabob Fishery Management Plan in May 2010. This not only formally enshrines the harvest control rule and wider objectives of the fishery, but also details management and administrative processes, including the establishment of a Seabob Working Group (SWG), which first met in April 2010 and continues to be the principle forum for management discussion of the fishery. In June 2009 the Suriname Seabob fishery entered the MSC assessment process and was successfully certified against the MSC standard in November 2011. The client for the original assessment was Morubel, a Belgian processing company, at that time part of the Heiploeg Group. The 2 fishing operations covered by the original assessment were Guiana Seafoods (now Heiploeg Suriname) and Namoona (now SAIL).

3.2.4 Fishing Practices The Suriname Seabob vessels are outrigger trawlers with forward superstructure and aft working deck. The towing winch is located just aft of the superstructure with its axis along the centreline so that the warps from the drums feed directly to cap-rail bollards and then to the towing blocks at the ends of the outriggers. The trawl designs used by Suriname seabob trawlers have a low opening (less than 2 meters), with the wings attached to the upper and lower edge of wooden otter boards. The trawls have mesh sizes ranging from 57 mm in the body and wings, decreasing to 45mm at the codend. The trawls are always used on flat and smooth bottom substrates and therefore there is no requirement for rock- hopper bobbins, meaning that the gear remains comparatively light. In the Suriname fleet, a small "try net" is also used to quickly and easily assess the potential catch of shrimp – both before and periodically during the haul. Figure 3.2.1 Typical Suriname seabob demersal trawl vessel, showing b) configuration of gear and ‘try’ net

Source: Photo Southall. Line image adapted from FAO Gear-type Factsheet Four trawls (two of each side) are towed at the same time. These are towed from the ends of two outriggers, on port and on starboard side of the vessel, and the nets are towed by a single warp terminating in a crow-foot. The outrigger booms are at an angle of between 20° and 30° from horizontal. There are a number of reasons for using twin rig, such as:  more efficient - higher catch rate than a single rigging using a single trawl with a similar drag;  a wider net opening is possible with less drag;  multiple trawls work better on the bottom than one large trawl;

Page 13 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

 easier to manoeuvre (and sort) four small trawls. All nets are fitted with Turtle excluder devices (TED) and Bycatch Reduction Devices (BRD) (these are also a stipulated licence condition). The otter boards used by the trawl vessels are relatively light, manufactured from wood planking with a steel footing. In total, 4 otter doors are use with the twin rig configuration. When hauling the gear, the otter boards, the mid–trawl sledge and the nets remain suspended at the ends of the outriggers as the codends alone are taken aboard. This operation may be done by three or four men depending on the size of the trawls. The catch is sorted on board before being stored in ice below decks. Figure 3.2.2: a) Turtle Excluder Device, b) Bycatch Reduction Device & c) a typical trawl door.

Source: Photo Southall Trips typically last between 6 – 8 days, of which almost 2 days maybe spent steaming to and from fishing grounds. Vessels are typically ashore for a 2 day turn around before putting to sea again. Around 30 trips per year is perhaps average, with it being noted that the very best boats achieve a maximum of around 220 fishing days per year. Fishing trips typically comprise of around 40 hauls. Landings in the order of 10t are not unusual after trip. On landing, product is discharged to the respective private docks of the two processing companies, and transferred some 50m to the reception areas of the processing floors. Shrimp are then emptied on to conveyors passing in front of sorters for removal of debris, etc. Product is then fed to automatic peeling machines, which sort raw peeled meats by size grade, prior to freezing, packaging and export.

3.2.5 The Target Species The target species for the fishery under certification is Xiphopenaeus kroyeri. This report does not intend to provide a scientifically comprehensive description of the species. Interested readers should refer to sources that have been useful in compiling the following summary description of the species.

 FAO Species Factsheet: Figure 3.2.3: Computer http://www.fao.org/fishery/species/2600/en generated distribution maps for  http://www.sealifebase.org/summary/Xiphopenaeus- Xiphopenaeus kroyeri (Atlantic kroyeri.html seabob) The Atlantic seabob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri (Heller, 1862) is a decapod crustacean widely distributed in the Western Atlantic from North Carolina (U.S.A.) to southern Brazil (Holthius 1980). Suriname is in the central portion of the species distribution. Seabob are a marine and brackish species found in depths of 1 to 70 m, usually less than 27 m. They are epibenthic, with a preference for mud or sand and are most plentiful in areas near river estuaries (Holthius 1980). These areas are typically accompanied by high sedimentation and associated high nutrient introductions. The species is a relatively fast growing species, growing to a maximum of around 140mm although typical adult sizes are Source: www.aquamaps.org considerably smaller (with females significantly larger than males).

Page 14 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Typical lifespan for the species is around 18 months with maturity being reached relatively quickly, at around 24mm (carapace length) for females. Estimates from French Guiana refer to slightly larger sizes. The world catch of Xiphopenaeus kroyeri increased from less than 10,000 t in the 1960s to 52,651 t in 2012. In 2013 the world catch was 49,217 t with the highest landings in Guyana (23,400 t) (FAO, 2014). Landings in Suriname in 2013 were approximately 8033 t (FAO, 2014).

Page 15 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

3.3 Principle One: Target Species Background Principle 1 of the Marine Stewardship Council standard states that: A fishery must be conducted in a manner that does not lead to over fishing or depletion of the exploited populations and, for those populations that are depleted, the fishery must be conducted in a manner that demonstrably leads to their recovery. Principle 1 covers all fishing activity on the entire target species stock - not just the fishery undergoing certification. However, the fishery under certification would be expected to meet all management requirements, such as providing appropriate data and complying with controls, therefore demonstrably not adding to problems even if the problems will not cause the certification to fail. In the following section the key factors which are relevant to Principle 1 are outlined.

3.3.1 Biology and ecology in Suriname waters Stocks of Xiphopenaeus kroyeri have not been defined at a regional level and examination of available data (morphometrics, CPUE indices and size structure) in 2009 (CRFM 2009) indicated there was no evidence that seabob in Suriname and Guyana were the same stock. To be precautionary Suriname seabob were assumed to be separate from Guyana seabob and treated as such during stock assessments. Planned research on population genetics of Atlantic seabob (VLI-RUOS, 2016) may point to the need for alternative hypotheses of stock structure that will need to be considered. In the first MSC assessment (FCI 2011) there was reference to the dearth of studies on seabob biology, particularly in Suriname waters. Since that time, at least partially in response to the MSC assessment, there has been an impressive amount of research done on the population biology of Suriname seabob and on the ecology of the Suriname coastal zone (e.g. Perez 2014, Kerkhove 2014, Quilez 2014, Torrez 2015, Willems 2016). Seabob is a short-live species with females that live longer and grow larger than males. Off Suriname, Torrez (2015) estimated longevities (95% of the asymptotic length) of 79 weeks (1.5 y) for males and 122 weeks (2.3 y) for females. The study estimated male carapace size at first maturity (50%) at 14.4 mm but for various reasons could not reliably estimate female size at onset of maturity. Off southern Brazil, the estimates of longevity were similar to those off Suriname. Castilho et al. (2015) estimated lifespans to be 1.4 y for males and 2.1 y for females. Off southern Brazil Atlantic seabob reach 50% sexual maturity at 14.8 mm (males) and 15.5 mm (females), Seabob are a dominant species in Suriname’s near shore epibenthos. Willems et al. (2015) reported 3 assemblages through analysis of multispecies data from seasonal trawl surveys on shallow-deep transects off Suriname in 2012-13. Closest to shore was a species-poor coastal assemblage from 6- 20 m in turbid water that was dominated by Atlantic seabob. Between 20 and 30 m was a transition assemblage characterized by the absence of seabob. Near the 30 m contour sediments a more diverse offshore assemblage was identified, coincident with coarser sediments and higher water transparency. Off Suriname and elsewhere early life history stages tend to be nearer to shore, with larger reproductive animals in deeper waters. It is hypothesized that adults move offshore to spawn and planktonic larvae return to nearshore nurseries to settle and grow (e.g. Castro et al. 2005). Torrez (2015) sampled postlarval, juvenile and adult seabob together with environmental factors on an inshore-offshore transect in 2014-15. Postlarvae and small juveniles were more present in the shallow inshore zone, while large juveniles and adults were more in the deeper offshore zone. Compared to the offshore stations, the inshore stations were characterized by a lower salinity, higher temperature, lower water clarity and more suspended matter. Studies of the commercial catch of seabob corroborate this difference in distribution with life stage. The largest individuals and gravid females occurred in the deeper part of the fishing zone (29-35 m) (Perez, 2014). Since the directed seabob fishery in Suriname is limited to waters deeper than 10 fathoms (18 m), early life history stages are given some protection from trawls used by the directed fishery. With regard to the timing of seabob reproduction and recruitment off Suriname, Torrez (2015) reported two recruitment events (increased postlarvae density) in the inshore zone. The main event was in July and a smaller event occurred in October. The bottom temperature peaked during the main recruitment event in the in- and offshore zone. Off Brazil, recruitment and abundance of reproductive females were positively correlated with water temperature and the extent of finer grained bottom sediments. Recruits (4-13 mm CL) peaked in different months in different years but the events occurred between April and September.

Page 16 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Costa et al. (2007) found that sediment type, salinity, and temperature are among the most important variables affecting the spatial and seasonal distribution of this species off Brazil. Off Suriname, seasonal differences in commercial catch rate are suggestive of seasonal changes in distribution. CPUE was higher in the fishing zone during the rainy season indicating a higher abundance of seabob in the directed fishing zone between 10 and 15-18 fathoms depth (18 and 27-33 m) (Perez, 2014). This is consistent with observations of other brackish water fauna that tend to move further from shore when nearshore salinity decreases due to increased river outflow (Perez, 2014).

3.3.2 Trophic status of seabob in Suriname waters Recent studies by Willems (2016) and Kerkhove (2014) highlight the trophic importance of seabob to the nearshore benthic ecosystem of Suriname. Kerkhove (2014) analysed stomach contents of 60 seabob from larger size classes. In total 20 prey items were found, with the main items unidentifiable organic detritus, followed by copepods and a planktonic shrimp (Lucifer faxoni). An ontogenetic diet shift between life stages was apparent with post-larvae and juveniles having a higher contribution of smaller prey like copepods in their diet than adults, which were more dependent on larger prey. Willems (2016) reported that gravimetrically, seabob was the third most important prey type, contributing 11% to the diet of the demersal fish community by weight. Most seabob found in the stomachs were juveniles (carapace length on average 10 ± 5.1 mm). Postlarvae occurred regularly in the stomachs of some species. Willems (2016) concluded that Xiphopenaeus kroyeri locally constitutes an important prey species for higher trophic level demersal fishes. Together with the fact that seabob feeds on a variety of low-trophic level species, he concluded that the study results supported the hypothesis that seabob is the ‘waist’ through which energy is channelled up the benthic food web of the inner Suriname Shelf. Clearly therefore Atlantic seabob are an important Low Trophic Level (LTL) species off Suriname but consideration of various criteria indicates that they do not meet MSC criteria as a “key low trophic stock” (key LTL). Designation of key LTL status means that reference points must be more precautionary than in the single-species context. In the case of Suriname Atlantic seabob, the reference points are likely above the default recommendations but these would need further examination were it to be concluded that the species met the MSC definition of key LTL. To be treated as a key LTL stock under MSC requires consideration of species type and the stock must meet at least two of the following three criteria (i) high trophic connectivity (is there significant trophic dependence of predators on this one stock), (ii) a large volume of energy passing between trophic levels passes through the stock and (iii) there are few other species at this trophic level through with energy can pass (i.e. is the ecosystem wasp-waisted?). With regard to species type, seabob shrimp are not one of the species types defined as “key LTL stocks” for the purposes of MSC assessment (see Box CB1 of MSC Certification Requirements v 1.3). This does not disqualify seabob from identification as key LTL, but it means additional criteria must be met. If a species is not listed in Box CB1, then it must meet two of the above three criteria in its adult phase. In addition, it must feed predominantly on plankton, be characterized by small body size, early maturity, high fecundity and short life span and form dense schools. Seabob shrimp would meet most of these criteria although benthic shrimp are not known to form dense schools although they may aggregate for reproduction. With regard to trophic connectivity, an index recommended in the MSC guidance is SURF (Supportive Role to Fishery ecosystems). This index takes account of the strength of connections between species. Index values > 0.005 would normally be considered key LTL; values less than 0.001 would normally be considered not key LTL. Willems (2016) calculated the SURF index and three prey types had values >0.001: unidentified Pisces sp. (0.008), digested debris (0.008) and Seabob (0.003). Using this criterion, Suriname seabob are intermediate. However, the MSC guidance stipulates that the criteria must be met in the adult phase. Given that most of the seabob found in the stomachs by Willems (2016) were juveniles, the SURF index for adults only would be lower than 0.003. With regard to criterion (ii) (a large volume of energy passing between trophic levels passes through the stock), a food web model would be best to evaluate this, but such a model does not currently exist. Although catch levels are not directly related to likely importance in energy transfer, catch size can approximate ecosystem importance and LTL stocks with small catches (< 50,000 t annually) would not normally be considered key LTL stocks unless they are taken from unusually small ecosystems (MSC guidance doc 1.3). Given the catch of Suriname seabob is < 10,000 t, and the Suriname seabob coastal

Page 17 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

zone is not a closed ecosystem and cannot be considered small, the stock does not meet this criterion. With regard to criterion (iii) (“wasp-waisted ecosystem”) there is some evidence that the system is configured this way and that seabob is unique in its role (Willems 2016). Again a food web model might help to confirm this. On balance, and given that the criteria apply to the adult phase, Suriname seabob does not meet the MSC criteria of a key LTL species. This should continue to be evaluated in light of new studies or models. Currently the target reference point at 111% of the estimated BMSY exceeds the SG80 level of “consistent with BMSY”.

3.3.3 Stock Status & Assessment Methodology Between 1996 (the year when directed trawling for Atlantic seabob began off Suriname) and 2008 there were several efforts to assess stock status at regional assessment workshops but it was not until 2009 that an assessment provided an indication of stock status relative to biomass and fishing mortality reference points (FCI, 2011). The 2009 stock assessment (CRFM 2009) used a logistic biomass dynamics model. Logistic models treat the population as a whole and do not incorporate biological information regarding the growth rate of individuals, maturity or natural mortality rate. Logistic models make a number of assumptions that need ongoing verification but demand fewer data than age- or length-structured models, and therefore have been widely used in shrimp assessments (Gillett, 2008). The 2009 stock assessment provided estimates of BMSY (Biomass at maximum sustainable yield), replacement yield, current biomass relative to biomass at BMSY, and current fishing mortality relative to fishing mortality at BMSY (CRFM, 2009). The assessment indicated that the stock was not overfished (B/BMSY > 1.0) and overfishing was not occurring (F/FMSY < 1.0). This conclusion continues to the current time based on monitoring of the biomass indicator; catch per unit effort (CPUE). The 2009 assessment used Bayesian methods to estimate various parameters, and accounted for uncertainty by providing the lower percentile (5th), median estimate and the upper percentile (95th). The 2009 assessment utilized catch and effort data from 1989 to 2008. In 2009 the lower percentile for current biomass relative to biomass at BMSY (B/BMSY) was 1.12 (CRFM 2009). Stock assessments conducted in 2011 and 2012 addressed some data quality issues and added the most recent years of data and the conclusions were similar to the original assessment and in fact suggested the stock was in slightly better condition. Management advice from the 2009 assessment was to adopt reference points and a harvest control rule (HCR) within the fisheries management plan to ensure that the fishing is sustainable. Provisional reference points and a harvest control rule were proposed based on BMSY. The proposed limit reference point: was biomass at 60% of the MSY estimate; a target reference point of 120% of the BMSY estimate was recommended. In terms of the HCR, CPUE was used as a biomass proxy and the CPUE expected at MSY was 1.48 t per day at sea. The limit reference point corresponded to a CPUE of 0.89 t per sea day. The 2010 fishery management plan for Suriname Seabob (LVV 2010) adopted the proposed limit reference point, a target of 111% of BMSY (CPUE of 1.65 t per day at sea) and a trigger at the CPUE corresponding to BMSY. The current HCR is based on limits to annual effort (days at sea) which are to be adjusted downwards if the HCR CPUE declines below the trigger. The HCR is described in the Suriname seabob fishery management plan as follows. The number of days-at- sea is determined as: • 5100 days-at-sea in case the current CPUE equals or is above the trigger CPUE • A linear decreasing value on the basis of the formula: • Number of days-at-sea = (current CPUE – Limit CPUE)*8.625 • Zero (the fishery is closed) in case the current CPUE equals or is above the limit CPUE (0.89) • The trigger CPUE shall be determined on 1.48t per day-at-sea. The current CPUE for each year shall be calculated as the average of the year prior to the current year. The CPUE shall be calculated as the total landing divided by the total number of days-at-sea of the fleet.

Page 18 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

It is important to note that the number of days at sea is a maximum and in the last 5 calendar years the actual number of days at sea has not exceeded 4300. It is also important to note that the plan hinges on consistent and reliable measures of CPUE. In 2011 the 2009 seabob assessment was updated with the corrected landings and effort time series and the current HCR for Suriname seabob was tested against the new assessment to ensure it continued to achieve its objectives (CRFM 2011). The HCR was found to be robust to the changes in the assessment that occurred. The B/BMSY estimate (lower percentile) was 1.19. Table 3.3. Comparison between CPUE (t/day at sea) reference points from 2009 and 2011 stock assessments. The trigger reference point is the expected CPUE at MSY. The 2009 values are used in the harvest control rule, which the 2011 stock assessment suggests are precautionary. The 2011 are more accurate estimates of the appropriate values, so reference point values higher than these are more precautionary. From CRFM, 2011, p. 89.

2009 2011 Limit 0.89 0.83 Trigger 1.48 1.38 Target 1.65 1.66

In 2012, the stock assessment model was updated and fitted to the total catch from 1989-2011 and catch and effort from 1998-2011. Results were similar to the stock assessment in 2011 and appeared robust to likely levels of artisanal landings which were not included in the catch data. The lower percentile for B/BMSY was 1.33 in 2012 (CRFM 2012). Values of the CPUE index from 2012 to early 2016 were made available (LVV, pers. comm); earlier values were available in a graphic. Figure 3.3. Total Atlantic seabob catch for Suriname from 1998-2015 and HCR calendar year CPUE (12 month CPUE in December of each year), from 2009-2015, together with HCR target and trigger. Landings data are from FAO 2014 except for 2015 (from LVV pers. comm.). They do not include any artisanal catches. HCR CPUE data are from LVV (pers. comm.).

The stock is fluctuating around its target reference point in recent years. Figure 3.3 considers the calendar year HCR CPUE. In considering the 12-month HCR calculated on a monthly basis for the 2012 to 2015 calendar years, the HCR CPUE was above the target in 29 months and below the target in 19 months. Of some concern is the fact that the below target HCR CPUEs were observed in a recent period (June 2014 to Dec 2015). This concern is eased with the facts that (i) there is strong evidence

Page 19 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

that the cause is not reduced seabob biomass but reduced catchability (a measure of the proportion of the population captured by the gear, not to be confused with commercial catch rate); (ii) during this 19 month period the HCR CPUE averaged close to 90% of the target and was usually above the trigger. Stakeholder evidence is that an influx of sargassum (floating brown alga) in some months clogged the gear, reducing the seabob catch. This influx of sargassum was seen throughout the Caribbean (Doyle and Franks 2015). In the first few months of 2016, seabob monthly CPUE increased and as of the end of Feb 2016, the HCR CPUE was only slightly below target (1.64 vs target of 1.65). Although effort (annual days at sea) has never exceeded what is called for by the HCR, there appears to be some confusion in how the HCR should be applied. For example, it is not clear whether the HCR was referenced when the12-month CPUE dropped below the trigger in Dec 2014, but in 2015 the days at sea did not go above that required through application of the HCR. The steps taken to reduce effort in Nov 2015 are applauded as they are more precautionary than required by the HCR, but there should be documentation of how and why this step was taken, and why there was apparently no reference to the HCR in early 2015, when the 2014 HCR CPUE dipped below the trigger. It is therefore concluded that the exploitation levels are effectively being controlled but that the levels are not set in strict adherence to the tested harvest control rules. This may be due to some confusion over how the HCR should be applied (Medley, P. pers. comm, email of May 10, 2016.). A new stock assessment of Suriname seabob is currently underway with the objective of applying the same size- and sex structured model as that used for Guyana seabob (CRFM 2013). Given that this model accounts for within population differences in growth, mortality and reproduction, it should increase confidence in the assessment of stock status and estimation of reference points. An update on the progress of the work as of Mar 11 2016 (Medley, P., pers. comm.) indicates the new stock assessment suggests the stock is not “under-exploited” (or “over-exploited”). To fit the model to the Suriname seabob data requires more work than originally anticipated and the new stock assessment will not likely be completed before the autumn of 2016.

3.3.4 History of fishing and management The first fishing company began a directed fishery for seabob in Suriname waters in 1996 and a second company joined the fishery in 1997. At that time, they had fleets of 15 and 8 vessels which were former shrimp trawlers (Charlier et al. 2000). The fleet had a maximum of 30 licences (some inactive) between 2001 and 2008, with reductions in the number of licences from 2009-2011 (FCI, 2011). In 2016 there were 22 licences. The management plan with harvest strategy were codified in the 2010 fishery management plan (LVV, 2010). The high level stock management objectives are: An ecological responsible and sustainable fishing, with no or limited effects on: 1. the target species, the sea-bob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri; 2. the marine ecosystem of the target species; 3. the breeding and nursery grounds of the young fishes and shrimp species To meet these and the more specific objectives, there is a suite of measures to control fishing, plus regular monitoring, a harvest control rule, periodic stock assessments and focussed research to address concerns related to the effects of the seabob fishery on the ecosystem. A Seabob Working Group meets regularly to discuss fishery status and recommend management decisions. Management measures include restriction to a specific fishing area (the seabob fishing zone begins at 10 fathoms and extends to depths of 15-18 fathoms), a limit on the number of licences, limitations on fishing gear and on the number of fishing days (“sea days”) and a requirement that all catches are landed at locations sanctioned by LVV (Suriname Fisheries Department). Monitoring includes ongoing recording and update of catch and effort data to calculate the HCR CPUE, monitoring of sea days via catch records and a Vessel Moniotring System (VMS) (required for each vessel), and monitoring of bycatch by periodic observed sea trips. There are government enforcement vessels to insure only licenced vessels are in seabob fishing zone and to insure licenced seabob vessels are in compliance with regulations. Bycatch is monitored by periodic observed sea trips and various gear modifications have been put in place to reduce bycatch. VMS on vessels allows ground truthing of the number of reported fishing days and locations.

Page 20 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Evaluations have been made of seabob catch by fleets other than the seabob trawler fleet. Extensive research has been conducted to reduce bycatch and to understand the role of the seabob in the ecosystem. One of the concerns of the initial MSC assessment (FCI 2011) was the incomplete data on landings of seabob by other fleets. Since 2011 data have been gathered on four potential sources of removals outside the directed seabob fishery: the artisanal fishery, the Penaeus fishery, the finfish trawl fishery and IUU catches. Of these, the artisanal fishery is the only one that is significant compared to the directed fishery and a questionnaire survey has been developed that will be conducted quarterly in the future.

Page 21 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

3.4 Principle Two: Ecosystem Background Principle 2 of the Marine Stewardship Council standard states that: Fishing operations should allow for the maintenance of the structure, productivity, function and diversity of the ecosystem (including habitat and associated dependent ecologically related species) on which the fishery depends. The following section of the report highlights some of the key characteristics of the fishery under assessment with regard to its wider impact on the ecosystem. Detailed catch data from the Suriname seabob fishery were made available to the assessment team during the reassessment site visit (T. Willems, pers. comm). These data comprised information from 68 catch samples taken both during day and night on six commercial fishing trips between April and November 2014. Summary statistics are shown in Table 3.4. The determination of a species being retained or bycatch was made following consultation with the client and members of the crew. Table 3.4: Detailed catch data for the seabob fishery, 2014 (T.Willems, pers. comm). Yellow highlighting indicates the target species, green highlighting indicates retained species, and peach highlighting indicates bycatch species. The status of retained and bycatch species is assessed by RBF. No ETP species were recorded.

Average Catch % Cumulative Species Scoring Area CPUE by weight % Xiphopenaeus kroyeri Seabob P1 Target 113.36 55.33 55.33 Stellifer microps Smalleye stardrum Bycatch (main) 24.34 11.88 67.21 Scyphozoa spp. Scyphozoa jellyfish Bycatch (minor) 16.73 8.17 75.38 Cynoscion jamaicensis Jamaica weakfish Bycatch (main) 11.56 5.64 81.02 Macrodon ancylodon Bangamary Retained (minor) 5.14 2.51 83.53 Dasyatis guttata Longnose stingray Bycatch (minor) 3.50 1.71 85.24 Trichiurus lepturus Largehead hairtail Bycatch (minor) 3.02 1.47 86.71 Stellifer rastrifer Rake stardrum Bycatch (minor) 2.63 1.29 88.00 Cynoscion virescens Green Weakfish Retained (minor) 2.45 1.20 89.20 Larimus breviceps Shorthead Drum Bycatch (minor) 2.19 1.07 90.27 Nebris microps Smalleye croaker Retained (minor) 2.03 0.99 91.26 Bagre bagre Coco sea catfish Bycatch (minor) 1.55 0.76 92.02 Paralonchurus elegans Blackfin croaker Bycatch (minor) 1.41 0.69 92.71 Paralonchurus Banded croaker Bycatch (minor) 1.21 0.59 93.30 brasiliensis Dasyatis geijskesi Sharpsnout stingray Bycatch (minor) 1.20 0.58 93.88 Gymnura micrura Smooth butterfly ray Bycatch (minor) 1.16 0.57 94.45 Anchoa spinifer Spicule anchovy Bycatch (minor) 1.12 0.55 95.00 Symphurus plagusia Duskycheek tonguefish Bycatch (minor) 0.92 0.45 95.45 Caranx hippos Crevalle jack Bycatch (minor) 0.89 0.44 95.89 Farfantepenaeus subtilis Carpas shrimp Retained (minor) 0.69 0.34 96.23 Bycatch 56 other species 0.13 3.77 100.00 (negligible)

The MSC requires that the catch is divided into Principle 1 target, and Principle 2 retained, bycatch and ETP species categories, with the retained and bycatch species also needing to be divided into either ‘main’ or ‘minor’ categories. GCB3.5.2. (MSC 2013b) notes:

Page 22 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

“Both SG60 and SG80 use the qualifier ‘main retained species’. ‘Main’ allows consideration of the weight, value or vulnerability of species caught. For instance, a species that comprises less than 5% of the total catch by weight may normally be considered to be a minor species (i.e., not ‘main’) in the catch, unless it is of high value to the fisher or of particular vulnerability, or if the total catch of the fishery is large, in which case even 5% may be a considerable catch. A species that normally comprises 20% or more of the total catch by weight would almost always be considered a ‘main’ retained species.” It is noted that elasmobranchs, as species that are typically relatively slow growing, late to mature, and long lived, may be considered to be ‘of particular vulnerability’ according to the MSC requirements, although the MSC provides no guidance in the CRv.1.3 standard as to the percentage of the catch that should be used in considering such species to be ‘main’. The CR v2.0 requirements do, though, provide a 2% threshold for considering ‘less resilient’ species to be ‘main’ (MSC 2014, SA 3.4.2). The Suriname seabob reassessment team was guided by this approach in determining ‘main’ or ‘minor’ species, and considered any species comprising <2.0% of the catch to be minor. The catch data showed that 56 species individually comprised ≤0.3% of the catch, which was determined to be a negligible quantity. As such, these species are not considered further here or in scoring. Regarding catches of species other than seabob, as noted in the first assessment report, the Suriname seabob industry voluntarily instigated a bycatch reduction programme in 2008 in an effort to minimise the catch of species other than seabob. The programme involved development and testing a square mesh panel type bycatch reduction device (BRD). Results indicated that an overall reduction of bycatch during fishing trials of 12-40% was achieved. Subsequently, the use of the BRD in seabob fisheries has been a condition of the seabob fishing licence for all vessels since January 2010. Efforts to further reduce bycatch levels have been undertaken periodically, and further efforts are planned, in particular through the fishery’s participation in the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) funded REBYC II LAC (Reducing bycatch in Latin American and Caribbean trawl fisheries) project. A number of other measures have been implemented that make an effective contribution to limiting the scale of bycatch in the fishery, or controlling its potential impact. These measures, some of which are conditions of the seabob fishing licence, are also highlighted and contained in a revised Fleet Code of Practice that has been introduced on all seabob vessels. Most significantly, the fishery is spatially constrained to the narrow band between approximately 18 - 30 m. Sensitive inshore nursery and feeding grounds are thus protected, as are the juveniles of many species that use these areas. The mandatory use of turtle excluder devices (TEDs) with a minimum bar spacing of 4” in trawls has been shown to be effective at eliminating larger rays, larger sharks and larger fish from trawl nets. The use of ‘try nets’ by seabob vessels allow skippers to monitor catch levels for seabob and bycatch in real time during the fishing operation, which facilitates an early cessation of the fishing operation if catch rates of seabob are low or bycatch rates are deemed to be excessive.

3.4.1 Retained species The data presented in Table 3.4 show that there were then no main retained species, but bangamary (Macrodon ancylodon – 2.5%), green weakfish (Cynoscion virescens – 1.2%) and smalleye croaker (Nebris microps – 1.0%), were retained and taken in minor quantities, as well as very small quantities of Carpas shrimp (Farfantepenaeus subtilis – 0.3%). No data on stock status were available, and so the risk-based framework (RBF) was employed for scoring. The Assessment Team assumed a worst case scenario outcome for a Scale-Intensity- Consequence Analysis (SICA) (i.e., that SICA scores of 3 – high risk - were achieved – CC2.3.6.7, MSC 2013a) and therefore undertook a more in depth Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) for retained species. The PSA data for retained species are provided in Appendix 1.2 in Table A1.2.1, with the scoring provided in Table A1.2.3.

3.4.2 Bycatch species There were two main bycatch species, smalleye stardrum (Stelifer microps – 11.9%) and Jamaica weakfish (Cynoscion jamaicensis – 5.6%), while Scyphozoa jellyfish (8.2%) as a group was considered to be minor (Table 3.4). Seventeen other species were considered to be minor bycatch species, including longnose stingray (Dasyatis guttata – 1.7%), largehead hairtail (Trichiurus lepturus – 1.5%), rake stardrum (Stellifer

Page 23 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

rastrifer – 1.3%) and shorthead drum (Larimus breviceps – 1.1%) as the only species to comprise more than 1% of the catch. As for retained species, no data on stock status were available, and so the risk-based framework RBF was employed for scoring. Again, the Assessment Team assumed a worst case scenario outcome (high risk) from the Scale-Intensity-Consequence Analysis (SICA), and undertook a more robust Productivity- Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) for all the bycatch species comprising >0.3% of the catch. The PSA data for bycatch species are provided in Appendix 1.2, in Table A1.2.2, with the scoring provided in Table A1.2.3.

3.4.3 ETP Species Endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species are defined as species that are recognised by national ETP legislation, or as species listed on Appendix 1 of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), (unless it can be shown that the particular stock of the CITES listed species impacted by the fishery under assessment is not endangered). No ETP species were recorded in the 2014 catch sample. A number of species that are ETP, through being listed on CITES Appendix I, occur in the area targeted by the Suriname seabob fishery and have the potential to interact with the fishery. The use of a type- approved TED in the nets used in the Suriname seabob fishery minimises the potential for large animals to be taken – this includes all but small, immature individuals of the following ETP species: • Smalltooth sawfish – Pristis pectinata (CITES Appendix I, Western Atlantic population – International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Critically Endangered). The native range of the smalltooth sawfish extends across the coastal tropical Atlantic, from Argentina to North Carolina in the West, including the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico, and from Namibia to Gibraltar in the East (http://www.fishbase.org/summary/2057 ). It’s shape and size makes it particularly vulnerable to capture in trawls and gillnets, but discussions during the site visit indicated that there was no memory of any sawfish ever having been taken in the Suriname seabob fishery. • Largetooth sawfish – Pristis pristis (CITES Appendix I, Western Atlantic population – IUCN Critically Endangered). The western Atlantic subpopulation of largetooth sawfish were once found from Uruguay to the USA, but as with smalltooth sawfish, this species inhabits freshwater, estuarine and nearshore waters and is very vulnerable to capture in gillnets and trawls. There is relatively little information on population status, but this species is currently thought to occur mainly in freshwater habitats in Central and South America (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/43508845/0 ). Again, discussions during the site visit indicated that there was no memory of any sawfish ever having been taken in the Suriname seabob fishery • Leatherback turtle – Dermochelys coriacea (CITES Appendix I, Northwest Atlantic population – IUCN Least Concern). The range of the Northwest Atlantic subpopulation of leartherback turtle extends north from a line between Natal on the coast of Brazil and Benin, Africa, to a line between Newfoundland Canada, and Scotland, including the Mediterranean. There are nesting beaches within Suriname, for example at Matapica and within the Galibi Nature Reserve in northeastern Suriname; the subpopulation overall is estimated to be increasing (20% over the last three generations) and is classified as ‘Least Concern’ by the IUCN (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/46967827/0 ). While leatherback turtles may pass through the TEDs, there were no reports made to the reassessment team of leatherback turtles being taken in the Suriname seabob fishery. • Hawksbill turtle – Eretmochelys imbricata (CITES Appendix I – IUCN Critically Endangered). The hawksbill turtle is found throughout the world’s tropical waters, although there are genetic differences between populations in the Indo-Pacific and the Atlantic (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/8005/0 ). Hawksbill turtles nest in Suriname, but understanding hawksbill turtle population dynamics is complicated by their dispersed nesting behaviour. The shell of hawksbill turtle is prized as it can be polished and made in to jewellery and decorative items, so the animals are targeted in some areas, and the global hawksbill turtle population appears to be declining. There were no reports made to the reassessment team of hawksbill turtles being taken in the Suriname seabob fishery,

Page 24 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

although there would be no record of animals passing through the nets and escaping via the TEDs. • Green turtle – Chelonia mydas (CITES Appendix I – IUCN Endangered) Similar to the hawksbill turtle, the green turtle is found throughout the world’s tropical and subtropical waters. Green turtles also nest in Suriname, although the proportion of the population which nests in any year is variable, complicating the assessment of population status (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/4615/0 ). Nevertheless, the data indicate that the green turtle population globally has declined, with egg poaching being a major issue, as well as mortality resulting from capture in different fisheries. No green turtles were recorded in the 2014 Suriname seabob catch data available to the reassessment team, but a single green turtle was observed to have been caught in a try net (T. Willems, pers. comm.) during the fishery. However, because this gear is used to check the grounds for shrimp abundance and is retrieved after a short period (≈15 minutes), the turtle was released alive and active. • Olive ridley turtle – Lepidochelys olivacea (CITES Appendix I – IUCN Vulnerable). Olive ridley turtles are the most abundant sea turtle but, and this species again has a circum global range, with populations in the Western Atlantic extending along the coast of Brazil to central America and the Caribbean islands to Cuba. Genetic analyses indicate that there is a high degree of inter-rookery migration between animals from Brazil and Suriname, although this is likely to be over long time scales as mark-recapture experiments indicate the populations are isolated (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/11534/0 ). Bycatch in Suriname shrimp fisheries was previously highlighted as a significant cause of mortality for olive ridley turtles in the region, but the use of TEDs now minimises the risk from the Suriname seabob fishery, and no catches of any turtle species was recorded in the 2014 data. • Guiana dolphin – Sotalia guianensis (CITES Appendix I – IUCN Data Deficient). Guiana dolphin is a riverine, estuarine and nearshore species, which ranges along the Western Atlantic coast from southern Brazil to Guatemala. There is little information on population structure and status for the Guiana dolphin; although the species appears relatively abundant in many parts of its range, estimates of absolute or relative abundance, such as minimum number sighted, encounter rate, or estimated minimum density, are available only for small areas (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/181359/0 ). The nearshore habits of Guiana dolphin possibly protect this species from interactions with the Suriname seabob fishery to some extent, although the use of TEDs should also minimise the potential for capture. No dolphins were reported in the 2014 catch data. • West Indian manatee – Trichechus manatus (CITES Appendix I, IUCN Endangered). The range of the Antillean subspecies of West Indian manatee extends across riverine and coastal systems from the Bahamas to Salvador, Brazil, including the Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico. The population is estimated to consists of less than 2,500 individuals (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22103/0 ). The main threats to this species include habitat degradation and loss and directed hunting, as well as accidental capture in fishing gears. The nearshore habits of West Indian manatee should again protect this species from interactions with the Suriname seabob fishery to some extent, although the use of TEDs should also minimise the potential for capture. No manatees were reported in the 2014 catch data. Overall, the Suriname seabob fishery does not occur in areas that are known to be critical for any ETP species, although it is clear that if TEDs weren’t used within the trawl nets then captures of some ETP species, in particular the turtles, would be more likely. Data collected over a number of years, in particular from the US and Australian shrimp fisheries, demonstrate that the use of TEDs is effective in minimising the impact (including sublethal effects) of shrimp fisheries on ETP species (e.g., Brewer et al. 2006, Crowder et al. 1995, Griffiths et al., 2006, Lewison et al. 2003, NMFS undated).

3.4.4 Habitat The seabed habitats of Surinamese shelf waters are mainly sedimentary in nature because of the fine particles that are carried into coastal waters by the Amazon River and other major sources, as well as by local Suriname rivers including the Maroni, Commewinje, Suriname, Saramacca and Coppename. The shallow inshore areas adjacent to river mouths tend to be characterised by very soft sediments that form banks of mud. These banks can change in size, shape and location in time, and are believed to

Page 25 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

generally move with the prevailing Guyana Current in a north-easterly direction along the Brazil-Guianas shelf. Offshore areas are generally characterised by firmer sediments and seabeds mainly comprise areas of sand, clay and clay with silt (Figure 3.4.1). Occasional biogenic and geogenic reefs are known to occur within Surinamese waters, mainly outside of the areas trawled by the seabob fleet.

Figure 3.4.1: Map of Surinamese waters showing the general distribution and extent of the mainly sedimentary seabed habitats. Source: Lowe-McConnell 1962

Although the reassessment team is not aware of comprehensive mapping of Suriname coastal habitats having been undertaken recently, work by Willem et al. (2015a) has provided additional detail on coastal habitats, and supports the findings of work undertaken previously by Lowe-McConnell (1962). This new work showed that there are three spatially distinct species assemblages present across the nearshore to offshore environment off Suriname (Figure 3.4.2). It found a species-poor coastal assemblage inshore, within the muddy, turbid-water zone (6–20 m depth), a transition assemblage from approximately 20-30 m, with epibenthic species typically found in either the coastal or offshore assemblages, while near the 30 m isobath, sediments were much coarser (median grain size on average 345 ± 103 mm vs. 128 ± 53 mm in the coastal assemblage) and water transparency was much higher (on average 7.6 ± 3.5 m vs. 2.4 ± 2.1 m in the coastal assemblage). In the offshore zone, a diverse assemblage was found, characterized by brittlestars, a variety of crab species, seastars and hermit crabs. Although the epibenthic community was primarily structured in a nearshore to offshore gradient related to depth, sediment grain size and sediment total organic carbon content, a longitudinal (west-east) gradient was apparent as well. The zones in the eastern part of the Suriname coastal shelf seemed to be more widely stretched along the on-offshore gradient. The Suriname seabob fishery is limited to those parts of Surinamese waters that are 18-30 m deep. Waters shallower than 18 m are closed to seabob trawling in order to protect the inshore artisanal fishery, as well as sensitive sub-tidal communities such as seagrass beds, and important nursery and juvenile fish and invertebrate foraging grounds. Willem et al. (2015a) noted that seabob did not occur in economically viable concentrations outside of the 30 m isobath.

Page 26 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Figure 3.4.2: Map of the inner Suriname continental shelf with indication of the major estuaries. Dots represent the sampling sites at 5 depths (6, 13, 20, 27, 34 m) along three transects (Source: Willems et al. 2015a).

Because of the nature of the seabed habitat where seabob is targeted, the trawl gear used is relatively lightweight. The trawl doors used are mainly constructed of wood with steel skids along the lower edge, while tickler chains may be used ahead of a relatively light ground rope made of combination wire. Seabob are not known to burrow deeply into the seabed, and like many shrimp species they are easily stimulated to flee their burrows by the vibrations of approaching trawl gear. This means that it is relatively easy to catch seabob, and there is no need for towed fishing gears to penetrate the surface layers of the seabed in order to work efficiently. The seabed habitat in the fishing areas is highly unlikely to be sensitive to trawl impacts due to its sedimentary nature and mobility, and the potential for negative trawling related impacts must be considered in the context of any underlying natural variability in seabed habitats. Accordingly, species assemblages are likely to comprise mainly of short lived, fast growing species with rapid regeneration times. Nevertheless, the potential for the seabob fishery to have serious or irreversible consequences for seabed habitats off Suriname is constrained by a range of factors, in particular that the fishery comprises only 22 licensed seabob vessels that are subject to a maximum days-at-sea allocation, and because the fishery is limited to waters between 18-30 m. The fishery also takes place in localised areas intensively for short periods by many vessels, before catches tail off and the fleet moves to a different ground. Accordingly, there is some break to trawling effort and some recovery period is likely to be a feature of annual fishing patterns. Seen in the context of the overall seabed area of the Brazil- Guiana shelf, the spatial extent of the seabob fishery is very small, even when consideration is given to the fact that only a narrow range of habitat types is fished. As part of a Code of Practice, seabob vessels have undertaken to report the occurrence of or interaction with, a range of prescribed sensitive seabed habitats (e.g., seagrass, molluscs/shells, corals or other epibenthic species) (DoF 2012). If and when such an encounter occurs, the Code of Practice requires that a ‘move on’ rule be applied, whereby the vessel must move to a distance of at least 1 nm from the line of the tow, or the point of interaction if that can be determined, for at least five days. Other vessels in the fleet are also required to avoid the location for the minimum five-day period.

3.4.5 Ecosystem Suriname coastal waters sit within the North Brazil Large Marine Ecosystem (LME), as described by Heileman (undated). This author study noted that the North Brazil LME extends along north-eastern South America from the Parnaíba River estuary in Brazil to the boundary with the Caribbean Sea and has a surface area of about 1.1 million km2. It contains 0.01% of the world’s coral reefs and 0.06% of the world’s sea mounts. The hydrodynamics of this region are dominated by the North Brazilian Current,

Page 27 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

which is an extension of the South Equatorial Current and its prolongation, the Guyana Current. Shelf topography and external sources of material, particularly the Amazon River, with its average discharge of 180,000 m3s-1, exert a significant influence on the marine ecosystem, with this being complemented by discharge from other rivers such as Tocantins, Maroni, Corentyne, and Essequibo. A wide continental shelf, macrotides and upwellings along the shelf edge are some other features of the North Brazil LME (Heileman, undated). Philips (2007) also noted that the North Brazil Shelf LME is considered a Class I, highly productive ecosystem (>300 gCm- 2yr-1), with the Amazon River and its extensive plume being the main source of nutrients. Primary production is limited by low light penetration in turbid waters influenced by the Amazon, while it is nutrient-limited in the clearer offshore waters. Primary productivity on the continental shelf has been found to be greatest in the transition zone between these two types of waters, occasionally exceeding 8 gCm-2day-1. It has a high number of amphibians, birds and reptile species. In addition to high production, the food webs in the North Brazil Shelf LME are moderately diverse. In the context of the North Brazil LME, the Suriname seabob fishery comprises a small, albeit locally significant fishery. The role of seabob in the Suriname nearshore food-web has been studied recently by Quilez (2014) and Willems (2016). These studies showed that seabob is one of the most abundant demersal organisms in the coastal system up to 30 m depth, and that it is an important prey item for many other organisms, including demersal fish species, having been found in 18.3% of examined fish stomachs (Quilez 2014). A significant amount of energy in the benthic food web of the inner Suriname shelf is channelled at an intermediate level through seabob. In terms of managing the ecosystem aspect of the seabob fishery, the seabob stock is only assessed on a single species basis and as such management does not yet reflect an ecosystem approach to fisheries management. However, the setting of a precautionary target reference point that equates to a seabob biomass which is 10% above the level that is expected to achieve BMSY is designed to provide some security in the event of a failure of recruitment. This target reference point also provides a degree of safety given the uncertainty with respect to the implications of harvesting large amounts of seabob on the ecosystem. Restrictions on the number of vessels that may operate within the fishery, and the number of days-at- sea allowed per year, as well as limiting the fishery to water depths of 18-30 m, so preventing trawling in a significant area to the coastward side of the fishery (DoF 2012), also serve to protect the seabob resource and prevent serious harm to the ecosystem. Other ecosystem components such as retained fish, bycaught species, endangered threatened and protected species are subject to at least some monitoring. Management of the potential impacts of the fishery on these ecosystem components has been significantly enhanced in recent times through elements of the seabob fishery management plan (DoF 2012) as well as the fleet and on-board vessel Code of Practice, as discussed in greater detail in previous sections of the report.

Page 28 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

3.5 Principle Three: Management System Background Principle 3 of the Marine Stewardship Council standard states that: The fishery is subject to an effective management system that respects local, national and international laws and standards and incorporates institutional and operational frameworks that require use of the resource to be responsible and sustainable. In the following section of the report a brief description is made of the key characteristics of the management system in place to ensure the sustainable exploitation of the fishery under assessment.

3.5.1 Jurisdiction The Suriname Seabob fishery takes places entirely within the waters of the Suriname EEZ. The species is not migratory and the stock unit is not transboundary, therefore there is no requirement for any formal or binding engagement with any other countries in the management of the fishery. Furthermore, there is no local, regional or inshore fisheries management authority, therefore there is only a single management jurisdiction which is relevant to the management of the fishery (and the scoring of Principle 3); the national jurisdiction, under the management of the Suriname Government Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries (LVV).

3.5.2 Recognised Groups The commercial seabob fishery features 2 companies, fishing with the designated seabob trawl zone – all of this activity and catch is included within the Unit of Certification. No other commercial fishing takes place within the seabob trawl zone and none of the seabob trawl vessels covered by this assessment fish outside of the seabob trawl zone. As such there are no other fishers outside of the client group, which participate in the fishery. Inshore the designated seabob trawl zone there is a sizable inshore artisanal fishing zone, where the use of mobile gears is prohibited. Within this zone, some seabob is caught by artisanal fishers, who may be recognised as those with a customary dependence on the resource for food or livelihood. As a result of a condition at the time of the first MSC surveillance work has been undertaken to evaluate the size of this inshore artisanal seabob catch. This has confirmed that the scale of the artisanal seabob fishery is small, in terms of relative importance to the stock. However, it remains an important source of income for some inshore artisanal fishers. The interests or artisanal fishers are served by representatives sitting on both the Fishery Advisory Council and the Seabob Working Group. Off-shore of the designated seabob trawl zone commercial trawl fishing for penaeid shrimp species and finfish occurs, by both Suriname flagged vessels and vessels of other states. Analysis of catches from these fisheries indicates that little or no seabob is caught. This is an indication that the designated seabob trawl zone, is well located relative to the species distribution. S a result the offshore trawl vessels do not need to be regarded as a ‘Recognised Group’ in the Seabob fishery, although they too have opportunity for representation and consultation at the Fishery Advisory Group. The assessment has not identified any non-fishery users or activities, which could affect the fishery, so no arrangements are therefore in place for liaison. However, it is perhaps relevant that NGOs can request to attend the Seabob Working Group meetings in an observer capacity and other interested parties are now able to see details for the fishery operation and management at the new fishery website (www.seabob.sr) which is maintained by the Suriname Fishery Department.

3.5.3 Management Plan There is a Seabob Management Plan in place for the fishery, which sets out the objectives, decision- making processes and regulations for the seabob fishery (Fishery Management Plan for Suriname – Seabob Fishery (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) 2010 – 2015). This is available to view on-line at http://seabob.sr/msc-certification/ . The management plan provides a policy platform for the seabob harvest control rule and provides strategic guidance for management decisions about the fishery. Ministerial Approval of the Seabob Fishery Management Plan was issued in May 2010. The wider policy context for the Seabob FMP is now provided by the new national ‘Fisheries Management Plan for Suriname (2014 – 2018)’. This

Page 29 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

explicitly states the high level objectives which guide management decision-making for the Ministry of agriculture, animal husbandry and fisheries (LVV). Although the main over-arching piece of fisheries legislation in Suriname - the Fisheries Law of 1981 (Decree C-14) and subsequent revisions - is still due for revision, the implementation of the national Fishery Management Plan provides a clear legal foundation for both the Seabob FMP and the objectives which guide management decision-making and the regulations which result. The legal framework provided by the fisheries law still functions and enables annual ministerial decree to be issued by the Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries. This Ministerial Decree sets out the numbers of licences and the licensing conditions for all Surinamese fisheries for the year ahead. This annual decree specifically identifies the seabob trawl sector and specifies licence conditions such as gear restrictions (mesh size, BRD, TED), engine restrictions (500 kw), fishing zone and season, permitted landing sites and other obligations (e.g. VMS), which reflect the commitments in the Seabob Fishery Management Plan.

3.5.4 Decision-making process The SWG is a consultative body, which acts as a fishery specific advisory body, to provide a forum for stakeholder-informed management initiatives and consultation. The working group first convened April 2010. Since its inception the group has the support of LVV technical staff. The group has played a pivotal role in the development of management proposals, the implementation of a Code of Practise, refinement and agreement of the research plan. Figure 3.5.1: Representative structure of the new Seabob Working Group

Source: Seabob Working Group Terms of Reference The Seabob Working Group is primarily responsible for monitoring the performance of the fishery and, where necessary, making management proposals. The working group comprises key members of the Fishery Department staff, representatives of the 2 vessel-owning / processing companies, and representatives of the artisanal fishing sector. In addition, others may attend meetings in an observer capacity, such as WWF. The annual report of the Seabob Working Group is available on-line on the

Page 30 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

www.seabob.sr website3. The Seabob Working Group will pass minutes to the Chairman of the national Fishery Advisory Council and the Underdirector of LVV, where decision-making responsibility ultimately remains at Ministerial level.

3.5.5 Objectives There are a number of areas where the objectives which guide decision-making in the fisheries sector in Suriname can be found. Above all, national sector objectives are clearly defined in a single over- arching document, in the Fisheries Management Plan for Suriname (2014 – 2018). From a more fishery specific perspective, the operational objectives are contained within the seabob fishery management plan, and are phrased in terms of where management seeks to exploit the fishery in comparison to estimated maximum sustainable yield. The scoring tables provide further details of these objectives and detail how they relate to the 3 MSC Principles.

3.5.6 Monitoring Control & Surveillance A monitoring, control and surveillance system has been implemented which includes: • Vessel Monitoring System on all Seabob vessels. Figure 3.5.2: Suriname fisheries patrol vessel • Inspections of vessels on landing (mainly for gear compliance – TEDs, VMS, BRD). Including inspection by the US authorities on the TEDs. • Inspections of vessels at sea. Since the initial MSC assessment the level of at sea enforcement has been greatly enhanced. A budget of over 20m US$ has been invested in coastguard enforcement apparatus such as enforcement vessels and helicopters. Coastguard personnel (typically ex Navy) have been trained and the legislative basis for the enhanced level of Source: by kind permission of the Suriname coastguard enforcement has been Coastguard. implemented. • For species such as Seabob destined for the European market, the EU requires a catch certificate from the national competent authority (LVV) stating that the product is not the result of IUU activity. The certificate is only issued once licence, trip VMS, landing statistics have been reported.

3 The most recent annual report can be viewed at: http://seabob.sr/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/160215- Jaarverslag-jan-2014-tot-en-met-sept-2015.pdf

Page 31 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

4. Evaluation Procedure

4.1 Harmonised Fishery Assessment At the time of writing, no relevant overlapping MSC assessments have either been completed or are currently underway. There are no other MSC certified fisheries in Suriname or fisheries in assessment, and no other Seabob fisheries under assessment anywhere with the Brazilian shelf large marine ecosystem. As a result, there is no requirement to harmonise with any other MSC assessments.

4.2 Previous assessments The Suriname Atlantic Seabob fishery entered into the MSC assessment process in June 2009 and was successfully certified in November 2011. The public certification report is available for download from the MSC website4. This concluded that the all 3 MSC Principles met the required 80 level and the fishery was therefore successfully certified. However, 6 Performance Indictors scored below the 80 scoring level and therefore triggered binding conditions. The 4th annual surveillance was carried out in March 2016 and reported on in May 2016. This concluded that the requite actions associated with all 6 conditions had be completed to a level to enable to performance indicator to be re-scored at the 80 level. By the time of the 4th surveillance report, all the requisite actions had been completed, enabling the assessors to rescore each of the performance indictors at the 80 level. There are therefore no outstanding conditions at the time of this 2nd full MSC assessment period. Considerable further detail about the original conditions and the justification for re-scoring is presented in the 4th surveillance report which is available to view on the MSC website5. In addition, the scoring tables presented later within this report also refer to the work which was undertaken to address the conditions from the previous assessment. In the interests of avoiding repetition, the table below therefore only provides the only the very briefest of summaries of the actions undertaken. Table 4.2 - Conditions placed on the Suriname Atlantic Seabob fishery at the time of the original 2011 assessment.

Condition Closed? Brief Justification (Y/N) Good Information on all other fishery Y (2016) Estimations of the amount of seabob catches in the offshore removals from the stock shrimp and finfish trawls, estimations of seabob catches in the inshore artisanal fishery and estimations of seabob catches as a result of IUU activity have all improved as a result of dedicated research work. Ensure main bycatch species are Y (2016) Work has been undertaken to estimate impacts of fishery on within biologically based limits main bycatch species. Further work has been undertaken to reduce the overall level of bycatch. And improved catch profile data has provided a better understanding of which bycatch species are considered main. Nature, distribution and vulnerability Y (2016) Work has been undertaken to extensively sample seabed of main seabed habitats habitats to better understand substrate types and fauna. Main functions of the components of Y (2016) Research work has been carried out on stomach contents of the ecosystem are known seabob and other key species. Explanations for management Y (2016) The management process has become more transparent, in action particular with the recent publication on-line of the www.seabob.sr website. Consistent application of sanctions Y (2016) The management authority wrote to all vessel operators to deal with non-compliance clarifying the incremental scale of penalties for infringement. Although not directly related to the condition, the significant

4 https://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/western-central- atlantic/suriname_atlantic_seabob_shrimp/assessment-downloads 5 https://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/western-central- atlantic/suriname_atlantic_seabob_shrimp/re-assessment-downloads/20160211_SR_SHR120.pdf

Page 32 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

investment in offshore patrol vessels has greatly enhanced the MCS capacity within Suriname. Source: Acoura Marine Ltd assessment team

4.3 Assessment Methodologies This fishery was assessed using version 1.3 of the MSC Certification Requirements but, where permitted, making use of the process elements of the newer version CR2 (for example in determining the level of surveillance). The reporting template is largely based on the latest version of the reporting template but with the Default assessment tree from version 1.3 of the MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template.

4.3.1 Assessment Tree The default assessment tree was used, with no adjustments.

4.4 Evaluation Processes and Techniques

4.4.1Site Visits During week commencing 14th March 2016, 2 members of the assessment team, undertook a site visit to Paramaribo, Suriname (Tristan Southall and Rob Blyth-Skyrme). This enabled a scheduled programme of consultations to take place with key stakeholders in the fishery – including skippers, scientists, fishery protection officers, NGOs, fishery managers and technical support staff. Prior notification of this site visit was issued on the MSC website and by email in order that all relevant stakeholders were aware of the opportunity to meet with the assessment team. Day 1 – 15th March 2016 – Paramaribo / Heiploeg Suriname » On day 1, the assessment team met with the client representative, Heiploeg Suriname staff and vessel skippers and crew to discuss the fishery under assessment. This provided further detail on the fishing methods and practice and gave the vessel skippers / owners an opportunity to submit comments, additional information or ask questions of the assessment team. In the afternoon the assessment team met with Mr Tomas Willems to discuss his work in relation to the Principle 2 conditions raised at the time of the last MSC assessment (John Tremblay joined this meeting via Skype). Day 2 – 16th March 2016 - Paramaribo » On day 2, the assessment team met with members of the Suriname Fishery Department to discuss the fishery under assessment, in particular the operation of the management system and provided managers to submit comments, additional information or ask questions of the assessment team. In addition, the assessment team with Chantal Landburg to get an understanding of her role in the data collection process (John Tremblay joined this meeting via Skype). Day 3 – 17th March - Paramaribo » On day 3, the assessment team conducted meetings with Paul Medley – via Skype - and Michael Hiwat of WWF (John Tremblay joined both of these meetings via Skype). A meeting was also scheduled with Monique Pool of Green Heritage Fund Suriname, but Monique was unable to attend. Table 4.4.1 below provides full details of the stakeholders that met with the assessment team during the site visit. Table 4.4.1: Interview Programme

Name Organisation Role Mr Robert Banning Heiploeg International Client Representative Mr. Jude Jagroop Heiploeg Suriname Plant manager Mrs. Silvie Singh Heiploeg Suriname Operations Manager

Page 33 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Mr Tomas Willems University of Ghent PHd student and Seabob ecosystems research coordinator Mr Steve Hall Heiploeg Suriname Skipper Neptune 6 Dr Rene Lieveld LVV- Fisheries Department Fisheries Director Ranjet Soekhradj LVV- Fisheries Department Statistician (HCR oversight) Muriel Wirjodirjo LVV- Fisheries Department Chair Seabob Working Group Mario Yspol LVV- Fisheries Department Research scientist Dr Paul Medley (remote via Skype) Independent Stock Assessment Scientist Chantal Landburg Local Data Coordinator Michael Hiwat WWF Guianas Marine Conservation Officer » Source: Acoura Marine assessment team

4.4.2 Consultation outcomes In addition to the meetings referred to above, a total of 33 stakeholder individuals and organisations having relevant interest in the assessment were identified and contacted during this assessment (primarily via e-mail announcements). The interest of others not appearing on this list was solicited through the postings on the MSC website. No written representations were provided to the assessment team. However, meetings with key stakeholders provided an opportunity to explore a range of issues or possible concerns. Informal minutes are retained by the CAB of all meetings – primarily to enable an audit trail of discussions. These are available to meeting attendees on request. However, in the interests of brevity and clarity these are not included in full in the assessment report. Instead a brief summary of the focus of discussion and where this has been addressed in the scoring is detailed below. No strong concerns were raised by any stakeholder and no stakeholder expressed any reservation or objection to the re-certification of the Suriname Seabob fishery. The team is therefore of the view that matters raised have been adequately debated and addressed as a part of the scoring process for this fishery, and that none of the issues raised, therefore, require separate attention beyond that represented in this report. Table 4.4.2: Summary of topics discussed with stakeholders

Meeting Topic Discussed / concerns raised Where addressed Mr Tomas Willems Research work in Suriname, focusing on The results of Tomas Willems work (University of Ghent) bycatch, habitat, and ecosystem. Future has informed the scoring across bycatch reduction projects. No concerns Principle 2. raised. Mr Robert Banning, Mr. Details of the client group and operational Reflected throughout report and Jude Jagroop, Mrs. characteristics of the fishery. No concerns scoring. Silvie Singh, (Heiploeg raised. International / Heiploeg Suriname) Mr Steve Hall (Vessel Operational characteristics, with particular Description of fishing practices and Skipper) focus on bycatch composition, bycatch scoring of Principle 2. reduction, ETP interaction and MCS. No concerns raised. Dr Rene Lieveld, Ranjet Current regulation / licencing, operations of the Primarily in relation to P3 scoring. Soekhradj, Muriel Seabob Working Group, application of the Responses have also influenced Wirjodirjo, Mario Yspol HCR, efficacy of MCS, recent infringements, scoring in relation to Condition 2. (LVV- Fisheries adoption of national fishery management plan Department) and development of new fisheries law. No concerns raised.

Page 34 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Dr Paul Medley Progress with on-going stock assessment. No Scoring of Principle 1. And (Independent Stock concerns raised, although some discussion Condition 1. Assessment Scientist about how HCR is being applied. Chantal Landburg Role of the local data coordinator. Contract Scoring of PI 1.2.3 (Local Data arrangements. Liaison between LVV, SWG, Coordinator) seabob companies and stock assessment scientist. Michael Hiwat (WWF Summary of MSC processes. WWF’s Scoring of Principle 2. Concern Guianas) engagement with the fishery. Some concern about application of HCR is expressed about management response to addressed by Condition 1. falling below Btrigger but satisfied that response was ultimately appropriate. Stated that would ideally like more observers on board. WWF working now with artisanal fleet and also bycatch reduction in other fisheries.

4.4.3 Evaluation Techniques The MSC is dedicated to promoting “well-managed” and “sustainable” fisheries, and the MSC initiative focuses on identifying such fisheries through means of independent third-party assessments and certification. Once certified, fisheries are awarded the opportunity to utilise an MSC promoted eco-label to gain economic advantages in the marketplace. Through certification and eco-labelling the MSC works to promote and encourage better management of world fisheries, many of which have been suggested to suffer from poor management. The MSC Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fisheries form the standard against which the fishery is assessed and are organised in terms of three principles: » MSC Principle 1 - Resource Sustainability » MSC Principle 2 - Ecosystem Sustainability » MSC Principle 3 - Management Systems A fuller description of the MSC Principles and Criteria and a graphical representation of the assessment tree is presented as Appendix 1 to this report. The MSC Principles and Criteria provide the overall requirements necessary for certification of a sustainably managed fishery. To facilitate assessment of any given fishery against this standard, these Criteria are further split into Sub-criteria. Sub-criteria represent separate areas of important information (e.g. Sub-criterion 1.1.1. requires a sufficient level of information on the target species and stock, 1.1.2 requires information on the effects of the fishery on the stock and so on). These Sub-criteria, therefore, provide a detailed checklist of factors necessary to meet the MSC Criteria in the same way as the Criteria provide the factors necessary to meet each Principle. Below each Sub-criterion, individual ‘Performance Indicators’ (PIs) are identified. It is at this level that the performance of the fishery is measured. The Principles and their supporting Criteria, Sub-criteria and Performance Indicators that have been used by the assessment team to assess this fishery are incorporated into the scoring sheets (Appendix 1.1). Scoring of the attributes of this fishery against the MSC Principles and Criteria involves the following process: » Decision to use the MSC Default Assessment Tree contained within the MSC Certification Requirements (Annex CB) » Description of the justification as to why a particular score has been given to each sub-criterion » Allocation of a score (out of 100) to each Performance Indicator In order to make the assessment process as clear and transparent as possible, the Scoring Guideposts are presented in the scoring table and describe the level of performance necessary to achieve 100 (represents the level of performance for a Performance Indicator that would be expected in a theoretically ‘perfect’ fishery), 80 (defines the unconditional pass mark for a Performance Indicator for that type of fishery), and 60 (defines the minimum, conditional pass mark for each Performance

Page 35 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Indicator for that type of fishery). The Assessment Tree and Scoring Guideposts for the Fishery Name fishery are shown as Appendix 1.1 to this report. There are two, coupled, scoring requirements that constitute the Marine Stewardship Council’s minimum threshold for a sustainable fishery: » The fishery must obtain a score of 80 or more for each of the MSC’s three Principles, based on the weighted average score for all Criteria and Sub-criteria under each Principle. » The fishery must obtain a score of 60 or more for each Performance Indicator. A score below 80 at the Principle level or 60 for any individual Performance Indicator would represent a level of performance that causes the fishery to automatically fail the assessment. A score of 80 or above for all three Principles results in a pass.

4.4.4 RBF Use The MSC Risk Based Framework (RBF) was employed in Principle 2 only for scoring both retained species and bycatch species, as there is limited information available on the stock status of species other than seabob taken in the catch. The RBF was not used to score ETP, habitat and ecosystem PIs as there is sufficient information available for the Suriname seabob fishery to score these components using the conventional assessment tree. Stakeholder Comments on Use of RBF The intention to use the risk based framework to score PIs 2.1.1 and 2.2.1 was announced to all stakeholders and notified on the MSC website on 7th March 2016. No stakeholder comments were received on the proposed use of the RBF in response to this announcement and no specific comments on the use of the RBF were received during the site visit. RBF Consultation Process Summary The assessment Team assumed a worst case scenario outcome for retained and bycatch species - i.e. that a high risk score of 3 - would result from a SICA exercise (CC2.3.6.7, MSC 2013a). A more in- depth, quantitative and species specific Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) was therefore undertaken. This decision to focus the analysis on the PSA rather than the simpler SICA is in line with on-going developments in the MSC standard as reflected in the fact that PSA alone is permitted to score 2.1.1 and 2.2.1 in the MSC CRv2. A Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis was undertaken for all retained and bycatch species comprising >0.3% of the catch (noting that 56 species individually comprised ≤0.3% of the catch, which was determined to be a negligible quantity, and so these species were not considered further in scoring). The PSA data for retained and bycatch species are provided in Appendix 1.2 in Tables A1.2.1 and A1.2.2, respectively, with the scoring provided in Table A1.2.3. Summary of Information Obtained Information on catches of retained and bycatch species was provided to the assessment team. The team were also provided with details of the fishing area and an understanding of catches elsewhere in Suriname waters. Details about on-board practices, such as which species are released was obtained from stakeholder meetings. Other biological information, including species characteristics was available from published resources (see Appendix 1.2). Summary of Activities and Components Discussed / Evaluated Not applicable. Process of Choosing Most Vulnerable Scoring Element As noted, the worst case scenario was assumed for retained and bycatch species, and all such species comprising >0.3% of the catch were scored using PSA.

Page 36 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

5. Traceability

5.1 Eligibility Date The Target Eligibility Date for this fishery is the 28th February 2017, when the current certificate expires to ensure unbroken certification. This means that any fish caught by the certified fleet following that date will be eligible to enter the chain of custody as certified product if and when certification is ultimately granted. The rationale for this date is that it meets with the client’s wishes, for commercial reasons, for the date to be set at the earliest point at which the Certification Requirements allow. In the case of recertification this is set at a date to enable continued certification between certificates. The measures taken by the client to account for risks within the traceability of the fishery – and therefore generating confidence in the use of this date for target eligibility – are detailed in the rest of this section.

5.2 Traceability within the Fishery Traceability up to the point of first landing has been scrutinised as part of this assessment and the positive results reflect that the systems in place are deemed adequate to ensure fish is caught in a legal manner and is accurately recorded. The report and assessment trees describe these systems in more detail, but briefly traceability can be verified by:

5.2.1 Tracking, Tracing and Segregation Systems Traceability is assured by virtue of the fact that the fishery is distinct and discreet. All trawl caught seabob in Surinamese waters is covered by the assessment. All trawl caught seabob in Surinamese waters is caught from the same fishing zone and landed to one of 2 processing facilities – both of which are MSC CoC certified. The Monitoring, Control and Surveillance systems in place (described in the scoring of PI 3.2.4) ensure that declarations of quantities caught are accurate. Prior to export (most seabob is destined for the EU market) and EU catch certificate must be issued by the fishery department confirming that the exported product has been legally caught.

5.2.2 Evaluation of Risk of Vessels Fishing Outside of UoC There is no risk of other vessels landing Seabob to the 2 private processing facilities.

5.2.3 Risk of Substitution of Mixing Certified / Non-Certified Catch prior to point of landing No other shrimp is caught by the client vessels (and if this were to happen morphological differences would make any such attempt at substitution obvious). No other vessels catch seabob in Surinamese waters (aside from the small artisanal catch – which is landed to local markets). No other vessels land to the 2 processing facilities covered by this assessment. There is therefore a low risk of substitution of non-certified product.

5.2.4 At-Sea Processing There is no at sea processing in the fishery under assessment. For the avoidance of doubt at-sea processing is not permitted within the scope of this assessment.

5.2.5 Trans-Shipment There is no transhipment in the fishery under assessment. For the avoidance of transhipment is not permitted within the scope of this assessment.

5.3 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody Only Suriname Atlantic Seabob caught in the manner defined in the Unit of Certification (Section 3.1) under restrictions detailed throughout the body of the final Public Certification Report for this fishery shall be eligible to enter the Chain of Custody. Chain of Custody should commence following the first point of landing, at which point the product shall be eligible to carry the MSC logo (under restrictions imposed by the MSC Chain of Custody standard). There are no restrictions on the fully certified product entering further chains of custody.

Page 37 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

5.3.1 Eligible points of landing Seabob covered by this assessment may only be landed to the quays adjacent to the SAIL processing facility (Paramaribo) and the Heiploeg Suriname processing facility.

5.3.2 Parties eligible to use the fishery certificate Only vessels owned or contracted to Heiploeg Suriname and SAIL (and listed in the vessels list) are eligible to use this certificate. There are no other eligible fishers.

Page 38 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

6. Evaluation Results

6.1 Principle Level Scores Table 6.1: Final Principle Scores

Principle Score Principle 1 – Target Species 83.1 Principle 2 - Ecosystem 83.3 Principle 3 – Management System 83.4 Source: Acoura Marine assessment team

6.2 Summary of Scores Table 6.2: Final Performance Indicator Scores. Underlined scores in red trigger conditions.

Principle Component PI No. Performance Indicator (PI) Score One Outcome 1.1.1 Stock status 80 1.1.2 Reference points 90 1.1.3 Stock rebuilding N/A Management 1.2.1 Harvest strategy 85 1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools 75 1.2.3 Information & monitoring 80 1.2.4 Assessment of stock status 85

Two Retained 2.1.1 Outcome 85 species 2.1.2 Management 80 2.1.3 Information 85 Bycatch 2.2.1 Outcome 80 species 2.2.2 Management 95 2.2.3 Information 80 ETP species 2.3.1 Outcome 85 2.3.2 Management 85 2.3.3 Information 80 Habitats 2.4.1 Outcome 90 2.4.2 Management 80 2.4.3 Information 80 Ecosystem 2.5.1 Outcome 80 2.5.2 Management 85 2.5.3 Information 80

Three Governance 3.1.1 Legal & customary framework 95 and policy 3.1.2 Consultation, roles & responsibilities 80 3.1.3 Long term objectives 80 3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishing 80

Page 39 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Fishery 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives 80 specific management 3.2.2 Decision making processes 95 system 3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement 80 3.2.4 Research plan 90 3.2.5 Management performance evaluation 70

6.3 Summary of Conditions Two performance indicators scored less than the unconditional SG80 pass mark, therefore 2 binding conditions of certification are raised against the fishery. Neither condition relates to conditions applied in the initial assessment (see table 4.2). All conditions raised at the time of the initial MSC assessment (FCI 2011) have been closed prior to this re-assessment. The following conditions relate to new issues which have become apparent during the period of initial certification. Full details of the conditions including timelines for progress against the conditions to be assessed during annual surveillance audits, are set out in Appendix 1.3 Table 6.3: Summary of Conditions

Condition Condition Performance Indicator Related to number previously raised condition? (Y/N/ N/A) There are well defined and effective harvest N 1.2.2c 1 control rules in place There is effective and timely review of the N 3.2.5b 2 fishery-specific management system Source: Acoura Marine assessment team

6.3.1 Recommendations There are 2 recommendations for this fishery. These do not result from a score of below SG80 and are therefore not a binding condition of certification, however the assessment team wish to highlight a potential step which could reasonably be taken to contribute to on-going improvement and enhanced sustainability of the fishery. Recommendation 1: Evaluate whether CPUE has been affected by changes in gear or changes in environmental conditions. The CPUE reference points (target, trigger and limit) are measured in terms of CPUE. The assumption is that CPUE is a reliable proxy for biomass and that the relationship between CPUE and biomass does not change over time. Any changes in catchability which affect the relationship between CPUE and biomass are important to monitor and understand. Reduced catchability appears likely as a result of sargassum incursions but may also occur as the result of gear modifications to reduce bycatch. Reduced catchability would introduce more caution but unaccounted for bias; increased catchability would increase risk. It is therefore recommended to develop methods and undertake studies to evaluate how CPUE is affected by sargassum incursions (or other changes in environmental conditions) and whether CPUE has been affected by gear modifications. Client Response:

This might be addressed by recording amount of sargassum and shrimp brought aboard on a haul by haul basis. Unfortunately, the observation error is very high so a large sample would be necessary, which may be impractical. A more realistic assessment might be to interview captains to get an idea of how sargassum might affect catch rates. This interview information might be incorporated in the MSE. The current data collection co-ordinator could carry out the interviews.

Page 40 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Recommendation 2: Clarify roles and responsibility for provision of future stock assessment advice. In the past the relationship with the regional fisheries management organisation (CRFM) has been effective in ensuring application of appropriate science, in particular in relation to stock assessment. Previous seabob stock assessments have been carried out by the CRFM Shrimp and Groundfish Working Group in a timely and transparent manner. However, it is understood that the working group is now shifting resources to other fisheries, therefore the most recent stock assessment exercise is being carried out by a stock assessment scientist working independently of CRFM. Although the robustness or independence of this process is not in question, it does mean there is less obvious opportunity for external review. Furthermore, looking ahead beyond this current stock assessment, it is not clear within the management system exactly where responsibility lies for stock assessment, how future stock assessments will be funded and how this process will be managed / administered. The process by which future stock assessment will be carried out should therefore be clarified and formalised within the management system. Client response:

This needs to be addressed by the Fisheries Department. Scientific meetings are now conducted on request to CRFM. If a seabob scientific group meeting takes place, Trinidad, Guyana and Suriname might attend. CRFM could set this up for every 2 years in alternate countries.

6.4 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement The fishery attained a score of 80 or more against each of the MSC Principles and did not score less than 60 against any MSC Criteria. It is therefore determined that the Suriname Atlantic Seabob fishery should be certified according to the Marine Stewardship Council Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fisheries. Following this decision by the assessment team, and review by stakeholders and peer-reviewers, the determination will be presented to Acoura Marine’s decision making entity that this fishery has passed its assessment and should be certified.

Page 41 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

7. References Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B. & P. Jones (2006). The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia’s northern prawn trawl fishery. Fisheries Research, V. 81, pp. 176-188. Castilho, A. L., R. T. Bauer, F. A. M. Freire, V. Fransozo, R. C. Costa, R. C. Grabowski and A. Fransozo (2015). "Lifespan and reproductive dynamics of the commercially important sea bob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri (Penaeoidea): synthesis of a 5-year study. J. Crustacean Biology 35:30-40. Castro, R. H., R. C. Costa, A. Fransozo and F. L. M. Mantelatto (2005). Population structure of the seabob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri (Heller, 1862) (Crustacea: Penaeoidea) in the littoral of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Scientia Marina 69: 105-112. Charlier, P., M. Ijspol, Y. Babb-Echteld, and A. Booth. 2000. Shrimp and finfish fisheries in Suriname In: Report of the third Workshop on the Assessment of Shrimp and Groundfish Fisheries on the Brazil-Guianas Shelf. Belém, Brazil, 24 May - 10 June 1999. FAO Fisheries Report. No. 628, FAO. Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/X9136E/X9136E00.HTM. Costa, R. C., A. Fransozo, F. A. M. Friere and A. L. Castilho (2007). Abundance and Ecological Distribution of the "Sete-Barbas" Shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri (Heller, 1862) (Decapoda: Penaeoidea) in Three Bays of the Ubatuba Region, Southeastern Brazil. Gulf and Caribbean Research 19:33-41. CRFM (Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism) 2009. CRFM Fishery Report - 2009. Volume 1. Report of Fifth Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 09-18 June 2009. 167p. CRFM 2011. CRFM Fishery Report -2011. Volume 1. Report of Seventh Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 16 - 24 June 2011. 181p. CRFM 2012. Report of Eighth Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 20 - 30 June 2012. CRFM Fishery Report - 2012. Volume 1. 150p. CRFM 2013. Report of Ninth Annual CRFM Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 10- 14 June 2013. CRFM Fishery Report - 2013. Volume 1. 85p. Crowder, L.B., Hopkins-Murphy, S.R. & J.A. Royle (1995). Effects of turtle excluder devices (TEDs) on loggerhead sea turtle strandings with implications for conservation. Copeia, No. 4, pp. 773-779. DoF (2012). Fisheries management plan for Suriname, the seabob (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) fisheries, 2010-2015. Suriname Directorate of Fisheries, modified August 2012. 28 pp. Doyle, E. and J. Franks. 2015. Sargassum Fact Sheet. Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. FAO (2014). Global Capture Production 1960-2014, available at: www.data.fao.org (accessed 25 May 2016). FCI (Food Certification International Ltd.). 2011. MSC Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp. Final Report. May 2011. Available on MSC website www.msc.org Gillett, R. 2008. Global study of shrimp fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 475. Rome, FAO. 331p Griffiths, S.P., Brewer, D.T., Heales, D.S., Milton, D.A. & I.C. Stobutzki (2006). Validating ecological risk assessments for fisheries: assessing the impacts of turtle excluder devices on elasmobranch bycatch populations in an Australian trawl fishery. Marine and freshwater Research, V. 57, pp. 395-401. Holthuis, L.B., 1980. FAO Species Catalogue. Vol. 1 Shrimps and prawns of the world. An annotated catalogue of species of interest to fisheries. FAO Fish. Synop. 125(1):271p. Rome: FAO. IAC Secretariat (2006). Fisheries and sea turtles. May 2006, San José, Costa Rica. Available online: http://www.iacseaturtle.org/eng-docs/publicaciones/Pesquerias-FINAL-ENG.pdf (web address checked, June 2016). Kerkhove, T. 2014. Trophic ecology of the Atlantic seabob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri in Suriname: combining stomach content and stable isotope analyses. MSc. thesis, Ghent University, 27 pp. Lewison, R.L., Crowder, L.B. & D.J. Shaver (2003). The impact of turtle excluder devices and fisheries closures on loggerhead and Kemp’s ridley strandings in the western Gulf of Mexico. Conservation Biology, V. 17, pp. 1089- 1097. Lowe-McConnell, R.H. (1962) The fishes of the. British Guiana continental shelf, with notes on their natural history. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 44: 669-667 LVV [MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ], 2010. Translation: Fishery management plan for Surinam Seabob fishery Xiphopenaeus kroyeri. 2010-2015. LVV [MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ], pers. comm. 2016. Document with monthly catch and effort data and graphic provided during site visit meeting, Mar. 16, 2016. Medley, P. (2014). Sustainable Suriname Seabob fishery: preliminary risk assessment of elasmobranch bycatch in the Suriname seabob fishery. Nautilus Consultants Ltd, Peebles, September 2014, 22 pp. Medley, P. 2016. Pers comm. Suriname stock assessment update. 11th March 2016. Document provided to MSC assessment team for March 2016 site visit. MSC (2013a). MSC certification requirements, version 1.3, 14 January 2013. Marine Stewardship Council, London. 301 pp.

Page 42 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

MSC 2013b. Guidance to the MSC Certification Requirements. Version 1.3, 14 January 2013. MSC (2014). MSC fisheries certification requirements and guidance, Version 2.0, 1st October, 2014. Marine Stewardship Council, London, 528 pp. NMFS (undated). History of turtle excluder devices (TEDs). NOAA, Southeast Fisheries Science Center (http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/labs/mississippi/ted/history.htm). Pérez, A.R. 2014. Ecology and dynamics of the Atlantic seabob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) in Suriname based on fisheries data and local ecological knowledge. MSc. Thesis, Ghent University, 68 pp. Philips, T. (2007). Thematic report for the Guianas-Brazil sub-region; a discussion paper for the CLME Synthesis Workshop. CLME-TT/4 Prov, Barbados, February 2007, 30 pp. Quilez, I. 2014. The importance of the Atlantic seabob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri as a food source for demersal fishes in the coastal waters of Suriname. MSc. thesis, Ghent University, 106 pp. Torrez, P. (2015). "Reproductive biology and recruitment of Xiphopenaeus kroyeri in Suriname: Implications for resource management." MSc. Thesis, Ghent University, 44 pp. VLIR-UOS, 2016. Ongoing projects. Ecological and genetic basis for sustainable fishery for the Atlantic seabob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri in Suriname. Scholar: Thomas Kerkhove. Abstract available at http://www.vliruos.be/en/ongoing-projects/overview-of-ongoing-projects/ Scholar: Thomas Kerkhove Willems, T. 2016. An Ecosystem Approach to fisheries management: the Atlantic seabob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) in Suriname. Ph.D. Thesis, Ghent University. http://hdl.handle. Willems, T., De Backer, A., You, K.W.T., Vincx, M. & K. Hostens 2015a. Spatio-temporal distribution patterns of the epibenthic community in the coastal waters of Suriname. Continental Shelf Research, V. 108, pp. 25-40. Willems, T., De Backer, A., Mol, J.H., Vincx, M. & K. Hostens (2015b). Distribution patterns of the demersal fish fauna on the inner continental shelf of Suriname. Regional Studies in Marine Science, V.2, pp. 177–188. Willems, T., Depestele, J., De Backer, A. & K. Hostens (2016). Ray bycatch in a tropical shrimp fishery: do bycatch reduction devices and turtle excluder devices effectively exclude rays? Fisheries Research 175: 35-42.

Page 43 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Appendix 1. Scoring & Rationale

MSC Principles & Criteria

Figure A1 – Graphic of MSC Principles and Criteria

Page 44 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Below is a much-simplified summary of the MSC Principles and Criteria, to be used for over-view purposes only. For a fuller description, including scoring guideposts under each Performance Indicator, reference should be made to the full assessment tree, complete with scores and justification, contained in Appendix 1.1 of this report. Alternately a fuller description of the MSC Principles and Criteria can be obtained from the MSC website (www.msc.org). Principle 1 A fishery must be conducted in a manner that does not lead to over-fishing or depletion of the exploited populations and, for those populations that are depleted, the fishery must be conducted in a manner that demonstrably leads to their recovery. Intent: The intent of this Principle is to ensure that the productive capacities of resources are maintained at high levels and are not sacrificed in favour of short-term interests. Thus, exploited populations would be maintained at high levels of abundance designed to retain their productivity, provide margins of safety for error and uncertainty, and restore and retain their capacities for yields over the long term. Status » The stock is at a level that maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing. » Limit and target reference points are appropriate for the stock (or some measure or surrogate with similar intent or outcome). » Where the stock is depleted, there is evidence of stock rebuilding and rebuilding strategies are in place with reasonable expectation that they will succeed. Harvest strategy / management » There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place, which is responsive to the state of the stock and is designed to achieve stock management objectives. » There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place that endeavour to maintain stocks at target levels. » Sufficient relevant information related to stock structure, stock productivity, fleet composition and other data is available to support the harvest strategy. » The stock assessment is appropriate for the stock and for the harvest control rule, takes into account uncertainty, and is evaluating stock status relative to reference points.

Principle 2 Fishing operations should allow for the maintenance of the structure, productivity, function and diversity of the ecosystem (including habitat and associated dependent and ecologically related species) on which the fishery depends Intent: The intent of this Principle is to encourage the management of fisheries from an ecosystem perspective under a system designed to assess and restrain the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem. Retained species / Bycatch / ETP species » Main species are highly likely to be within biologically based limits or if outside the limits there is a full strategy of demonstrably effective management measures. » There is a strategy in place for managing these species that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species. » Information is sufficient to quantitatively estimate outcome status and support a full strategy to manage main retained / bycatch and ETP species.

Habitat & Ecosystem

Page 45 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

» The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat or ecosystem structure and function, considered on a regional or bioregional basis. » There is a strategy and measures in place that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to habitat types. » The nature, distribution and vulnerability of all main habitat types and ecosystem functions in the fishery area are known at a level of detail relevant to the scale and intensity of the fishery and there is reliable information on the spatial extent, timing and location of use of the fishing gear.

Principle 3 The fishery is subject to an effective management system that respects local, national and international laws and standards and incorporates institutional and operational frameworks that require use of the resource to be responsible and sustainable. Intent: The intent of this principle is to ensure that there is an institutional and operational framework for implementing Principles 1 and 2, appropriate to the size and scale of the fishery. Governance and policy » The management system exists within an appropriate and effective legal and/or customary framework that is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries and observes the legal & customary rights of people and incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. » Functions, roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals involved in the management process are explicitly defined and well understood. The management system includes consultation processes. » The management policy has clear long-term objectives, incorporates the precautionary approach and does not operate with subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing. Fishery specific management system » Short and long term objectives are explicit within the fishery’s management system. » Decision-making processes respond to relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner. » A monitoring, control and surveillance system has been implemented. Sanctions to deal with non- compliance exist and there is no evidence of systematic non- compliance. » A research plan provides the management system with reliable and timely information and results are disseminated to all interested parties in a timely fashion.

Page 46 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Appendix 1.1 Performance Indicator Scores and Rationale

Principle 1

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a It is likely that the It is highly likely that There is a high degree of stock is above the the stock is above the certainty that the stock is above point where point where recruitment the point where recruitment recruitment would be would be impaired. would be impaired.

Guidepost impaired.

Met? Y Y N

Page 47 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The team accepts that it is highly likely that the seabob stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired and SG80 is met. This is based on consideration of the initial seabob stock assessment together with (i) stock assessments completed subsequent to MSC certification in 2011 and (ii) the CPUE index which has been above the trigger for most of the period since 2011. In the first MSC assessment the final report (FCI 2011) stated: “An assessment in 2009 indicates that the current biomass of the seabob stock is safely above the point of recruitment failure, and has been operating close to and above its target reference level in recent years. The high level of certainty indicated by the model result is dependent on a number of assumptions about stock and fishery conditions and data quality, which though probably reasonable, should be verified as far as possible to improve confidence in the robustness of the assessment over time.” The 2009 stock assessment (CRFM 2009) used a logistic biomass dynamics and provided estimates of lower percentiles (5th), median and upper percentiles (95th) for various population parameters. It utilized catch and effort data from 1989 to 2008. In 2009 the lower percentile for current biomass relative to biomass at BMSY (B/BMSY) was 1.12 (CRFM 2009), which indicates the stock was not overfished (B/BMSY>1.0). Stock assessments conducted in 2011 and 2012 addressed some of the data quality issues and added the most recent years of data and the conclusions were similar to the original assessment and in fact suggested the stock was in slightly better condition. In 2011 the 2009 seabob assessment was updated with the corrected landings and effort time series and the current HCR for Suriname seabob was tested against the new assessment to ensure it continued to achieve its objectives (CRFM 2011). The HCR was found to be robust to the changes in the assessment that occurred. The B/BMSY estimate (lower percentile) was 1.19. In 2012 the stock assessment model was updated and fitted to the total catch from 1989-2011 and catch and effort from 1998-2011. Results were similar to the stock assessment in 2011 and appeared robust to likely levels of artisanal landings which were not included in the catch data. The lower percentile for B/BMSY was 1.33 in 2012 (CRFM 2012). Numeric values of the CPUE index from 2012 to the present were made available to the team (LVV, pers. comm); earlier values were available in a graphic. Since 2012 the index has been mainly above the trigger, well above the limit reference point. From the perspective of the results of the stock assessments from 2009-2012, there is confidence that stock is above the point where the recruitment would be impaired. However, the assessment team has concerns that the last assessment was 4 years ago, and that an improved assessment model has not been completed. As such there is not a high degree of certainty that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired and this issue is scored at 80. A new stock assessment of Suriname seabob is currently underway (Medley, P., pers. comm.) with the objective of applying the same size- and sex structured model as that used for Guyana seabob (CRFM 2013). Given that this model accounts for within population differences in growth, mortality and reproduction, it should increase confidence in the assessment of stock status and estimation of reference points. An update on the progress of the work as of Mar 11 2016 (Medley, P., pers. com.) indicates the new stock assessment suggests the stock is not “under-exploited” (or “over-exploited”). The model did not fit well to the Suriname seabob data and the model requires more work than originally anticipated. As a result, the new stock assessment will not likely be completed before autumn 2016. To conclude, existing assessments of the seabob stock have indicated biomass is above BMSY and well above the point where recruitment might be impaired. SG100 is not met because of the uncertainties and limitations associated with the logistic

Justification model together with the fact that the last assessment was in 2012.

Page 48 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

b The stock is at or There is a high degree of fluctuating around its certainty that the stock has target reference point. been fluctuating around its target reference point, or has been above its target reference

Guidepost point, over recent years.

Met? Y N

The Suriname seabob stock is fluctuating around its target reference point and SG80 is met. The target reference point is a CPUE of 1.65 tons per sea day. CPUE is assumed to be a proxy for biomass, and the limit and target reference points are set at 60% and 111% of BMSY (CPUE at BMSY = 1.48 t/day - CRFM 2009). Stock assessments subsequent to 2009 estimated BMSY to be slightly higher, so that the original target reference point is more precautionary. For purposes of the HCR, a 12-month CPUE is calculated monthly (total catch/total days at sea over the previous 12 months). The stock has fluctuated around its target reference point in recent years (Figure 3.3 in Section 3.3). This is based on the 2012 to 2015 calendar years, when HCR CPUE was above the target in 29 months and below the target in 19 months. Of some concern is the fact that the below target HCR CPUEs were observed in the recent months (June 2014 to Dec 2015). This concern is eased with the facts that (i) there is strong evidence that the cause is likely reduced catchability rather than lower seabob biomass; (ii) during these 19 months the HCR CPUE averaged close to 90% of the target and was usually above the estimate of CPUE corresponding to BMSY. Stakeholder evidence is that an influx of sargassum (floating brown alga) in some months clogged the gear, reducing the seabob catch. This influx of sargassum was seen throughout the Caribbean (Doyle. and Franks. 2015). In the first few months of 2016, seabob monthly CPUE increased and as of the end of Feb 2016, the HCR CPUE was only slightly below target (1.64 vs target of 1.65). Given the recent declines in CPUE and the fact that there is not a high degree of certainty that the declines are fully explained by the sargassum influx, the SG100

Justification level is not met. CRFM 2009. CRFM Fishery Report - 2009. Volume 1. Report of Fifth Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 09-18 June 2009. 167p. CRFM 2011. CRFM Fishery Report -2011. Volume 1. Report of Seventh Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 16 - 24 June 2011. 181p. CRFM 2012. Report of Eighth Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 20 - 30 June 2012. CRFM Fishery Report - 2012. Volume 1. 150p. CRFM 2013. Report of Ninth Annual CRFM Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and References the Grenadines, 10-14 June 2013. CRFM Fishery Report - 2013. Volume 1. 85p. Doyle, E. and J. Franks. 2015. Sargassum Fact Sheet. Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. Food Certification International Ltd. (FCI) 2011. MSC Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp. Final Report. May 2011. Available on MSC website www.msc.org LVV [MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ], pers. comm. 2016. Document with monthly catch and effort data and graphic provided during site visit meeting, Mar. 16, 2016.

Stock Status relative to Reference Points

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

Page 49 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Target 111% of BMSY 1.65 tons/day at sea 2015 HCR CPUE = 1.51 reference (111% of BMSY which is Current status relative to target point estimated to = 0.92 correspond to 1.48 [Feb 2016 monthly CPUE = 1.64] tons/day at sea in CRFM 2009)

Limit 60% of BMSY 0.89 tons/day at sea Current status relative to limit = reference 1.70

point

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 50 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Generic limit and Reference points are target reference points appropriate for the are based on stock and can be justifiable and estimated. reasonable practice appropriate for the

Guidepost species category.

Met? Y Y

Reference points have been estimated and this scoring issue meets SG80. Target and limit reference points are based on a logistic biomass dynamics model and these biomass reference points are appropriate for the Suriname seabob stock based on MSC standards (MSC Certification Requirements Version 1.3, 14 January 2013). The reference points are biomass-based which is appropriate since there is no basis for alternative reference points, and a proxy for biomass (CPUE) is available and can be routinely monitored. The fishery management plan for Suriname Seabob (LVV 2010) documents limit and target reference points in terms of CPUE (tons per day of fishing). These reference points were evaluated in terms of the harvest control rule (Medley, 2009). The rule was shown to be robust to all uncertainties, but identified monitoring that was required to ensure it remained valid. The limit reference point in the fishery management plan is the CPUE corresponding to the biomass at 60% of the MSY estimate (0.89 t per day at sea). The target reference point was set by stakeholders at a CPUE of 1.65 t per day at sea, which corresponds to the biomass at 111% of the MSY estimate (1.48 in CRFM 2009). The stock assessment that is currently underway (Medley, P., pers. comm. 2016) incorporates size and sex differences in life history processes. This assessment should increase confidence in the assessment of stock status and the

appropriateness of reference points. Justification

b The limit reference The limit reference point is set point is set above the above the level at which there level at which there is is an appreciable risk of an appreciable risk of impairing reproductive capacity impairing reproductive following consideration of

Guidepost capacity. precautionary issues.

Met? Y Y

Page 51 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

The team concludes the limit reference point is set above the level at which there is an appreciable risk of impairing reproductive capacity following consideration of precautionary issues, and this issue is scored at SG100. The limit reference point selected for Suriname seabob shrimp in the fishery management plan is set at 60% of BMSY (corresponding CPUE of 0.89 t per sea day) based on estimates from a logistic biomass dynamics model. The Guidance to the MSC Certification Requirements (Version 1.3, 14 January 2013) states:

“default limit reference points for stocks with average productivity as being ½BMSY or 20% of B0. Such points are generally consistent with being above the point at which there is an appreciable risk that recruitment is impaired, though for some short-lived stocks the actual point at which there is an appreciable risk that recruitment is impaired may be lower than 20% B0 and for some long-lived species it may be higher than this.” In the current case of Suriname seabob, a short-lived species with lifespans of 2.3 years or less (Torrez, 2015) a limit reference point set at 60% of BMSY is more precautionary than that indicated in the MSC Guidance document. This precaution is appropriate given uncertainties in the logistic model and with the potential important ecological role of seabob shrimp. Stock assessments subsequent to 2009 (CRFM 2011, 2012) have resulted in similar or slightly higher estimates of BMSY and thus the reference points are appropriate for Suriname seabob. A new stock assessment is ongoing, and will re-evaluate the

reference points. Justification

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

Guidepost with a high degree of certainty.

Met? Y N

The target reference point selected for Suriname seabob shrimp was a CPUE that

corresponds to 111% of BMSY based on estimates from a logistic biomass dynamics model (CRFM, 2009). This target reference point maintains the stock well above the limit reference point of 60% of BMSY and is more precautionary than a target set at BMSY and SG80 is met. There is not a high degree of certainty that the ecological role of seabob shrimp is fully understood and thus this issue does not meet the

Justification SG100 level.

d For key low trophic level stocks, the target reference point takes into account the ecological role of the

Guidepost stock.

Met? Not relevant

Page 52 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

While recent research indicates Suriname seabob is an ecologically important species within the Suriname coastal zone, it does not meet the criteria of a Key Low Trophic Level (LTL) Species (See Section 3.3 - Principle One: Trophic status of

seabob in Suriname waters). Justification

CRFM (Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism) 2009. CRFM Fishery Report - 2009. Volume 1. Report of Fifth Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 09-18 June 2009. 167p. CRFM 2011. CRFM Fishery Report -2011. Volume 1. Report of Seventh Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 16 - 24 June 2011. 181p. CRFM 2012. Report of Eighth Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 20 - 30 June 2012. CRFM Fishery Report - 2012. Volume 1. 150p. References LVV [MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ], 2010. Translation: Fishery management plan for Surinam Seabob fishery Xiphopenaeus kroyeri. 2010-2015. Medley, P. 2009. Harvest Control Rule Testing. Unpublished document. Medley, P. 2016. Pers comm. Suriname stock assessment update. 11th March 2016. Document provided to MSC assessment team. Torrez, P. (2015). "Reproductive biology and recruitment of Xiphopenaeus kroyeri in Suriname: Implications for resource management." MSc. Thesis, Ghent University, 44 pp.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 53 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Where the stock is depleted, there is evidence of stock rebuilding within a PI 1.1.3 specified timeframe

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Where stocks are Where stocks are depleted, depleted rebuilding strategies are demonstrated to strategies, which have be rebuilding stocks a reasonable continuously and there is strong expectation of evidence that rebuilding will be success, are in place. complete within the specified

Guidepost timeframe.

Met? (Y/N) (Y/N)

Not Relevant (Stocks are not depleted)

b A rebuilding timeframe A rebuilding timeframe The shortest practicable is specified for the is specified for the rebuilding timeframe is depleted stock that is depleted stock that is specified which does not the shorter of 30 years the shorter of 20 years exceed one generation time for or 3 times its or 2 times its the depleted stock. generation time. For generation time. For cases where 3 cases where 2 generations is less generations is less than than 5 years, the 5 years, the rebuilding rebuilding timeframe is timeframe is up to 5

Guidepost up to 5 years. years.

Met? (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)

Not Relevant

c Monitoring is in place There is evidence that to determine whether they are rebuilding the rebuilding stocks, or it is highly strategies are effective likely based on in rebuilding the stock simulation modelling or within a specified previous performance timeframe. that they will be able to rebuild the stock within

Guidepost a specified timeframe.

Met? (Y/N) (Y/N)

Not Relevant

References » ……

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE:

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 54 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is expected to achieve responsive to the state responsive to the state of the stock management of the stock and the stock and is designed to objectives reflected in elements of the harvest achieve stock management the target and limit strategy work together objectives reflected in the target reference points. towards achieving and limit reference points. management objectives reflected in the target and limit

Guidepost reference points.

Met? Y Y Y

Page 55 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

The team concludes that the Suriname shrimp harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the stock and is designed to achieve the management objectives reflected in the reference points and this issue is scored at 100. Catch and effort from all sources is accounted for, the HCR CPUE (biomass proxy) is tracked in relation to reference points, there is surveillance to ensure compliance, and there is a mechanism in place to reduce effort should HCR CPUE fall below the trigger. The high level stock management objectives listed in the fishery management plan are: An ecological responsible and sustainable fishing, with no or limited effects on: 1. the target species, the sea-bob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri; 2. the marine ecosystem of the target species; 3. the breeding and nursery grounds of the young fishes and shrimp species To meet these and the more specific objectives, there is a suite of measures to control fishing, plus regular monitoring, a harvest control rule, periodic stock assessments and focussed research to address concerns related to the effects of the seabob fishery on the ecosystem. A Seabob Working Group meets [regularly] to discuss fishery status and recommend management decisions. Management measures include restriction to a specific fishing area, a limit on the number of licenses, limitations on fishing gear and on the number of fishing days (“sea days”) and a requirement that all catches are landed at locations sanctioned by LVV (Suriname Fisheries Department). The seabob fishing zone begins at 10 fathoms (18 m) and extends to depths of 15-18 fathoms (27-33 m) which not only prevents overlap between the directed trawl fishery and artisanal fishing, but reduces any negative effects of trawling on early life history stages and juveniles which are more abundant closer to shore. Monitoring includes ongoing recording and update of catch and effort data to calculate the HCR CPUE, monitoring of sea days via catch records and VMS (required for each vessel), and monitoring of bycatch by periodic observed sea trips. There are government surveillance vessels to insure only licensed vessels are in seabob fishing zone and to insure licensed seabob vessels are in compliance with regulations. A harvest control rule links the current HCR CPUE (a biomass proxy) to a rule for limiting total effort (number of sea days). Stock assessments to update stock status and to review the HCR were conducted in 2009, 2011 and 2012. A new stock assessment using a size-structured model is in progress. Bycatch is monitored by periodic observed sea trips and various gear modifications have been put in place to reduce bycatch. VMS on vessels allows ground truthing of the number of reported fishing days and locations. Evaluations have been made of seabob catch by fleets other than the seabob trawler fleet. Extensive research has been conducted to reduce bycatch and to understand

the role of the seabob in the ecosystem. Justification

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

Guidepost at target levels.

Met? Y Y N

Page 56 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

The current harvest strategy has been in place since 2010. HCR CPUE is monitored regularly and since 2010 HCR CPUE has been above the target reference point except for a period of 19 months. The level of catches of seabob by fisheries other than seabob vessels (artisanal, penaeid trawl, finfish, IUU) has been evaluated and found to be small or non-existent. The 2012 update stock assessment (CRFM 2012) indicated results were broadly the same as those from previous stock assessments appeared robust to likely levels of artisanal landings estimated at that time. There is evidence that the strategy is achieving its objectives given that steps were taken to reduce fishing effort as a result of a decline in HCR CPUE. In addition, research on bycatch and seabob’s role in the ecosystem has been published (see P2). The 2015 12-month HCR CPUE (1.51) is below the target, but the Feb 2016 12-month CPUE is essentially at the target (1.65). This issue meets SG80. The harvest strategy has not been formally evaluated since it was put in place in 2010 (addressed in PI 3.2.5) and there is some evidence that the decision rule application was not consistent with that prescribed in the fishery management plan

(see P1.2.2). As such this scoring issue does not meet SG100. Justification

c Monitoring is in place that is expected to determine whether the harvest strategy is

working. Guidepost

Met? Y

CPUE is critical to the management strategy, so monitoring is focused on ensuring accurate catch and effort information. In addition to monitoring and quality control of catch records, VMS, and at-sea samples (to check bycatch) are expected to determine the harvest strategy success. If any of the above indicate there is non-compliance in management measures, the

fishery department can apply sanctions. This issue meets the SG60 standard. Justification

d The harvest strategy is periodically reviewed and

improved as necessary. Guidepost

Met? N

The harvest strategy has been in place since 2010 and the fishery management

plan for seabob was expected to be in place until 2015 (LVV 2010). As such the harvest strategy is due for review and SG100 is not met. This review can be started before the current stock assessment is completed but will benefit greatly from the finalized stock assessment. Evaluation will be done after HCR development, an expected outcome from the stock assessment (LVV, pers. comm.,

Justification 2016).

e It is likely that shark It is highly likely that There is a high degree of finning is not taking shark finning is not certainty that shark finning is

place. taking place. not taking place. Guidepost

Page 57 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Met? Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant

Justification

CRFM 2012. Report of Eighth Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 20 - 30 June 2012. CRFM Fishery Report - 2012. Volume 1. 150p. LVV [MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ], 2010. Translation: Fishery References management plan for Surinam Seabob fishery Xiphopenaeus kroyeri. 2010-2015. LVV [MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ], pers. comm. 2016. Comment during site visit meeting, Mar. 16, 2016.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 58 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

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

Guidepost approached.

Met? Y Y

Well defined harvest control rules are in place that meet the criteria of SG80. The current HCR limits the maximum effort (days at sea) to 5100. This sets an upper limit on exploitation. A limit reference point based on a biomass proxy is set at a

CPUE of 0.89 (equivalent to 60% of BMSY). A trigger reference point is set at a CPUE of 1.48 (equivalent to the BMSY estimate) well above the limit reference point. If and when the trigger CPUE is reached, maximum effort is to be reduced in a linear fashion such that it would be zero if the limit reference point is reached. Applied correctly, this HCR ensures that exploitation rate is reduced as the limit

Justification reference point is approached.

b The selection of the The design of the harvest harvest control rules control rules takes into account takes into account the a wide range of uncertainties.

main uncertainties. Guidepost

Met? Y N

Using simulation methods, the HCR for Suriname seabob was shown to be robust to uncertainties such as stock productivity, hyperstability in the biomass proxy (CPUE) and sample or process error (Medley 2009). The HCR was shown to be sensitive to significant changes in catchability, which would invalidate the biomass proxy. The selection of the harvest control rules takes into account the main uncertainties. Recommendations are in place to monitor factors that could change catchability, such as changes in gear design to reduce bycatch. SG80 is met. The SG100 level is not met because there is uncertainty regarding the effect of sargassum incursions on CPUE. Given that sargassum incursions are likely to

Justification reduce rather than inflate CPUE, this is not regarded as a main uncertainty.

c There is some Available evidence Evidence clearly shows that the evidence that tools indicates that the tools tools in use are effective in used to implement in use are appropriate achieving the exploitation levels harvest control rules and effective in required under the harvest are appropriate and achieving the control rules. effective in controlling exploitation levels exploitation. required under the

Guidepost harvest control rules.

Met? Y N N

Page 59 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

The available evidence indicates the HCR CPUE is well tracked and that management can respond to reductions in HCR CPUE, and SG60 is met. This scoring issue is not met at SG80 because it is unclear if the HCR is being applied as prescribed in the fishery harvest plan. This may be due to some confusion over how the HCR should be applied (Medley, P. pers. comm.), or possibly due to undocumented modifications to how the HCR should be applied. As such it is uncertain that if the HCR CPUE falls below the trigger in the future, fishing effort will be lowered to reduce exploitation rate according the HCR. An example of this apparent confusion is provided below. In the Seabob management plan, HCR CPUE is described as: “The current CPUE for each year shall be calculated as the average of the year prior to the current year.” For application of the decision rule, the 12 month HCR CPUE for the previous calendar years is prescribed. In the document supplied by LVV to the assessment team, CPUE (monthly CPUE in t/days at sea) and “12 month HCR CPUE” are provided for each month. There is no indication that the relevant CPUE for application of the decision rule is that for the previous year. Tracking the annual CPUE on a monthly basis (as in the LVV document – LVV, pers. comm. 2016) is prudent and precautionary but the current HCR decision rule is based on calendar year CPUE. In August 2014 HCR CPUE dropped below the target for the first time since early 2011. The monthly catch rate in June was 0.63, a substantial reduction from the April monthly CPUE (1.42). The Seabob working group discussed the reasons for the drop and surmised the likely cause was an influx of sargassum which clogged the nets and thus reduced catches. This influx is consistent with reports elsewhere in the Caribbean (Doyle and Franks, 2015). Monthly CPUE recovered to 1.57 in August 2014, but the HCR CPUE dropped to 1.46, just below the trigger of 1.48. The HCR CPUE for the 12 months of 2014 was 1.39. This is below the trigger but there was evidently no management consideration of what the annual effort (days at sea) for 2015 should be. At the trigger the HCR calls for an application of the following rule: Number of days-at-sea = (current CPUE – Limit CPUE) × 8.625 [note CPUE in kg per days at sea] For an HCR CPUE of 1.39, application of the HCR rule calls for no more than 4312 days at sea for the 2015 calendar year. It is unclear whether this effort level was calculated, but for the 2015 calendar year the effort was 4198 sea days, below the HCR prescribed number of days. In August 2015 there was again a sharp drop in monthly CPUE, likely due to sargassum (assessment team meeting with LVV, Mar 15, 2016) and in November 2015 a decision was taken to reduce effort by reducing the number of active vessels by 25%. This remained in place until Mar 2016 after several months of high monthly CPUE (2.2-2.8) and a recovery of the monthly HCR CPUE to close to the target. This measure did have some effect on reduced effort. Nov 2015 to Feb 2016 days at sea was 1047, lower than previous years (2014-15: 1338 days; 2013- 14: 1471 days; 2012-13: 1234 days). While this measure was precautionary, it was inconsistent with the HCR. Following the HCR, the relevant HCR CPUE was that for Jan-Dec 2015. This was 1.51, above the trigger of 1.48, and thus according to the HCR, the upper limit of 5100 days should apply for 2016. The steps taken to reduce effort in Nov 2015 are applauded as they are more precautionary than required by the HCR, but there was apparently no reference to

Justification the HCR in early 2015, when the 2014 HCR CPUE dipped below the trigger.

References Doyle, E. and J. Franks. 2015. Sargassum Fact Sheet. Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute.

Page 60 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

LVV [MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ], pers. comm. 2016. Document with monthly catch and effort data and graphic provided during site visit meeting, Mar. 16, 2016. Medley, P. 2009. Harvest Control Rule Testing. Unpublished document. Medley, P. 2016. Pers comm. Email, May 10, 2016.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 75

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 1

Page 61 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Some relevant Sufficient relevant A comprehensive range of information related to information related to information (on stock structure, stock structure, stock stock structure, stock stock productivity, fleet productivity and fleet productivity, fleet composition, stock abundance, composition is composition and other fishery removals and other available to support data is available to information such as the harvest strategy. support the harvest environmental information), strategy. including some that may not be

directly related to the current

Guidepost harvest strategy, is available.

Met? Y Y N

Sufficient relevant information are available to support the harvest strategy for Suriname seabob and this issue is scored at SG80. The harvest strategy aims for a sustainable population of Suriname seabob with limited or no effects on the marine ecosystem of seabob, including the community of associated fish and shrimp. The harvest strategy includes measures to control fishing, monitoring, a harvest control rule, periodic stock assessments and focussed research (see P.1.2.1). The HCR is based on CPUE which is regularly monitored and updated monthly. The HCR operates on the 12-month CPUE from the previous calendar year. Stock structure of Atlantic seabob is not well understood but the distribution is known to cross national boundaries. Seabob are patchy in distribution, this is confirmed by Perez (2014). Examination of available evidence (morphometrics, CPUE indices and size structure) in 2009 indicated there was no evidence that seabob in Suriname and Guyana were the same stock and thus Suriname shrimp were assumed to be separate from Guyana seabob. This is precautionary since by assessing Suriname separately, it preserves potential genetic diversity. Planned research on population genetics of Atlantic seabob may point to the need for alternative hypotheses of stock structure that will need to be modelled. To support the harvest strategy information on historical and current seabob removals is needed. In 2011 (CRFM 2011) a times series of landings data was updated from the first stock assessment in 2009. Earlier errors in the data were eliminated and the catch effort data was validated back to 2001 and the total catch data validated back to 1999. Current data on catch and effort are available from industry maintained records and mandatory VMS allows partial ground-truthing. Efforts continue to improve the quality of the catch and effort data (C. Landsburg, pers. comm., site visit meeting, Mar. 16, 2016). Data on the size and sex structure of seabob is collected from samples of the landed catch and this data is being incorporated into the current stock assessment (Medley, P., pers. comm.) which should increase confidence in the assessment of stock status and the appropriateness of reference points. To evaluate bycatch at-sea monitoring of seabob fleet catch has been conducted periodically. Extensive research has been conducted to develop approaches for reducing bycatch. Information on Suriname seabob stock structure, stock productivity and associated environmental information cannot be said to be comprehensive, and there is

uncertainty on the effect of sargassum on CPUE, so this SI does not meet SG100. Justification

Page 62 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy

b Stock abundance and Stock abundance and All information required by the fishery removals are fishery removals are harvest control rule is monitored and at least regularly monitored at a monitored with high frequency one indicator is level of accuracy and and a high degree of certainty, available and coverage consistent and there is a good monitored with with the harvest control understanding of inherent sufficient frequency to rule, and one or more uncertainties in the information support the harvest indicators are available [data] and the robustness of control rule. and monitored with assessment and management sufficient frequency to to this uncertainty. support the harvest

Guidepost control rule.

Met? Y Y N

Fishery removals are monitored via records of daily catch and effort recorded by industry and maintained electronically by LVV (C. Landsburg, pers. comm., site visit meeting, Mar. 16, 2016). Mandatory VMS is available to ground truth effort (days fished) and effort location. Stock abundance is monitored by a biomass proxy (CPUE in tons/day at sea), which is directly calculated from the catch and effort data. As such SG80 is met. CPUE is monitored monthly which is more than frequent enough to support the harvest control rule which is based on calendar year CPUE. SG100 is not met as there are uncertainties associated with changes in CPUE associated with sargassum incursions. Any changes in catchability which affect the relationship between CPUE and biomass are important to monitor and understand given that the reference points rely on CPUE as a biomass proxy. Changes in catchability appear likely as a result of sargassum incursions but are also possible as a result of gear modifications to reduce bycatch. Evidence was not presented that changes in catchability are being monitored and evaluated but given that bycatch modifications are most likely to reduce rather than inflate CPUE (and would thus induce more precaution), a recommendation is included rather than a condition. Recommendation – Conduct analyses to evaluate whether CPUE has been

Justification affected by changes in gear or changes in environmental conditions.

c There is good information on all other fishery removals from

the stock. Guidepost

Met? Y

Page 63 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy

This issue meets SG80. The seabob fishery has successfully met a condition from the first MSC assessment to obtain good information on all fishery removals from the stock. Data were gathered on four potential sources of removals outside the directed seabob fishery: the artisanal fishery, the Penaeus fishery, the finfish trawl fishery and IUU catches. Of these, the artisanal fishery is the only one that is significant compared to the directed fishery and a questionnaire survey has been developed that will be conducted quarterly in the future. More detail is provided in the 4th surveillance report (Acoura Marine, 2016). With regard to the other sources of seabob removals, any changes to fishing strategy by other fleets should be monitored. If they occur, re-evaluation of seabob

Justification removals may be needed. Acoura Marine 2016. MSC Sustainable Fisheries Certification. Onsite Surveillance Visit - Report for Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp Fishery. 4th Surveillance Audit, April 2016. Available at www.msc.org. CRFM 2009. CRFM Fishery Report - 2009. Volume 1. Report of Fifth Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 09-18 June 2009. 167p. CRFM 2011. Report of Seventh Annual Scientific Meeting – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the References Grenadines, 16 - 24 June 2011 – Fishery Management Advisory Summaries. CRFM Fishery Report - 2011. Volume 2. 77p. Medley, P. 2016. Pers comm. Suriname stock assessment update. 11th March 2016. Document provided to MSC assessment team. Pérez, A.R. (2014). Ecology and dynamics of the Atlantic seabob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) in Suriname based on fisheries data and local ecological knowledge. MSc. Thesis, Ghent University, 68 pp.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 64 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a The assessment is The assessment is appropriate appropriate for the for the stock and for the harvest stock and for the control rule and takes into harvest control rule. account the major features relevant to the biology of the species and the nature of the

Guidepost fishery.

Met? Y N

The stock assessment is appropriate for the stock and the harvest control rule and this SI is scored at 80. The stock assessment completed in 2009 and updated in 2011 and 2012 is a logistic biomass model and has been used commonly for shrimp stocks. Logistic models cannot incorporate any biological information regarding the growth rate of individuals, maturity or natural mortality rate. This is a limitation but logistic models do provide estimates of biomass and other parameters where such information is unavailable. The last assessment in 2012 utilized a longer time series than in 2009. The logistic model was fitted to the total catch from 1985-2011 and catch and effort from 2001- 2011. The logistic biomass model makes certain key assumptions that are reasonable but need to be continually evaluated: 1. the CPUE index is proportional to abundance. 2. The biomass dynamics model is appropriate for describing the dynamics of the species. 3. Total catches are well estimated. 4. The information included in the priors is valid. The logistic model treats the population as a whole and does not account for potential differences due to life stage and sex. Shrimp cannot be aged reliably but size- and sex based models can account for differences in growth and reproduction due to size and sex. The stock assessment currently underway (Medway, P., pers. comm.) uses a model that does account for these differences and should increase confidence in the assessment of stock status and of appropriate reference points. Given the currently available stock assessment does not account for size and sex differences and has not been updated since 2012, this issue does not meet SG

Justification 100.

b The assessment estimates stock status relative to reference

points. Guidepost

Met? Y

The currently available stock assessment model estimates BMSY and uses a

biomass proxy (CPUE) to relate current status to the BMSY based reference points. Justification

c The assessment The assessment takes The assessment takes into identifies major uncertainty into account uncertainty and is sources of uncertainty. account. evaluating stock status relative to reference points in a

Guidepost probabilistic way.

Page 65 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status

Met? Y Y Y

The existing stock assessments accounts for uncertainty and evaluates stock status

relative to reference points probabilistically and thus this issue is scored at SG 100.

The 2009 stock assessment and updates in 2011 and 2012 use Bayesian Statistics and the Monte Carlo methods to estimate BMSY, replacement yield, current biomass relative to biomass at BMSY, and current fishing mortality relative to fishing mortality th th at BMSY (CRFM, 2009). Upper percentiles (95 ) and lower percentiles (5 ) are

Justification provided to account for uncertainty in the estimates.

d The assessment has been tested and shown to be robust. Alternative hypotheses and assessment approaches have

Guidepost been rigorously explored.

Met? N

The 2009 assessment was updated in 2011 and 2012 and was found to be robust to additional data. However, given that the logistic model used does not account for differences due to size and sex, alternative modelling approaches are needed to increase confidence that the reference points and HCR are appropriate. SG100 is

not met. Justification

e The assessment of The assessment has been stock status is subject internally and externally peer

to peer review. reviewed. Guidepost

Met? Y N

The current assessment was reviewed within the shrimp and groundfish working group of the CRFM at meetings in 2009, 2011 and 2012 and SG80 is met. While these reviews included outside experts, they were not tasked specifically with reviewing the seabob stock assessments. As such this issue does not meet

SG100. Justification

CRFM 2009. CRFM Fishery Report - 2009. Volume 1. Report of Fifth Annual Scientific Meeting References – Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, 09-18 June 2009. 167p.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 66 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Principle 2

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Main retained species Main retained species There is a high degree of are likely to be within are highly likely to be certainty that retained species

biologically based within biologically are within biologically based

limits (if not, go to based limits (if not, go limits and fluctuating around scoring issue c below). to scoring issue c their target reference points.

below). Guidepost Met? Y Y RBF score = 90

The data presented in Table 3.4 show that there were then no main retained species, but bangamary (Macrodon ancylodon – 2.5%), green weakfish (Cynoscion virescens – 1.2%) and smalleye croaker (Nebris microps – 1.0%), were retained and taken in minor quantities, as well as very small quantities of Carpas shrimp (Farfantepenaeus subtilis – 0.3%). As there are no main retained species, the fishery meets the SG80 level of performance by default.

A PSA was undertaken for all four minor retained species as a precaution. The PSA data for retained species are provided in Appendix 1.2, table A1.2.1, with the scoring provided in A1.2.3. The PSA scores for these minor retained species were as follows:

Bangamary: 92 Green weakfish: 90 Smalleye croaker: 92

Carpas shrimp: 96

Following the scoring approach proscribed in Table CC18 (MSC 2013a), this SI is scored 90 on the basis that “All elements score at least 80; some achieve higher

scores approaching 100, but some do not.” Justification

b Target reference points are

defined for retained species. Guidepost Met? N

Target reference points are not defined for retained species, and so the fishery

does not meet this SG100 level requirement. Justification

Page 67 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

c If main retained If main retained species are outside species are outside the the limits there are limits there is a partial measures in place that strategy of are expected to ensure demonstrably effective that the fishery does management measures

not hinder recovery in place such that the

and rebuilding of the fishery does not hinder depleted species. recovery and

rebuilding. Guidepost Met? Y Y

There are no main retained species, so a default score of 80 is given. Justification d 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. Guidepost Met? Y

Status has been determined by RBF. Measures including the use of the TED and BRD in the nets, together with the limits placed on the number of vessels, on the total number of fishing days per year, and on the spatial extent of the fishery (DoF 2012), are in place and are expected to result in the fishery not causing the retained species to be outside biologically based limits or hindering recovery. There are no main retained species, and catches of retained species are very limited. The fishery

meets this SG60 level requirement. Justification DoF (2012). Fisheries management plan for Suriname, the seabob (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) References fisheries, 2010-2015. Suriname Directorate of Fisheries, modified August 2012. 28 pp. MSC (2013a). MSC certification requirements, version 1.3, 14 January 2013. Marine Stewardship Council, London. 301 pp.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

Page 68 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to PI 2.1.2 ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy in place for place, if necessary, strategy in place, if managing retained species. that are expected to necessary, that is maintain the main expected to maintain retained species at the main retained levels which are highly species at levels which likely to be within are highly likely to be biologically based within biologically limits, or to ensure the based limits, or to

fishery does not hinder ensure the fishery does

their recovery and not hinder their rebuilding. recovery and

rebuilding. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

There are no main retained species, so a default score of 80 is given.

The use of the TED and BRD in the nets, together with the limits placed on the number of vessels, on the total number of fishing days per year, and on the spatial extent of the fishery (DoF 2012), together comprises a partial strategy that is expected to maintain 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. As such, the fishery clearly meets the SG80 level of performance. A score of 100 is not warranted as this would require measures that are focused specifically on managing retained species, and the TED and BRD are focused on

reducing bycatch. Justification b The measures are There is some Testing supports high considered likely to objective basis for confidence that the strategy will work, based on confidence that the work, based on information plausible argument partial strategy will directly about the fishery and/or (e.g., general work, based on some species involved.

experience, theory or information directly

comparison with about the fishery and/or similar species involved.

fisheries/species). Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Page 69 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to PI 2.1.2 ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species

The use of BRDs and TEDs is known to be effective in reducing the amount of non- shrimp catch in shrimp trawls (e.g., Brewer et al. 2006, Griffiths et al. 2006), and work will be ongoing to further develop the effectiveness of the TEDs and BRDs in coming years, with the Suriname seabob fishery being actively involved in the FAO project REBYC-II LAC (Reduction of Bycatch in Latin American and Caribbean Countries). The license cap and spatial restrictions also effectively limit the potential for the fishery to overexploit retained species. Catch data are available which confirms there is a low level of catch of retained species. The fishery clearly meets the SG80 but cannot meet the SG100 because there is considered to be only a

partial strategy in place. Justification c There is some There is clear evidence that the

evidence that the strategy is being implemented

partial strategy is being successfully. implemented

successfully. Guidepost Met? Y N

At sea compliance monitoring is undertaken to check on the presence of TEDs and BRDs, and VMS is used to monitor the number of vessels fishing, day allocation limits and the spatial extent of the fishery, all of which are legally binding as part of the license. These elements are only a partial strategy to manage retained species, however, so the fishery meets the SG80 but cannot meet the SG100 level of

performance. Justification

d There is some evidence that

the strategy is achieving its

overall objective. Guidepost Met? N

The measures in place comprise a partial strategy to manage retained species. As

such the fishery cannot meet the SG100 level of performance. Justification

e It is likely that shark It is highly likely that There is a high degree of finning is not taking shark finning is not certainty that shark finning is

place. taking place. not taking place. Guidepost Met? N/A N/A N/A

Page 70 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to PI 2.1.2 ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species

The TEDs in use in the fishery are designed to minimise the possibility of any shark

species being taken in the fishery, and no shark species accounted for anything other than a negligible quantity in the 2014 catch data. This SI is therefore

considered to be not relevant. Justification Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B. & P. Jones (2006). The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia’s northern prawn trawl fishery. Fisheries Research, V. 81, pp. 176- 188. References DoF (2012). Fisheries management plan for Suriname, the seabob (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) fisheries, 2010-2015. Suriname Directorate of Fisheries, modified August 2012. 28 pp. Griffiths, S.P., Brewer, D.T., Heales, D.S., Milton, D.A. & I.C. Stobutzki (2006). Validating ecological risk assessments for fisheries: assessing the impacts of turtle excluder devices on elasmobranch bycatch populations in an Australian trawl fishery. Marine and freshwater Research, V. 57, pp. 395-401. D

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

Page 71 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Qualitative information Qualitative information Accurate and verifiable is available on the and some quantitative information is available on the amount of main information are catch of all retained species

retained species taken available on the and the consequences for the

by the fishery. amount of main status of affected populations. retained species taken

by the fishery. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

The 2014 catch data presented to the team (T.Willems, pers. comm.) are quantitative and the assessment team was satisfied that they were accurate and representative of the fishery as a whole. The fishery clearly meets the SG80 level of performance. However, the fishery does not meet the SG100 level as the data comprised a relatively small sample, only, and were not verified by other means. Data on the consequence of the catch for the status of affected populations were

also not available. Justification b Information is Information is sufficient Information is sufficient to adequate to to estimate outcome quantitatively estimate outcome

qualitatively assess status with respect to status with a high degree of

outcome status with biologically based certainty. respect to biologically limits.

based limits. Guidepost Met? N/A (RBF) N/A (RBF) N/A (RBF)

Retained species were scored with the RBF, and so this SI is not scored. Justification c Information is Information is adequate Information is adequate to adequate to support to support a partial support a strategy to manage

measures to manage strategy to manage retained species, and evaluate

main retained species. main retained species. with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is

achieving its objective. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Page 72 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Retained catch data are collated centrally and are available for comparison between vessels and the two companies involved. Other data showing the whole catch have been collected through research projects including those by T.Willems during his PhD work. There are no main retained species in the fishery, but this information would adequate to support a partial strategy to manage main retained species, so meeting the SG80 level of performance. Information on stock status for retained species is not available, and so the fishery does not meet the SG100 level

of performance. Justification d Sufficient data continue Monitoring of retained species to be collected to is conducted in sufficient detail detect any increase in to assess ongoing mortalities to risk level (e.g. due to all retained species. changes in the outcome indicator

score or the operation

of the fishery or the effectiveness of the

strategy) Guidepost Met? Y Y

Vessels operating in the Suriname seabob fishery are tracked by VMS, and restricted to a narrow depth-limited corridor off the Suriname coast. The potential for large-scale variations in catch of retained species is limited. Nevertheless, retained catch data are collated centrally and are available for comparison between vessels and the two companies involved. It is considered that monitoring of retained species is conducted in sufficient detail to assess ongoing mortalities to all retained

species, so meeting the SG100 level of performance. Justification References

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

Page 73 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the bycatch PI 2.2.1 species or species groups and does not hinder recovery of depleted bycatch species or species groups

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Main bycatch species Main bycatch species There is a high degree of are likely to be within are highly likely to be certainty that bycatch species

biologically based within biologically are within biologically based

limits (if not, go to based limits (if not, go limits. scoring issue b below). to scoring issue b

below). Guidepost Met? Y Y N

There were two main bycatch species recorded in the catch (see Table 3.4, T. Willems, pers. comm), smalleye stardrum (Stelifer microps – 11.9%) and Jamaica weakfish (Cynoscion jamaicensis – 5.6%).

Scyphozoa jellyfish (8.2%) as a group was considered to be minor, together with 17 other species including longnose stingray (Dasyatis guttata – 1.7%), largehead hairtail (Trichiurus lepturus – 1.5%), rake stardrum (Stellifer rastrifer – 1.3%) and shorthead drum (Larimus breviceps – 1.1%) as the only species to comprise more than 1% of the catch (Table 3.4).

All bycatch species were scored using the RBF; as main bycatch species, smalleye stardrum and Jamaica weakfish both scored 93 using the PSA (Appendix 1.2, Table A1.2.3). As such, the fishery meets the SG80 level of performance. However, whilst the data also show that most minor bycatch species scored >80 using the PSA, elasmobranch species such as longnose stingray and sharpsnout stingray scored just less than 80 using the PSA. As such, the fishery does not meet the SG100

level of performance. Justification b If main bycatch If main bycatch species species are outside are outside biologically biologically based based limits there is a limits there are partial strategy of mitigation measures in demonstrably effective place that are mitigation measures in

expected to ensure place such that the

that the fishery does fishery does not hinder not hinder recovery recovery and

and rebuilding. rebuilding. Guidepost Met? Y Y

Smalleye stardrum and Jamaica weakfish were the two main bycatch species. Both were scored using the RBF and both scored >80 (Appendix 1.2, Table A1.2.3). As such, main bycatch species were considered highly likely to be within biologically

based limits. The SG80 level of performance is met. Justification

Page 74 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the bycatch PI 2.2.1 species or species groups and does not hinder recovery of depleted bycatch species or species groups

c If the status is poorly known there are measures or practices in place that are expected to result in the fishery not causing

the bycatch species to

be outside biologically based limits or

hindering recovery. Guidepost Met? Y

The status of bycatch species was assessed using the RBF.

Measures including the use of the TED and BRD in the nets, together with the limits placed on the number of vessels, on the total number of fishing days per year, and on the spatial extent of the fishery (DoF 2012), are in place and are expected to result in the fishery not causing the bycatch species to be outside biologically based

limits or hindering recovery. Justification References DoF (2012). Fisheries management plan for Suriname, the seabob (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) fisheries, 2010-2015. Suriname Directorate of Fisheries, modified August 2012. 28 pp.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

Page 75 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place for managing bycatch that is designed to ensure PI 2.2.2 the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to bycatch populations

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy in place for place, if necessary, strategy in place, if managing and minimizing that are expected to necessary, that is bycatch. maintain the main expected to maintain bycatch species at the main bycatch levels which are highly species at levels which likely to be within are highly likely to be biologically based within biologically limits, or to ensure the based limits, or to

fishery does not hinder ensure the fishery does

their recovery and not hinder their rebuilding. recovery and

rebuilding. Guidepost Met? Y Y Y

Together with the licence and days-at-sea caps, restricting the fishery to a narrow depth-limited band off the Suriname coast and the requirement to record bycatch, the use of the TED and BRD in the nets comprises a strategy to manage and minimse bycatch 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. The fishery is also participating in the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) funded REBYC II LAC project, showing on-going commitment to minimise bycatch. There is some monitoring of the catch by on-board observers. As such, the fishery

clearly meets the SG100 level of performance. Justification b The measures are There is some Testing supports high considered likely to objective basis for confidence that the strategy will work, based on confidence that the work, based on information plausible argument partial strategy will directly about the fishery and/or (e.g. general work, based on some species involved.

experience, theory or information directly

comparison with about the fishery and/or similar species involved.

fisheries/species). Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Page 76 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place for managing bycatch that is designed to ensure PI 2.2.2 the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to bycatch populations

As noted against PI 2.1.2, the use of BRDs and TEDs is known to be effective in reducing the amount of non-shrimp catch in shrimp trawls (e.g., Brewer et al. 2006, Griffiths et al. 2006). Good data exist on bycatch quantities taken in the fishery (e.g., T. Willems, pers. comm.). Some work has also been undertaken to test and review the effectiveness of the existing TEDs in comparison to a different TED design (R.Lieveld, Dept. of Fisheries, pers. comm.). At present, the fishery clearly meets the SG80 level of performance, but the effectiveness of the BRD has not been reviewed to the knowledge of the assessment team, precluding a higher score. Work to further develop the effectiveness of the TEDs and BRDs will be undertaken in coming years, however, with the Suriname seabob fishery participating in the FAO project REBYC-II LAC (Reduction of Bycatch in Latin American and Caribbean Countries). This should allow the fishery to meet the

SG100 for this SI in future. Justification c There is some There is clear evidence that the

evidence that the strategy is being implemented

partial strategy is being successfully. implemented

successfully. Guidepost Met? Y Y

VMS is used on all vessels engaged in the Suriname seabob fishery, to confirm that fishing occurs in the designated depth-limited band. Compliance monitoring is also undertaken to check on the presence of TEDs and BRDs in the nets, and clearly shows that the BRDs and TEDs are used. The fishery meets the SG100 level of

performance. Justification

d There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its

overall objective. Guidepost Met? Y

Catch data (3.4) show that the fishery is managing and minimising bycatch levels.

The fishery meets this SG100 level requirement. Justification Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B. & P. Jones (2006). The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine References communities in Australia’s northern prawn trawl fishery. Fisheries Research, V. 81, pp. 176- 188. Griffiths, S.P., Brewer, D.T., Heales, D.S., Milton, D.A. & I.C. Stobutzki (2006). Validating ecological risk assessments for fisheries: assessing the impacts of turtle excluder devices on

Page 77 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place for managing bycatch that is designed to ensure PI 2.2.2 the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to bycatch populations

elasmobranch bycatch populations in an Australian trawl fishery. Marine and freshwater Research, V. 57, pp. 395-401.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

Page 78 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Information on the nature and the amount of bycatch is adequate to PI 2.2.3 determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Qualitative information Qualitative information Accurate and verifiable is available on the and some quantitative information is available on the amount of main information are catch of all bycatch species and

bycatch species taken available on the the consequences for the

by the fishery. amount of main status of affected populations. bycatch species taken

by the fishery. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

As noted against PI 2.1.3, the catch data presented to the team (T.Willems, pers. comm.) are quantitative and the assessment team was satisfied that they were accurate and representative of the fishery as a whole. The fishery clearly meets the SG80 level of performance. However, the fishery does not meet the SG100 level as the data comprised a relatively small sample, only, and were not verified by other means. Data on the consequence of the catch for the status of affected populations

were also not available. Justification b Information is Information is sufficient Information is sufficient to adequate to broadly to estimate outcome quantitatively estimate outcome

understand outcome status with respect to status with respect to

status with respect to biologically based biologically based limits with a biologically based limits. high degree of certainty.

limits Guidepost Met? Not relevant (RBF) Not relevant (RBF) Not relevant (RBF)

Bycatch species were scored with the RBF, and so this SI is not scored. Justification c Information is Information is adequate Information is adequate to adequate to support to support a partial support a strategy to manage

measures to manage strategy to manage retained species, and evaluate

bycatch. main bycatch species. with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is

achieving its objective. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Page 79 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Information on the nature and the amount of bycatch is adequate to PI 2.2.3 determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch

Data showing the whole catch have been collected through research projects including those by T.Willems during his PhD work. This information is adequate to support a partial strategy to manage main bycatch species (only smalleye stardrum – 11.9% and Jamaica weakfish – 5.6%), so meeting the SG80 level of performance. Information on stock status for bycatch species is not available, and so the fishery

cannot meet the SG100 level of performance. Justification d Sufficient data continue Monitoring of bycatch data is to be collected to conducted in sufficient detail to detect any increase in assess ongoing mortalities to risk to main bycatch all bycatch species. species (e.g., due to changes in the outcome indicator

scores or the operation

of the fishery or the effectively of the

strategy). Guidepost Met? Y N

Vessels operating in the Suriname seabob fishery are tracked by VMS, and restricted to a narrow depth-limited corridor off the Suriname coast. The potential for large-scale variations in catch of bycatch species is limited. Data are also collected periodically through research projects (e.g., Willems 2016). Overall, sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk to main bycatch species (e.g., due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectively of the strategy), so the fishery meets the

SG80 level of performance. Justification References Willems, T. 2016. An Ecosystem Approach to fisheries management: the Atlantic seabob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) in Suriname. Ph.D. Thesis, Ghent University. http://hdl.handle.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): N/A

Page 80 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species PI 2.3.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ETP species and does not hinder recovery of ETP species

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Known effects of the The effects of the There is a high degree of fishery are likely to be fishery are known and certainty that the effects of the within limits of national are highly likely to be fishery are within limits of and international within limits of national national and international

requirements for and international requirements for protection of

protection of ETP requirements for ETP species. species. protection of ETP

species. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

A variety of species listed on CITES Appendix I are found within Suriname’s waters including smalltooth and largetooth sawfish, leatherback, hawksbill, green and olive ridley turtles, Guiana dolphin and West Indian manatee.

The use of the TEDs in the nets is designed to prevent the capture of turtles in particular, and ETP species in general. Data on the effects of TEDs on turtles and large fish species are available (e.g., Brewer et al. 2006, Crowder et al. 1995, Griffiths et al. 2006, Lewison et al. 2003, NMFS undated), indicating that TEDs are effective at reducing impacts.

No ETP species was reported in the catch data for 2014, and it is considered that the effects of the fishery are known and are highly likely to be within limits of nation and international requirements for protection of ETP species, so meeting the SG80 level of performance. A higher score should be possible with greater corroboration

of the 2014 data with data on ETP species interactions from other recent years. Justification b Known direct effects Direct effects are highly There is a high degree of

are unlikely to create unlikely to create confidence that there are no

unacceptable impacts unacceptable impacts significant detrimental direct to ETP species. to ETP species. effects of the fishery on ETP

species. Guidepost Met? Y Y Y

Page 81 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species PI 2.3.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ETP species and does not hinder recovery of ETP species

Direct effects from the Suriname seabob fishery on ETP species are considered to be capture or direct morality resulting from the passage of an ETP animal through the fishing gear, or because of being impacted by it.

Catch data showing no interactions between the fishery and ETP species, together with the studies listed in SIa, above, provide a high degree of confidence that there are no significant detrimental direct effects of the fishery on ETP species. The

fishery meets the SG100 level of performance. Justification c Indirect effects have There is a high degree of

been considered and confidence that there are no

are thought to be significant detrimental indirect unlikely to create effects of the fishery on ETP

unacceptable impacts. species. Guidepost Met? Y N

Indirect effects from the Suriname seabob fishery are considered to include sub- lethal effects resulting from passage or repeated passage through the fishing gear, or disturbance with feeding or spawning activities and reductions in prey availability, caused by the fishing activity, or interactions with lost gear or rubbish thrown overboard from fishing vessels.

Sub-lethal effects on ETP turtle species have been studied in US shrimp fisheries, and data have shown that TEDs do reduce sub-lethal effects (Lewison et al. 2003), although compliance with TED regulations is important compliance with the TED requirements in the Suiname seabob fishery are closely monitored both at sea and at the quayside, and no concerns were raised during the reassessment site visit.

None of the ETP species present in Suriname waters are restricted to the locality, and the narrow strip in which seabob fishing occurs appears very unlikely to be a key feeding or resting area. Seabob is also very unlikely to be a key prey item for any ETP species.

It is forbidden to discard plastic, glass and oil from vessels in the fishery (DoF 2012), and during the reassessment site visit it was confirmed that, if gear is lost for

any reason, significant efforts are made to recover it.

Overall, indirect effects have been considered and are thought to be unlikely to create unacceptable impacts. However, by their nature, it is difficult to confirm that

there arno indirect effects, and so the SG100 is not met. Justification Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B. & P. Jones (2006). The impact References of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia’s northern prawn trawl fishery. Fisheries Research, V. 81, pp. 176- 188.

Page 82 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species PI 2.3.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ETP species and does not hinder recovery of ETP species

Crowder, L.B., Hopkins-Murphy, S.R. & J.A. Royle (1995). Effects of turtle excluder devices (TEDs) on loggerhead sea turtle strandings with implications for conservation. Copeia, No. 4, pp. 773-779. DoF (2012). Fisheries management plan for Suriname, the seabob (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) fisheries, 2010-2015. Suriname Directorate of Fisheries, modified August 2012. 28 pp. Griffiths, S.P., Brewer, D.T., Heales, D.S., Milton, D.A. & I.C. Stobutzki (2006). Validating ecological risk assessments for fisheries: assessing the impacts of turtle excluder devices on elasmobranch bycatch populations in an Australian trawl fishery. Marine and freshwater Research, V. 57, pp. 395-401. Lewison, R.L., Crowder, L.B. & D.J. Shaver (2003). The impact of turtle excluder devices and fisheries closures on loggerhead and Kemp’s ridley strandings in the western Gulf of Mexico. Conservation Biology, V. 17, pp. 1089-1097. NMFS (undated). History of turtle excluder devices (TEDs). NOAA, Southeast Fisheries Science Center (http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/labs/mississippi/ted/history.htm).

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 83 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place for managing ETP species that is designed to PI 2.3.2Alt ensure the fishery does not hinder the recovery of ETP species.

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy in place for place that are strategy in place that is managing ETP species, to

expected to ensure the expected to ensure the ensure the fishery does not

fishery does not hinder fishery does not hinder hinder the recovery of ETP the recovery of ETP the recovery of ETP species.

species. species. Guidepost Met? Y Y Y

The team shall evaluate the ETP species management strategy for the fishery under PI 2.3.2 Alternate (CR Table CB15a) where there are no requirements of protection and rebuilding provided through national ETP legislation or international agreements (CR CB3.12.3, MSC 2013a).

The key element of the strategy for managing ETP species interactions is the requirement to use a TED in the gear. However, restricting the area of the fishery, as well as the number of boats that may participate, and the number of days that can be fished, complement the TED measure.

As reported in a previous surveillance audit for the seabob fishery, onboard recording of ETP interactions has been implemented on all vessels and submission of ETP encounters recording forms is mandatory for all Captains at the end of each fishing trip (DoF 2012). Captains are also required to report observations of ETP species seen on the surface, and to implement a move-on rule such that the reporting vessel and other Suriname seabob fishing vessels are required to avoid the location for a period of 5 days. It is not possible for the reassessment team to

evaluate the level of compliance with this requirement, however.

Overall, it is considered that there is a strategy in place for managing ETP species, to ensure the fishery does not hinder the recovery of ETP species. As such, the

fishery scores 100 for this SI. Justification b The measures are There is some The strategy is mainly based on considered likely to objective basis for information directly about the work, based on confidence that the fishery and/or species involved, plausible argument partial strategy will and testing supports high (e.g., general work, based on some confidence that the strategy will

experience, theory or information directly work.

comparison with about the fishery and/or similar species involved.

fisheries/species). Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Page 84 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place for managing ETP species that is designed to PI 2.3.2Alt ensure the fishery does not hinder the recovery of ETP species.

TEDs are well established as an approach to minimising catch of turtles and large elasmobranch species (e.g., Brewer et al. 2006, Crowder et al. 1995, Griffiths et al. 2006, Lewison et al. 2003, NMFS undated). Restricting the area of the fishery and the number of vessels and days at sea are also clearly likely to be beneficial in terms of minimising the potential for interaction with ETP species. However, most of the available information is based on studies of other fisheries, so the fishery meets

the SG80 but not the SG100, here. Justification c There is some There is clear evidence that the

evidence that the strategy is being implemented

partial strategy is being successfully, and intended implemented changes are occurring.

successfully. Guidepost Met? Y N

There is clearly evidence that the strategy for ETP species is being implemented successfully (e.g., at sea and onshore inspections of the gear to check that nets are fitted with appropriate TEDs), but there is no evidence that intended changes are occurring (i.e., that populations of ETP species that were being impacted by the Suriname seabob fishery are now recovering). The fishery meets the SG80 level of

performance, but does not meet the SG100. Justification Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B. & P. Jones (2006). The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia’s northern prawn trawl fishery. Fisheries Research, V. 81, pp. 176- 188. Crowder, L.B., Hopkins-Murphy, S.R. & J.A. Royle (1995). Effects of turtle excluder devices (TEDs) on loggerhead sea turtle strandings with implications for conservation. Copeia, No. 4, pp. 773-779. Griffiths, S.P., Brewer, D.T., Heales, D.S., Milton, D.A. & I.C. Stobutzki (2006). Validating References ecological risk assessments for fisheries: assessing the impacts of turtle excluder devices on elasmobranch bycatch populations in an Australian trawl fishery. Marine and freshwater Research, V. 57, pp. 395-401. Lewison, R.L., Crowder, L.B. & D.J. Shaver (2003). The impact of turtle excluder devices and fisheries closures on loggerhead and Kemp’s ridley strandings in the western Gulf of Mexico. Conservation Biology, V. 17, pp. 1089-1097. MSC (2013a). MSC certification requirements, version 1.3, 14 January 2013. Marine Stewardship Council, London. 301 pp. NMFS (undated). History of turtle excluder devices (TEDs). NOAA, Southeast Fisheries Science Center (http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/labs/mississippi/ted/history.htm).

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 85 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Relevant information is collected to support the management of fishery impacts on ETP species, including:

 Information for the development of the management strategy; PI 2.3.3  Information to assess the effectiveness of the management strategy; and

 Information to determine the outcome status of ETP species.

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Information is sufficient Sufficient information is Information is sufficient to to qualitatively available to allow quantitatively estimate outcome estimate the fishery fishery related mortality status of ETP species with a

related mortality of and the impact of high degree of certainty.

ETP species. fishing to be quantitatively estimated

for ETP species. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Studies have been undertaken on the effectiveness of TEDs, and data exist both on the detailed catch of the fishery, and on the catch (or absence of catch) of ETP species specifically.

Sufficient information is available to allow fishery related mortality and the impact of fishing to be quantitatively estimated for ETP species, so the fishery meets the SG80 level of performance, but in the absence of a high level of observer data it is

not possible to meet the SG100 level of performance. Justification b Information is Information is sufficient Accurate and verifiable adequate to broadly to determine whether information is available on the

understand the impact the fishery may be a magnitude of all impacts,

of the fishery on ETP threat to protection and mortalities and injuries and the species. recovery of the ETP consequences for the status of

species. ETP species. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Available data are sufficient to indicate that the fishery is not a threat to the protection and recovery of ETP species. It is helpful to note, for example, that the status of the northwest Atlantic leatherback turtle population is considered to have improved in recent years, and this species has important nesting beaches in Suriname (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/46967827/0). The fishery meets SG80, but it is extremely difficult for any fishery to demonstrate that ‘accurate and verifiable information is available on the magnitude of all impacts, mortalities and injuries and the consequences for the status of ETP species’, and the Suriname

seabob fishery does not meet this strict SG100 requirement. Justification

Page 86 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Relevant information is collected to support the management of fishery impacts on ETP species, including:

 Information for the development of the management strategy; PI 2.3.3  Information to assess the effectiveness of the management strategy; and

 Information to determine the outcome status of ETP species.

c Information is Information is sufficient Information is adequate to adequate to support to measure trends and support a comprehensive measures to manage support a full strategy strategy to manage impacts, the impacts on ETP to manage impacts on minimize mortality and injury of

species. ETP species. ETP species, and evaluate with

a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving

its objectives. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Available data, including from the seabob fishery and from other fisheries that employ TEDs (e.g., Brewer et al. 2006, Griffiths et al. 2006, Lewison et al. 2003), are sufficient to measure trends and support a full strategy to manage impacts on ETP species. The fishery meets the SG80 level of performance. More information on ETP species interactions is likely to be obtained through the FAO project REBYC-II LAC in the near future, and this may help to justify a higher score, here,

in future. Justification Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B. & P. Jones (2006). The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia’s northern prawn trawl fishery. Fisheries Research, V. 81, pp. 176- 188. Griffiths, S.P., Brewer, D.T., Heales, D.S., Milton, D.A. & I.C. Stobutzki (2006). Validating References ecological risk assessments for fisheries: assessing the impacts of turtle excluder devices on elasmobranch bycatch populations in an Australian trawl fishery. Marine and freshwater Research, V. 57, pp. 395-401. Lewison, R.L., Crowder, L.B. & D.J. Shaver (2003). The impact of turtle excluder devices and fisheries closures on loggerhead and Kemp’s ridley strandings in the western Gulf of Mexico. Conservation Biology, V. 17, pp. 1089-1097.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 87 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure, PI 2.4.1 considered on a regional or bioregional basis, and function

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a The fishery is unlikely The fishery is highly There is evidence that the to reduce habitat unlikely to reduce fishery is highly unlikely to structure and function habitat structure and reduce habitat structure and

to a point where there function to a point function to a point where there

would be serious or where there would be would be serious or irreversible irreversible harm. serious or irreversible harm.

harm. Guidepost Met? Y Y Partial

Evidence from recent work (Willems et al. 2015a) supports earlier work by Lowe- McConnell (1962), in describing the habitats off the Suriname coast.

The seabed habitats of Surinamese shelf waters are mainly sedimentary in nature because of the fine particles that are carried into coastal waters by the Amazon River and other sources including local Suriname rivers such as the Maroni, Commewinje, Suriname, Saramacca and Coppename. The shallow inshore areas adjacent to river mouths tend to be characterised by very soft sediments that form banks of mud. These banks can change in size, shape and location in time, and are believed to generally move with the prevailing Guyana Current in a north-easterly direction along the Brazil-Guianas shelf. Further offshore, outside the areas fished for seabob, in water depths of approximately 30 m or more, habitats are generally comprised of firmer sediments with areas of sand, clay and clay with silt (Figure 3.4.1 & 3.4.2). Occasional biogenic and geogenic reefs are known to occur within Surinamese waters, mainly outside of the areas trawled by the seabob fleet.

Because of the nature of the inshore seabed habitat where seabob is targeted, the trawl gear used is relatively lightweight. The trawl doors are mainly constructed of wood with steel skids along the lower edge, while tickler chains may be used ahead of a relatively light ground rope made of combination wire. Seabob are not known to burrow deeply into the seabed, and like many shrimp species they are easily stimulated to flee their burrows by the vibrations of approaching trawl gear. This means that it is relatively easy to catch seabob, and there is no need for towed fishing gears to penetrate the surface layers of the seabed in order to work efficiently. Also, the fishery is limited to water depths of between 18-30 m, so any impacts are localised in nature.

Overall, the detailed habitat mapping across the coastal area is dated, but the available evidence indicates that the fishery is highly unlikely to reduce habitat structure and function to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm.

As such, a partial score of 90 is awarded. Justification Lowe-McConnell, R.H. (1962) The fishes of the. British Guiana continental shelf, with notes on their natural history. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 44: 669-667 References Willems, T., De Backer, A., You, K.W.T., Vincx, M. & K. Hostens 2015a. Spatio-temporal distribution patterns of the epibenthic community in the coastal waters of Suriname. Continental Shelf Research, V. 108, pp. 25-40.

Page 88 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure, PI 2.4.1 considered on a regional or bioregional basis, and function

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 89 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the fishery does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to habitat types

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy in place for place, if necessary, strategy in place, if managing the impact of the that are expected to necessary, that is fishery on habitat types.

achieve the Habitat expected to achieve

Outcome 80 level of the Habitat Outcome performance. 80 level of performance

or above. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

There is a partial strategy in place for the Suriname seabob fishery that is expected to achieve the Habitat Outcome 80 level of performance or above.

The components of the partial strategy include the use of lightweight trawl gear, and limits on both the number of vessels in the fishery and the total number of days that may be fished. Captains are also required to report interactions with any seagrass, shell beds or corals, and implement a move-on rule to avoid those areas (DoF 2012). The main component of the partial strategy, however, is the spatial restriction limiting the fishery to water depths of between 18-30 m, so any impacts are localised in nature.

The fishery meets the SG80 level of performance. A higher score would require there to be evidence of the move-on rule being implemented, and consideration of establishing more permanent closures in the event that any sensitive habitats were

identified within the fished area. Justification b The measures are There is some Testing supports high considered likely to objective basis for confidence that the strategy will work, based on confidence that the work, based on information plausible argument partial strategy will directly about the fishery and/or (e.g. general work, based on habitats involved.

experience, theory or information directly

comparison with about the fishery and/or similar habitats involved.

fisheries/habitats). Guidepost Met? Y Y N

There is clearly an objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy will work, as the habitats present are highly unlikely to be impacted significantly by the gears used, and limiting the fished area to just the waters between 18-30 m in any case minimises risk to habitats. Implementing a move-on rule to limit impacts on sensitive habitats adds to the overall partial strategy. The fishery meets the SG80,

but it is not clear that there has been any testing, so the SG100 is not met. Justification

Page 90 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the fishery does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to habitat types

c There is some There is clear evidence that the

evidence that the strategy is being implemented

partial strategy is being successfully. implemented

successfully. Guidepost Met? Y N

The key component of the strategy that can be evidenced is the restriction of the Suriname seabob fishery to water depths between 18-30 m. VMS data were presented to the reassessment team showing the fished area over the last three years, and this confirms that vessels have been constrained largely to the seabob fishing zone. SG80 is met, but SG100 cannot be met as there is not a strategy in

place, and because it is not clear if the move on rule has been used reliably. Justification

d There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its

objective. Guidepost Met? N

This SG100 requirement cannot be met because there is not a strategy in place.

Justification References DoF (2012). Fisheries management plan for Suriname, the seabob (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) fisheries, 2010-2015. Suriname Directorate of Fisheries, modified August 2012. 28 pp.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 91 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to habitat types by the PI 2.4.3 fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on habitat types

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a There is basic The nature, distribution The distribution of habitat types understanding of the and vulnerability of all is known over their range, with types and distribution main habitat types in particular attention to the of main habitats in the the fishery are known occurrence of vulnerable

area of the fishery. at a level of detail habitat types.

relevant to the scale and intensity of the

fishery. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

The reassessment team is not aware of comprehensive mapping of Suriname coastal habitats having been undertaken recently, but the seabed habitats of Surinamese shelf waters are mainly sedimentary in nature because of the fine particles that are carried into coastal waters by the major and minor riverine sources, including local Suriname rivers.

The shallow inshore areas adjacent to river mouths tend to be characterised by very soft sediments that form banks of mud. These banks can change in size, shape and location in time. Work by Willem et al. (2015a) has provided additional detail on coastal habitats in support of the findings of work undertaken previously by Lowe-McConnell (1962). This new work showed that there are three spatially distinct zones present across the nearshore to offshore environment off Suriname (Figure 3.4.2Error! Reference source not found.). Inshore, within 6-20 m water d epth, there is a muddy, turbid-water zone, characterised by a species-poor coastal assemblage. From about 20-30 m, where the Suriname seabob fishery occurs in the main, there is a transition assemblage, with epibenthic species typically found in either the coastal or offshore assemblages. Near the 30 m isobath, sediments were much coarser (median grain size on average 345 ± 103 mm vs. 128 ± 53 mm in the coastal assemblage) and water transparency was much higher (on average 7.6 ± 3.5 m vs. 2.4 ± 2.1 m in the coastal assemblage). Although the epibenthic community was primarily structured in a nearshore to offshore gradient related to depth, sediment grain size and sediment total organic carbon content, a longitudinal (west-east) gradient was apparent as well. The zones in the eastern part of the Suriname coastal shelf seemed to be more widely stretched along the on-offshore gradient.

Overall, the nature, distribution and vulnerability of all main habitat types in the fishery are known at a level of detail relevant to the scale and intensity of the fishery, so meeting the SG80 level of performance. The SG100 is not met because the most comprehensive seabed habitat map available (Lowe-McConnell 1962) is

now quite dated. Justification

Page 92 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to habitat types by the PI 2.4.3 fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on habitat types

b Information is Sufficient data are The physical impacts of the adequate to broadly available to allow the gear on the habitat types have understand the nature nature of the impacts of been quantified fully. of the main impacts of the fishery on habitat gear use on the main types to be identified habitats, including and there is reliable spatial overlap of information on the

habitat with fishing spatial extent of

gear. interaction, and the timing and location of

use of the fishing gear. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

The general distribution of habitat types is understood, and the gears used in the Suriname seabob fishery are typical of tropical shrimp fisheries, globally. VMS data are collected from all vessels and three years of VMS data were made available to the Assessment Team, showing the extent of fishing activity. Sufficient data are therefore available to allow the nature of the impacts of the fishery on habitat types to be identified and there is reliable information on the spatial extent of interaction, and the timing and location of use of the fishing gear. The fishery meets the SG80 level of performance, but not the SG100 as the physical impacts of the gear on the

habitat types have been quantified fully. Justification c Sufficient data continue Changes in habitat distributions to be collected to over time are measured. detect any increase in risk to habitat (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator

scores or the operation

of the fishery or the effectiveness of the

measures). Guidepost Met? Y N

Data are collected routinely on where the fishery occurs through the VMS system, and the reassessment team were presented with summary plots of VMS data for the last three years. Sufficient data therefore continue to be collected to detect any

increase in risk to habitat due to changes in the operation of the fishery. The fishery

meets the SG80 level of performance. Changes in habitat distribution are not measured over time, however, so the SG100 is not met.

Justification

Page 93 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to habitat types by the PI 2.4.3 fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on habitat types

Lowe-McConnell, R.H. (1962) The fishes of the. British Guiana continental shelf, with notes on their natural history. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 44: 669-667 References Willems, T., De Backer, A., You, K.W.T., Vincx, M. & K. Hostens 2015a. Spatio-temporal distribution patterns of the epibenthic community in the coastal waters of Suriname. Continental Shelf Research, V. 108, pp. 25-40.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 94 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to the key elements PI 2.5.1 of ecosystem structure and function

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a The fishery is unlikely The fishery is highly There is evidence that the to disrupt the key unlikely to disrupt the fishery is highly unlikely to elements underlying key elements disrupt the key elements ecosystem structure underlying ecosystem underlying ecosystem structure

and function to a point structure and function and function to a point where

where there would be to a point where there there would be a serious or a serious or would be a serious or irreversible harm.

irreversible harm. irreversible harm. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

The MSC defines ‘key ecosystem elements’ as the features of an ecosystem considered as being most crucial to giving the ecosystem its characteristic nature and dynamics, and are considered relative to the scale and intensity of the fishery. They are features most crucial to maintaining the integrity of its structure and functions and the key determinants of the ecosystem resilience and productivity (CB3.17.3, MSC 2013a).

Information presented in Quilez (2014), Willems (2016) and Willems et al. (2015b) demonstrated that seabob is a key prey item for a range of predatory species, and that a significant amount of energy in the benthic food web of the inner Suriname shelf is channelled at an intermediate level through seabob. As such, the key ecosystem element is considered to be trophic relationships within Surinamese coastal waters, with seabob as a key prey item.

In terms of protecting ecosystem structure and function, the Suriname seabob fishery operates in a narrow, depth-limited band off the Suriname coast, up to the depth limit of the main seabob population (Willems 2015a); a considerable area of seabob habitat therefore occurs inshore of the fished area. In addition, the stock status of seabob is being monitored, with the TRP being set at 110% of BMSY.

The fishery is highly unlikely to disrupt the key elements underlying ecosystem structure and function to a point where there would be a serious or irreversible harm, so meeting the SG80. The SG100 is not met as there is no ecosystem

modelling available that has considered the system in detail. Justification MSC (2013a). MSC certification requirements, version 1.3, 14 January 2013. Marine Stewardship Council, London. 301 pp. Quilez, I. 2014. The importance of the Atlantic seabob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri as a food source for demersal fishes in the coastal waters of Suriname. MSc. thesis, Ghent University, References 106 pp. Willems, T. 2016. An Ecosystem Approach to fisheries management: the Atlantic seabob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) in Suriname. Ph.D. Thesis, Ghent University. http://hdl.handle. Willems, T., De Backer, A., You, K.W.T., Vincx, M. & K. Hostens 2015a. Spatio-temporal distribution patterns of the epibenthic community in the coastal waters of Suriname. Continental Shelf Research, V. 108, pp. 25-40.

Page 95 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to the key elements PI 2.5.1 of ecosystem structure and function

Willems, T., De Backer, A., Mol, J.H., Vincx, M. & K. Hostens 2015b. Distribution patterns of the demersal fish fauna on the inner continental shelf of Suriname. Regional Studies in Marine Science, V.2, pp. 177–188. Willems, T. 2016. An Ecosystem Approach to fisheries management: the Atlantic seabob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) in Suriname. Ph.D. Thesis, Ghent University. http://hdl.handle.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 96 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There are measures in place to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy that consists

place, if necessary. strategy in place, if of a plan, in place.

necessary. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

The key ecosystem element for the Suriname seabob fishery is considered to be trophic relationships within Surinamese coastal waters, with seabob as a key prey item.

The partial strategy in place to manage impacts of the Suriname seabob fishery on seabob includes confining the fishery to the 18-30 m depth zone, with a large area of seabob habitat inshore of the fished area being closed to trawling. Also, the fishery is subject to vessel number and days-at-sea caps, and the TRP is set at 110% of BMSY (DoF 2012). The fishery clearly meets the SG80 level of performance, but does not meet the SG100 level of performance because an ecosystem ‘strategy’ is required to be designed to manage impacts on the ecosystem component specifically (GCB3.3, MSC 2013b), and it is not clear that

this is the case regarding the components of the partial strategy listed here. Justification b The measures take The partial strategy The strategy, which consists of into account potential takes into account a plan, contains measures to impacts of the fishery available information address all main impacts of the on key elements of the and is expected to fishery on the ecosystem, and ecosystem. restrain impacts of the at least some of these fishery on the measures are in place. The ecosystem so as to plan and measures are based achieve the Ecosystem on well-understood functional Outcome 80 level of relationships between the performance. fishery and the Components and elements of the ecosystem.

This plan provides for development of a full strategy

that restrains impacts on the

ecosystem to ensure the fishery does not cause serious or

irreversible harm. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Page 97 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There are measures in place to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function

The partial strategy, comprising the components listed in SIa, takes into account available information such as the extent of seabob habitat and seabob stock status, and is expected to restrain impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem so as to achieve the Ecosystem Outcome 80 level of performance. The fishery meets the SG80. The fishery cannot meet the SG100 as there is not considered to be an ecosystem

strategy in place. Justification c The measures are The partial strategy is The measures are considered considered likely to considered likely to likely to work based on prior work, based on work, based on experience, plausible argument plausible argument plausible argument or information directly from the (e.g., general (e.g., general fishery/ecosystems involved.

experience, theory or experience, theory or

comparison with comparison with similar similar fisheries/ecosystems).

fisheries/ecosystems). Guidepost Met? Y Y Y

Restricting the fishery to a narrow band off the Suriname coast and capping both the number of vessels and the days-at-sea for the fleet, as well as setting the TRP at a level above an appropriate proxy for BMSY, (i.e. the TRP is based on a CPUE figure that corresponds to 111% of BMSY based on estimates from a logistic biomass dynamics model – see scoring text for PI 1.1.2) are appropriate measures for managing the impact of the fishery on the key ecosystem element of seabob as a key prey item within the Suriname coastal ecosystem. The measures considered likely to work, based on plausible argument and information directly from the

fishery, and so the fishery meets the SG100 for this SI. Justification d There is some There is evidence that the evidence that the measures are being

measures comprising implemented successfully.

the partial strategy are being implemented

successfully. Guidepost Met? Y N

VMS data are available for all vessels in the Suriname seabob fleet, and show that the fishing activity occurs in the area designated for fishing. Seabob stock status is also monitored. These data provide some evidence that the measures comprising the partial strategy are being implemented successfully, so meeting the SG80 level of performance. Modelling of the Suriname nearshore ecosystem would provide the

evidence needed in order to achieve the SG100. Justification References DoF (2012). Fisheries management plan for Suriname, the seabob (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) fisheries, 2010-2015. Suriname Directorate of Fisheries, modified August 2012. 28 pp.

Page 98 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There are measures in place to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function

MSC 2013b. Guidance to the MSC Certification Requirements. Version 1.3, 14 January 2013.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 99 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

PI 2.5.3 There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Information is Information is adequate adequate to identify to broadly understand the key elements of the key elements of the the ecosystem (e.g., ecosystem. trophic structure and

function, community

composition, productivity pattern

and biodiversity). Guidepost Met? Y Y

Information presented in Quilez (2014), Willems (2016) and Willems et al. (2015b) demonstrated that seabob is a key prey item for a range of predatory species, and that a significant amount of energy in the benthic food web of the inner Suriname shelf is channelled at an intermediate level through seabob. As such, information is adequate to broadly understand the key elements of the ecosystem. The fishery

meets the SG80 level of performance. Justification b Main impacts of the Main impacts of the Main interactions between the fishery on these key fishery on these key fishery and these ecosystem ecosystem elements ecosystem elements elements can be inferred from

can be inferred from can be inferred from existing information, and have

existing information, existing information been investigated in detail. and have not been and some have been

investigated in detail. investigated in detail. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

Information available related to seabob as the key ecosystem element include catch data for the Suriname seabob fishery, including of species that are predators of seabob, data on seabob stock status and the extent of seabob habitat, and information on the spatial extent of the fishery. Together, this information means that the main impacts of the fishery on seabob can be inferred from existing information and some, specifically the role of seabob as prey item, have been investigated in detail. The fishery meets the SG80, but a Suriname nearshore

ecosystem model would be required in order to meet the SG100. Justification c The main functions of The impacts of the fishery on the Components (i.e., target, Bycatch, Retained and target, Bycatch, ETP species are identified and

Retained and ETP the main functions of these

species and Habitats) Components in the ecosystem in the ecosystem are are understood.

known. Guidepost

Page 100 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

PI 2.5.3 There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem

Met? Y N

The components of the ecosystem comprise seabob as the target species and a key prey item in the nearshore environment, smalleye stardrum and Jamaica weakfish as main bycatch species, two species of sawfish, four turtle species, Guyana dolphin and West Indian manatee as ETP species, and the sedimentary nearshore habitats of Suriname.

Recently published theses by Quilez (2014), Willems (2016) and Willems et al. (2015b) provide very useful insights to the trophic relationships within the Suriname nearshore ecosystem, and specifically on the role of seabob, while there is an extensive literature base detailing the various functions of fish species, invertebrates and seabed habitats within ecosystems. IAC (2006) outlines the role of turtles in the marine ecosystem, and there is some information on the role of Guyana dolphin and West Indian manatee. Overall, the main functions of the components in the ecosystem are considered to be known, so the fishery meets the SG80 level of performance. It is not possible to say that the functions of the

components are ‘understood’, however, so the SG100 is not met. Justification d Sufficient information is Sufficient information is available on the available on the impacts of the impacts of the fishery fishery on the Components and on these Components elements to allow the main

to allow some of the consequences for the

main consequences for ecosystem to be inferred. the ecosystem to be

inferred. Guidepost Met? Y N

The impact of the Suriname seabob fishery on seabob, other retained species, non- target species taken as bycatch, ETP species and habitats is known to a level of detail that allows the some of the main consequences to be inferred for these components. In the context of tropical shrimp trawl fisheries, bycatch and undersize fish discarding are perhaps the most significant sources of potential impact other than the removal of target species. There is sufficient information available in relation to the seabob fishery to infer the likely consequences of the impact of bycatch and discarding. Consequences for seabed habitats can be inferred from general knowledge of the impact that is likely to result from the gear types in use, in relation to the scale and spatial location of the fishery, as well as seabed habitats affected and the mechanisms of interaction. The fishery meets the SG80 level of performance, but an ecosystem model would be required in order to meet the

SG100 level of performance. Justification

Page 101 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

PI 2.5.3 There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem

e Sufficient data continue Information is sufficient to to be collected to support the development of detect any increase in strategies to manage risk level (e.g., due to ecosystem impacts. changes in the outcome indicator

scores or the operation

of the fishery or the effectiveness of the

measures). Guidepost Met? Y N

VMS data are available for all vessels in the Suriname seabob fleet, and show that the fishing activity occurs in the area designated for fishing. Seabob stock status is also monitored. These data continue to be collected and would detect any increase in risk level (e.g., due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery). The fishery meets the SG80 level of performance, but modelling of the Suriname nearshore ecosystem would provide the information needed in order

to achieve the SG100. Justification IAC Secretariat (2006). Fisheries and sea turtles. May 2006, San José, Costa Rica. Available online: http://www.iacseaturtle.org/eng-docs/publicaciones/Pesquerias-FINAL-ENG.pdf (web address checked, June 2016). Quilez, I. 2014. The importance of the Atlantic seabob shrimp Xiphopenaeus kroyeri as a food source for demersal fishes in the coastal waters of Suriname. MSc. thesis, Ghent University, References 106 pp. Willems, T. 2016. An Ecosystem Approach to fisheries management: the Atlantic seabob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) in Suriname. Ph.D. Thesis, Ghent University. http://hdl.handle. Willems, T., De Backer, A., Mol, J.H., Vincx, M. & K. Hostens (2015b). Distribution patterns of the demersal fish fauna on the inner continental shelf of Suriname. Regional Studies in Marine Science, V.2, pp. 177–188.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 102 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Principle 3

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it:  Is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC PI 3.1.1 Principles 1 and 2; and  Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and  Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a There is an effective There is an effective There is an effective national national legal system national legal system legal system and binding and a framework for and organised and procedures governing cooperation with other effective cooperation cooperation with other parties parties, where with other parties, which delivers management necessary, to deliver where necessary, to outcomes consistent with MSC management deliver management Principles 1 and 2. outcomes consistent outcomes consistent with MSC Principles 1 with MSC Principles 1 and 2. Guidepost and 2

Met? Y Y Y

Page 103 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it:  Is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC PI 3.1.1 Principles 1 and 2; and  Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and  Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. The legal foundations which underpin the Suriname Seabob Fishery are as follows:  The existing fisheries law (1980 Decree C-14) enables the fisheries department (LVV) to carry out its roles and requires an annual ministerial bill, detailing the management for each fleet segment, including licence numbers, gear specifications and technical measures.  Fisheries management in Suriname is also bound by UNCLOS (1982) which Suriname ratified in 1998.  The Suriname Fishery Management Plan (for all sectors) is in place which is valid for the period 2014 – 2018. This was made by LVV in cooperation with the ACP Fish II programme.  The fishery-specific ‘Suriname Seabob Fisheries Management Plan’ was adopted in 2010, with full ministerial approval. This sits beneath the existing fisheries law and details the process and approach that will guide management of the Seabob fishery. This also formally enshrines and commits to some of the wider ‘Governance and Policy Aspects’ and outlines the strategic direction The need to update the 1980 fisheries law has been recognised for a number of years; indeed, a draft version of the act has been in circulation, but never adopted, for a number of years. During the re-assessment site visit the Fishery Department reported that FAO assistance is now in place to re-draft the fisheries law, bringing inland and marine fisheries together under a single act, which will include ecological objectives and ratification of relevant international conventions. The Seabob fishery takes place entirely within the Suriname EEZ, therefore there is no requirement for binding procedures governing cooperation with other countries. However, the development of management within this fishery has been done in close cooperation with the Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism (of which Suriname is a full member) and in particular CRFM’s Shrimp & Groundfish Working Group. Development of management has also been done in consultation with neighbouring Guiana and this close cooperation continues. One recent example of cooperation between countries is in the increasing sharing of VMS data – as evidenced by correspondence seen by the Assessment team. It is therefore concluded that the requirement for ‘binding procedures’ at the SG100

Justification level is met.

b The management The management The management system system incorporates or system incorporates or incorporates or subject by law is subject by law to a is subject by law to a to a transparent mechanism for mechanism for the transparent mechanism the resolution of legal disputes resolution of legal for the resolution of that is appropriate to the disputes arising within legal disputes which is context of the fishery and has the system. considered to be been tested and proven to be effective in dealing with effective. most issues and that is appropriate to the

Guidepost context of the fishery.

Page 104 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it:  Is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC PI 3.1.1 Principles 1 and 2; and  Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and  Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. Met? Y Y N

The mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes is as follows:  Suriname has a full judiciary and legal process which provides an effective and transparent mechanism for resolving legal disputes, should this be required. Were full legal proceedings to be entered the process would be fully transparent.  Most fishery disputes are resolved proactively before the full legal proceedings are required, via one or other of the following for a: o The Suriname Fisheries Advisory Committee - a committee chaired by the permanent secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, with 5 representatives from commercial fishing sectors (including seabob, and artisanal representatives) and representatives of the other main government departments with marine concerns (such as Coast Guard service and the Suriname Maritime Authority). It is however debateable the extent to which the decisions of this committee are transparent – although minutes are available, or how effective the sector representation is. o The Seabob Working Group (SWG) – formally constituted and comprising representatives of the two seabob fishing companies, technical and statistical staff of the fisheries department, representatives of the artisanal sector and NGO observers (WWF). By achieving broad agreement on management proposals and initiatives at this level, before passing recommendations to the fishery advisory council or minister, there is increased likelihood of disputes being avoided. The transparency of the SWG is greatly improved now that all minutes are available on-line: www.seabob.sr  There is no requirement for a mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes with other countries as this fishery is contained entirely within the

Suriname EEZ.

It is concluded that the mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes described above is sufficiently transparent and effective (in the context of the fishery) in dealing with most disputes likely to arise, therefore the SG80 level is met. However, this is insufficiently tested to conclude that it is proven to be effective in all

Justification circumstances, therefore the SG100 level is not met.

Page 105 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it:  Is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC PI 3.1.1 Principles 1 and 2; and  Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and  Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. d The management The management The management system has a system has a system has a mechanism to formally commit mechanism to mechanism to observe to the legal rights created generally respect the the legal rights created explicitly or established by legal rights created explicitly or established custom of people dependent on explicitly or by custom of people fishing for food and livelihood in established by custom dependent on fishing a manner consistent with the of people dependent for food or livelihood in objectives of MSC Principles 1 on fishing for food or a manner consistent and 2. livelihood in a manner with the objectives of consistent with the MSC Principles 1 and objectives of MSC 2.

Guidepost Principles 1 and 2.

Met? Y Y Y

In Suriname inshore artisanal fishers may be regarded as being customarily dependent on fishing for food and livelihood. The management system – namely the Fisheries Act, the National Fisheries Management Strategy, the Fisheries Advisory Council and the Seabob Fishery Management Plan – all formerly recognise the importance of the inshore artisanal fishery and those dependent on that fishery for food and livelihood. This is evidenced by: o Explicit reference to the importance of the inshore artisanal sector in the National Fisheries Management Plan. o Active artisanal representation on the Suriname Fisheries Advisory Committee. o Active artisanal representation on the Seabob Working Group. o An inshore zone (<10 fathoms) which is protected from any trawling

activity and reserved for artisanal vessels. o Compulsory VMS on trawl vessels which was specifically introduced to safeguard this inshore zone. It is concluded that the evidence presented above represents a ‘formal commitment’

Justification therefore the SG100 level is met.

» Onderdirectoraat Visserij (2013). VISSERIJ MANAGEMENT PLAN VOOR References SURINAME 2014 – 2018: http://www.gov.sr/media/968160/visserij_management_plan_voor_suriname.pdf

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 106 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to interested and affected parties. PI 3.1.2 The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant parties

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Organisations and Organisations and Organisations and individuals individuals involved in individuals involved in involved in the management the management the management process have been identified. process have been process have been Functions, roles and identified. Functions, identified. Functions, responsibilities are explicitly roles and roles and defined and well understood for responsibilities are responsibilities are all areas of responsibility and generally understood. explicitly defined and interaction. well understood for key areas of responsibility

Guidepost and interaction.

Met? Y Y N

Functions, roles and responsibilities of key organisations and roles are defined in:  The 1980 Fisheries Act (1980 Decree C-14), which defines the role and power of the Minister and the Ministry of agriculture, animal husbandry and fisheries (LVV).  The LVV website is a useful source of information about key roles and responsibilities (http://www.gov.sr/ministerie-van-lvv.aspx )  The Fisheries Management Plan for Suriname 2014 – 2018, which provides further detail on the structure and role of the sub-directorate of fisheries within the Ministry and sets out the role of other key department, with respect of fisheries such as the Ministry of Deference, the Ministry of Justice and Police Maritime Authority Suriname (MAS). This also outlines the role and composition of the Fisheries Advisory Council and details the key fisheries representative bodies.  The Seabob Fisheries Management Plan, which re-states the roles referred to above and provides further description of the function and composition of the Seabob Working Group.  The Seabob Fishery website (www.seabob.sr) provides further details about the system of management within the fishery, detailing key organisations and providing a direct contact within the fishery department. The explicit definition of roles and responsibilities from these sources means that the SG80 level is met. The original assessment report noted that roles and responsibility for scientific research were less clearly defined – in part due to the low level of scientific infrastructure in Suriname. This remains the case. In the past the relationship with the regional fisheries management organisation (CRFM) has been effective in

ensuring application of appropriate science, and the CRFM assessments are now more readily available to view on the www.seabob.sr website. However, it is not obvious from any of the sources noted above where responsibility will lie for future stock assessments. This shortcoming does not appear to affect the functioning of the management system, however, it does mean that the SG100 level is not met

Justification and a recommendation is raised.

Page 107 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to interested and affected parties. PI 3.1.2 The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant parties

b The management The management The management system system includes system includes includes consultation processes consultation processes consultation processes that regularly seek and accept that obtain relevant that regularly seek and relevant information, including information from the accept relevant local knowledge. The main affected parties, information, including management system including local local knowledge. The demonstrates consideration of knowledge, to inform management system the information and explains the management demonstrates how it is used or not used. system. consideration of the

Guidepost information obtained.

Met? Y Y N

The following consultative steps are part of the fisheries management process:  The fisheries advisory council, which enables sector representatives to advise the minister on fisheries policy and management decisions.  The Seabob Working Group, which provides a further mechanism for stakeholder involvement. This working group also includes an NGO observer, which enables improved NGO interaction with the management consultative process. Representatives of the artisanal sector who met with the assessment team stated that consultation opportunities were now excellent and for the artisanal sector in particular it appears that representation has become more effective in recent years.  Additional Ad hoc consultation processes are used as required. This included a recent consultation on the new National Fisheries Management Plan. Based on the above evidence it is concluded that the management system includes appropriate consultation processes and considers information obtained, therefore the SG80 level is met. However, the lack of formal reporting of consultation

Justification responses means that the SG100 level is not met.

c The consultation The consultation process process provides provides opportunity and opportunity for all encouragement for all interested and affected interested and affected parties parties to be involved. to be involved, and facilitates

Guidepost their effective engagement.

Met? Y N

Page 108 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to interested and affected parties. PI 3.1.2 The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant parties

The following justification remains largely unchanged from the time of the previous MSC assessment: Any individual fisherman or fishing business is in theory represented by a member of their sector sitting on the fisheries advisory council, or the Seabob Working Group, or in attendance at ad hoc consultation events. In addition, NGOs such as WWF can have observer status at the Seabob Working Group. It can therefore be concluded that that the consultation process provides opportunity for all interested and affected parties to be involved – i.e. meeting the SG80 level.

However, if there are shortcomings in this system, it may be more associated with the effectiveness of sector representation and the flow of information both from sector representatives to members of their sector and vice versa. This may be particular challenging in the more numerous and widely dispersed artisanal sector. For this reason, it is not possible to conclude that effective engagement of individual

Justification stakeholders are actively facilitated – therefore the SG100 level is not met.

» On-line news article about the consultation process for the new National References Fisheries Management Plan http://www.dbsuriname.com/dbsuriname/index.php/nieuw-visserij-management-plan- af/

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 109 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide decision- PI 3.1.3 making that are consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria, and incorporates the precautionary approach

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Long-term objectives Clear long-term Clear long-term objectives that to guide decision- objectives that guide guide decision-making, making, consistent decision-making, consistent with MSC Principles with the MSC consistent with MSC and Criteria and the Principles and Criteria Principles and Criteria precautionary approach, are and the precautionary and the precautionary explicit within and required by approach, are implicit approach are explicit management policy. within management within management

Guidepost policy policy.

Met? (Y) (Y) (N)

Page 110 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide decision- PI 3.1.3 making that are consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria, and incorporates the precautionary approach

The newly published Fisheries Management Plan for Suriname (2014 – 2018) explicitly states the high level objectives which guide management decision-making. These include high level objectives for the Ministry of agriculture, animal husbandry and fisheries (LVV) (unofficial translation):  ensuring food security for the total Surinamese population;  ensuring food safety in the fisheries sector;  promoting and developing sustainable fisheries;  the development of the fisheries sector to food producer and supplier for the Caribbean;  increasing the contribution of the fisheries sector to the national economy;  the creation of spatial conditions for the sustainable development of the aqua-culture;  managing the framework conditions and risks associated with the implementation of the fisheries policy. In the same document, these high level objectives are followed by more detailed objectives which are more tailored to the fisheries sector and which reflect commitments to binding international conventions, such as The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries (FAO 2003). These include (unofficial translation): avoid overfishing; minimizing fisheries impact on ecosystem; application of the precautionary principle. The document also includes an overarching fisheries sector objective which states (unofficial translation): “The main objective of the fisheries policy of Suriname is the maintenance of the biological resources of the sea and sustainable and balanced exploitation of these resources, in which the impact of fisheries on marine ecosystems should be as limited as possible. All this under responsible economic and social conditions”. The document goes on to list further fisheries objectives.  Fleet capacity should be consistent with the sustainable use of fishery resources;  Reduction in unwanted by-catches;  Encourage the use of the best available fishing techniques;  Improvement of the control so that compliance with the rules;  Increasing the international market share by betting on quality, added value and achieving a steady supply;  Improve the quality and amount of information m.b.t. fish stocks and the marine ecosystem and promote research that provides information and advice for better decision making;  Reduce the by-catch of protected species;  Increasing the support of stakeholders for the fisheries policy. Taken in combination, these objectives are clear and explicit and guide precautionary management decision-making. Therefore, the SG80 scoring level is met. However, the assessors have not identified a high level “requirement” for these

Justification objectives to be set by management, therefore SG100 is not met.

Page 111 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide decision- PI 3.1.3 making that are consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria, and incorporates the precautionary approach

» Onderdirectoraat Visserij (2013). VISSERIJ MANAGEMENT PLAN VOOR SURINAME 2014 – 2018: References http://www.gov.sr/media/968160/visserij_management_plan_voor_suriname.pdf » FAO (2003), The ecosystem approach to fisheries, FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries-No. 4, Suppl. 2,

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): n/a

Page 112 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management system provides economic and social incentives for PI 3.1.4 sustainable fishing and does not operate with subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a The management The management The management system system provides for system provides for provides for incentives that are incentives that are incentives that are consistent with achieving the consistent with consistent with outcomes expressed by MSC achieving the achieving the outcomes Principles 1 and 2, and outcomes expressed expressed by MSC explicitly considers incentives in by MSC Principles 1 Principles 1 and 2, and a regular review of and 2. seeks to ensure that management policy or perverse incentives do procedures to ensure they do not arise. not contribute to unsustainable

Guidepost fishing practices.

Met? Y Y N

There is no evidence that management gives explicit consideration of incentives as part of a regular review of management policy, therefore the SG100 scoring level is not met. However, there are a number of positive incentives associated with the seabob fishery in Suriname:  The use of TEDs is incentivised, in order to allow export into the USA. This requires an annual certificate from a US Inspector to certify that TEDs are implemented in the fishery.  The requirement for the EU catch certificate to verify that fish have been legally caught in order to export to the EU also incentivises compliance with management regulations.  Restricted licences and engine power means there is no incentive to over- capitalise – indeed the existing number of licences enables all vessels to fish at full capacity without fishing mortality being expected to rise above the level thought likely to deliver maximum sustainable yield.  An effort restricted fishery, such as this, with clear fishing entitlements (divided among companies), coupled with a zonal fishing areas, provides a secure environment and creates an incentive to fish within the management regulations.  There is no pooling of quota and no annual fishery closure, therefore there is no situations which would result in a ‘race to fish’ or an ‘Olympic fishery’. No perverse incentives have been identified and the assessors conclude that the management strategy has been implemented in a way to avoid perverse incentives arising. As a result, the SG80 is met. Although the scoring guideposts do not refer to subsides, the title of this performance indicator does, therefore it is also useful to consider these. No subsides that contribute to unsustainable fishing have been identified and the industry receives no direct support from Government. Although some minor forms

of subsidy could be identified for this fishery (for example the industry does not pay directly for management or science - although this is funded through taxation - and a preferential tax rate is applied to diesel across all fishing sectors in Suriname), in the opinion of the assessment team these do not contribute to unsustainable fishing and are consistent with MSC principles 1 and 2. Therefore this does not alter the

Justification conclusion stated above that the SG80 level is met.

Page 113 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The management system provides economic and social incentives for PI 3.1.4 sustainable fishing and does not operate with subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing

» LVV Pers. Comms.. References » Fishery Management Plan for Suriname – Seabob Fishery (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) 2010 – 2015. MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ, Onderdirectoraat Visserij. February 2010.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): n/a

Page 114 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery has clear, specific objectives designed to achieve the outcomes PI 3.2.1 expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Objectives, which are Short and long-term Well defined and measurable broadly consistent with objectives, which are short and long-term objectives, achieving the consistent with which are demonstrably outcomes expressed achieving the outcomes consistent with achieving the by MSC’s Principles 1 expressed by MSC’s outcomes expressed by MSC’s and 2, are implicit Principles 1 and 2, are Principles 1 and 2, are explicit within the fishery’s explicit within the within the fishery’s management system fishery’s management management system.

Guidepost system.

Met? Y Y N

Page 115 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

A clear hierarchy of well-defined fishery specific objectives for the Suriname Seabob fishery are set out in the Seabob Management Plan. These are placed in the context of an overall vision for a fishery which:  is based on a productive and sustainably managed target population;  limits impact on the ecosystem for the target species and other species in the locality of the fishery;  limits impact on other forms of fishing;  maintains good relations between stakeholders in the shrimp fishery;  ensures good cooperation between the public administrative authority and the private sector. In order to achieve this vision, the following general objectives are specified:  An ecologically responsible and sustainable fishing, with no or limited effects on: o the target species; o the marine ecosystem of the target species; o the breeding and nursery grounds of the young fishes and shrimp species  An economically responsible and sustainable fishery, that o is economically viable; o maintains and improves the economic position of fishermen by coordinated self- regulation; o increases the effectiveness of the fishery; o is cost efficient Under these general objectives, the seabob management plan also outlines more fishery specific objectives which are more well defined and, in some cases, measurable. These include:  Make optimal use of this fishing resource in a responsible and sustainable way. Link fishing license conditions to requirements aimed at the reduction of pressure on other fishing resources which make use of other species of fishery.  Manage the fishery in accordance with the precautionary principle, and at long term, it shall be geared to exploitation in line with the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY).  Take the influence of the sea-bob fishery on other kinds of fisheries into consideration. Achieve limited negative influence on other kinds of fishery.  Implement a modern and effective controlling system (Vessel Monitoring System, sea patrol, etc.).  Encourage national entrepreneurs and Surinamese employees to participate in the catching activities.  Encourage activities geared at a higher added value created in Suriname.  Improve efficiency through measures such as the introduction of fishing gear that minimizes impact on the seabed.  Minimize bycatch. The short term manifestation of these objectives can be seen as the annual setting of licence conditions and fishing opportunities for the sector. This is done in

Justification accordance with the harvest control rule which seeks maintain the stock at 11%

Page 116 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery has clear, specific objectives designed to achieve the outcomes PI 3.2.1 expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2 above the level of maximum sustainable yield (the target CPUE is set to 1.65 t per day-at-sea). It is therefore concluded by the assessors that appropriate short and long term objectives are explicit within the management system, therefore the SG80 level is met, however as many of these are not defined in a measurable manner, the SG100 level is not met.

» Fishery Management Plan for Suriname – Seabob Fishery (Xiphopenaeus References kroyeri) 2010 – 2015. MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ, Onderdirectoraat Visserij. February 2010.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): n/a

Page 117 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, PI 3.2.2 and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under assessment.

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a There are some There are established decision-making decision-making processes in place that processes that result in result in measures and measures and strategies to achieve strategies to achieve the fishery-specific the fishery-specific

Guidepost objectives. objectives.

Met? Y Y

There is an established decision-making process, which works to achieve both the national objectives (described in PI3.1.3) and the fishery specific objectives (described in 3.2.1). This involves:  Provision of scientific advice from CRFM, or in the most recent stock assessment (in preparation) by an independent stock assessment expert.  On-going review of monthly CPUE and other relevant information, including specific research and monitoring, by the fishery department (LVV) and the Seabob Working Group.  Review of proposed annual licence conditions by the Suriname Fisheries Advisory Committee.  Management decisions are enacted by LVV and the responsible minister. There is clear evidence that this established decision-making process has resulted

in measures being implemented which are directly linked to the fishery specific objectives. This includes the binding implementation of fishery management plan (and HCR) and annual licence conditions which reflect decisions emanating from these decision-making processes, such as the adoption of bycatch reduction devices, the requirement to record bycatch, ETP and habitat interactions, the

Justification adoption of VMS).

b Decision-making Decision-making Decision-making processes processes respond to processes respond to respond to all issues identified serious issues serious and other in relevant research, identified in relevant important issues monitoring, evaluation and research, monitoring, identified in relevant consultation, in a transparent, evaluation and research, monitoring, timely and adaptive manner consultation, in a evaluation and and take account of the wider transparent, timely and consultation, in a implications of decisions. adaptive manner and transparent, timely and take some account of adaptive manner and the wider implications take account of the of decisions. wider implications of

Guidepost decisions.

Met? Y Y N

Page 118 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, PI 3.2.2 and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under assessment.

The decision making process described above (in scoring issue a) responds to the following sources:  The results of the periodic stock assessment  The on-going review of the monthly rolling CPUE (evidenced by the precautionary management decision to temporarily reduce active vessel numbers when the monthly CPUE declined).  The results of gear technology trials – in particular efforts to continue to improve the bycatch reduction device.  The results of additional research work on habitats, bycatch and ecosystem (described in Principle 2 – many of which were undertaken in response to the initial MSC assessment of the seabob fishery). The key forum where much of the discussion of the findings of these sources is the Seabob Working Group (although from a legislative point of view the actual decision-making body remains LVV and the minister). The review carried out by the Seabob Working Group is timely – with meetings occurring on a monthly basis. The degree of transparency has greatly increased since the time of the initial MSC assessment and the minutes of these meetings and the annual review are readily available on-line, on the new dedicated website ( www.seabob.sr ). The subsequent review of management recommendations emanating from the Seabob working group, by the National Fisheries Advisory Council, prior to being incorporated in the annual binding licence means that the wider implications of any fishery specific decisions are also considered. As a result, all the requirements of the SG80 scoring level are met. There does remain scope for further consideration of results of the research findings of Thomas Willems (described in Principle 2), although much of this work is

Justification only very recently published. Therefore, SG100 is not met.

c Decision-making processes use the precautionary approach and are based on best

available information. Guidepost

Met? Y

There is an explicit and binding requirement for decision-making to be guided by the precautionary approach. The National Fisheries Management Plan explicitly states a commitment to the precautionary approach (see PI 3.1.3). And the Suriname Seabob Management Plan also requires that “(the Seabob) Fishery shall at all times be managed in accordance with the precautionary principle”. There is also clear operational evidence of the precautionary approach influencing management decision-making, such as the decision to set the target biomass according to the HCR at 11% above MSY or the recent decision (in 2014-2015) to

temporarily reduce active licence numbers in response to a fall in the monthly rolling CPUE, thus being more precautionary than required by a strict application of the HCR, even though this decline in CPUE was recognised as being due to an decrease in catchability caused by Sargassum, rather than a decreasing population trend (described in more detail in PI1.2.2). As a result of the evidence above the

Justification SG80 scoring level is met.

Page 119 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, PI 3.2.2 and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under assessment.

d Some information on Information on fishery Formal reporting to all fishery performance performance and interested stakeholders and management management action is provides comprehensive action is generally available on request, information on fishery available on request to and explanations are performance and management stakeholders. provided for any actions and describes how the actions or lack of action management system associated with responded to findings and findings and relevant relevant recommendations recommendations emerging from research, emerging from monitoring, evaluation and research, monitoring, review activity. evaluation and review

Guidepost activity.

Met? Y Y Y

There is now good information on fishery performance and management action readily available to all stakeholder on-line (www.seabob.sr ). This includes the minutes of the monthly Seabob Working Group, including full description of management discussion. In addition, an annual review of the fishery is also published which includes publication of catches, monthly rolling CPUE indices and

Justification management response. This constitutes formal reporting, therefore SG100 is met.

e Although the The management The management system or management authority system or fishery is fishery acts proactively to avoid or fishery may be attempting to comply in legal disputes or rapidly subject to continuing a timely fashion with implements judicial decisions court challenges, it is judicial decisions arising from legal challenges. not indicating a arising from any legal disrespect or defiance challenges. of the law by repeatedly violating the same law or regulation necessary for the sustainability

Guidepost for the fishery.

Met? Y Y Y

Page 120 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, PI 3.2.2 and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under assessment.

The management authority is not subject to continuing court challenges, nor are there any judicial decisions arising from legal challenge. If there were, there’s no evidence to suggest that the management response would be anything other than timely. As a result, the 60 and 80 scoring guideposts are arguably not relevant, but are concluded to be met nonetheless. The dispute resolution framework has already been described in PI 3.1.1. This notes that there are 2 fora which play a key role within the management process to proactively avoid legal disputes. These are:  The Suriname Fisheries Advisory Committee - a committee chaired by the permanent secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, with 5 representatives from commercial fishing sectors (including seabob, and artisanal representatives) and representatives of the other main government departments with marine concerns (such as Coast Guard service and the Suriname Maritime Authority).  The Seabob Working Group (SWG) – formally constituted and comprising representatives of the two seabob fishing companies, technical and statistical staff of the fisheries department, representatives of the artisanal sector and NGO observers (WWF). By achieving broad agreement on management proposals and initiatives at this level, before passing recommendations to the fishery advisory council or minister, there is increased likelihood of disputes being avoided.

Justification It is therefore concluded that SG100 is also met.

» Onderdirectoraat Visserij (2013). VISSERIJ MANAGEMENT PLAN VOOR SURINAME 2014 – 2018: http://www.gov.sr/media/968160/visserij_management_plan_voor_suriname.pdf » Fishery Management Plan for Suriname – Seabob Fishery (Xiphopenaeus References kroyeri) 2010 – 2015. MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ, Onderdirectoraat Visserij. February 2010. » SWG (2015). VERSLAG SEABOB WERKGROEP. Periode januari 2014 tot en met September 2015. Available on-line at: http://seabob.sr/wp- content/uploads/2016/03/160215-Jaarverslag-jan-2014-tot-en-met-sept-2015.pdf

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): n/a

Page 121 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s PI 3.2.3 management measures are enforced and complied with

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Monitoring, control and A monitoring, control A comprehensive monitoring, surveillance and surveillance control and surveillance system mechanisms exist, are system has been has been implemented in the implemented in the implemented in the fishery under assessment and fishery under fishery under has demonstrated a consistent assessment and there assessment and has ability to enforce relevant is a reasonable demonstrated an ability management measures, expectation that they to enforce relevant strategies and/or rules. are effective. management measures, strategies

Guidepost and/or rules.

Met? Y Y N

A monitoring, control and surveillance system has been implemented which includes:  Vessel Monitoring System on all Seabob vessels.  Inspections of vessels on landing (mainly for gear compliance – TEDs, VMS, BRD). Including inspection by the US authorities on the TEDs.  Inspections of vessels at sea. Since the initial MSC assessment the level of at sea enforcement has been greatly enhanced. A budget of over 20m US$ has been invested in coastguard enforcement apparatus such as enforcement vessels and helicopters. Coastguard personnel (typically ex Navy) have been trained and the legislative basis for the enhanced level of coastguard enforcement has been implemented.  For species such as Seabob destined for the European market, the EU requires a catch certificate from the national competent authority (LVV) stating that the product is not the result of IUU activity. The certificate is only issued once licence, trip VMS, landing statistics have been reported. Furthermore, from a contextual point of view, the risk of infringement is relatively

low, in particular because there are no catch quota limits, and because of the small size of the fleet, there is in effect no effort restriction if the stock status is fluctuating around the target reference point. Furthermore, the spatial restrictions (fishing zone) are appropriate to the natural spatial extent of the stock. As a result, it can be concluded that the monitoring, control and surveillance system is appropriate to the

Justification scale and intensity of the fishery – although not comprehensive.

b Sanctions to deal with Sanctions to deal with Sanctions to deal with non- non-compliance exist non-compliance exist, compliance exist, are and there is some are consistently applied consistently applied and evidence that they are and thought to provide demonstrably provide effective

applied. effective deterrence. deterrence. Guidepost

Met? Y Y N

Page 122 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s PI 3.2.3 management measures are enforced and complied with

The initial MSC assessment in 2011 reported that although there was a system in place to apply sanctions for non-compliance, it was concluded that there was insufficient evidence of consistent application to provide effective deterrence, therefore a binding condition of certification was raised. By the time of the fisheries’ 1st surveillance audit in 2012 it was reported that as a result of the condition the Director of Fisheries has undertaken to fully clarify the incremental sanctions for infringements. All fishing companies were written to, to ensure that sanctions were clearly communicated and understood. Sanctions would be applied incrementally as follows:  Initial warning letter  3 incrementally increasing levels of fines  License being revoked. In recent years the fishery department have issued a small number of warning letters to the vessels in the client group - primarily in response to minor zonal infringements – but none in the past 22 months and no fines have been issued. However, in other fisheries fines have been issued and in at least 1 case a licence has been revoked, which has sent a strong signal that sanctions will be consistently applied. It is therefore concluded that appropriate sanctions are in place and are now consistently applied, sufficient to provide effective deterrence, therefore the SG80 level is met. However, the evidence base is perhaps not at the level required to be

Justification ‘demonstrably’ proven, as required for the SG100 level.

c Fishers are generally Some evidence exists There is a high degree of thought to comply with to demonstrate fishers confidence that fishers comply the management comply with the with the management system system for the fishery management system under assessment, including, under assessment, under assessment, providing information of including, when including, when importance to the effective required, providing required, providing management of the fishery. information of information of importance to the importance to the effective management effective management

Guidepost of the fishery. of the fishery.

Met? Y Y N

The developments in recent years in the coverage and efficacy of the monitoring, control and surveillance system (described above in scoring issue a) has led to an increased enforcement – in particular at sea - and it is believed to have had an impact in reducing the level of illegal fishing (LVV pers comms, Heiploeg Suriname pers comms). In a marked improvement since the initial MSC assessment, skippers on the most recent site visit (in 2016) reported that the Coastguard patrol vessel is now regularly seen, and they occasionally undertake at sea inspections (3 or 4 boardings per year). And the skippers reported that they now no longer see any Guyanese flagged vessels illegally trawling in Surinamese waters (as was reported

in the initial MSC assessment and corroborated by sharing of VMS data between Guyana and Suriname). There is therefore a much greater confidence in the efficacy of the enforcement system compared with the time of the original MSC assessment, and this in turn increases a sense of stewardship in the fishery and motivates compliance. LVV report no instances on non-compliance on the part of

Justification the Suriname Seabob fleet. It is therefore concluded that the SG80 level is met.

Page 123 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s PI 3.2.3 management measures are enforced and complied with

d There is no evidence of systematic non-

compliance. Guidepost

Met? (Y)

Consultations with the Head of the Fisheries Department confirm that there is no

evidence of systematic non-compliance (LVV pers comms.) Justification

» Chickrie. R (2013). Suriname gets modern coast guard to tackle Guyanese pirates. Caribbean News Now. Article available on-line: http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/topstory-Suriname-gets-modern-coast-guard-to- tackle-Guyanese-pirates-17559.html

References » » Fishery Management Plan for Suriname – Seabob Fishery (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) 2010 – 2015. MINISTERIE VAN LANDBOUW, VEETEELT EN VISSERIJ, Onderdirectoraat Visserij. February 2010. » LVV pers comms, » Heiploeg Suriname pers comms

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): n/a

Page 124 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery has a research plan that addresses the information needs of PI 3.2.4 management

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a Research is A research plan A comprehensive research plan undertaken, as provides the provides the management required, to achieve management system system with a coherent and the objectives with a strategic strategic approach to research consistent with MSC’s approach to research across P1, P2 and P3, and Principles 1 and 2. and reliable and timely reliable and timely information information sufficient to sufficient to achieve the achieve the objectives objectives consistent with consistent with MSC’s MSC’s Principles 1 and 2.

Guidepost Principles 1 and 2.

Met? (Y) (Y) (Y)

The Seabob Working Group are responsible for coordinating research. The Annual Review of the Seabob Working Group provides a Research & Development Plan. The most recent version of this plan (at the time of writing – June 2016) is from

September 2015. This includes not only research in response to the conditions raised at the time of the original MSC assessment, but also research identified by management. The research plan includes research across P1 (such as HCR review), P2 (such as ETP impacts, habitat mapping etc.) and P3 (Monitoring & surveillance). It is therefore concluded that this is comprehensive, therefore the

Justification SG100 guidepost is met.

b Research results are Research results are Research plan and results are available to interested disseminated to all disseminated to all interested parties. interested parties in a parties in a timely fashion and timely fashion. are widely and publicly

available. Guidepost

Met? (Y) (Y) (N)

Much of the research which has been conducted since the time of the first MSC assessment is available on-line in the form of peer reviewed publications. The lead or contributing author of many of these was Tomas Willems of the University of Ghent. His research output (most of which relates to this fishery) can be viewed at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tomas_Willems/publications In addition, the new fishery website (www.seabob.sr) have published some research outputs, in one case linked as a news article. Further research outputs would be available on request. Finally, previous stock assessments are available on the CRFM website. Overall, given that not all research outputs are widely and publically available, SG100 is not met, however the level and timeliness of dissemination of research

Justification outputs is adequate to meet the SG80 level.

» SWG (2015). VERSLAG SEABOB WERKGROEP. Periode januari 2014 tot en met September 2015. Available on-line at: http://seabob.sr/wp- content/uploads/2016/03/160215-Jaarverslag-jan-2014-tot-en-met-sept-2015.pdf » Willems, T., De Backer, A., You, K.W.T., Vincx, M. & K. Hostens (2015a). References Spatio-temporal distribution patterns of the epibenthic community in the coastal waters of Suriname. Continental Shelf Research, V. 108, pp. 25-40. » Babb-Echteld, Y. 2016. Incidental removal of Atlantic seabob by fishing vessels. Internal report, Suriname LVV. Available on www.seabob.sr

Page 125 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

The fishery has a research plan that addresses the information needs of PI 3.2.4 management

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): n/a

Page 126 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives PI 3.2.5 There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100

a The fishery has in The fishery has in The fishery has in place place mechanisms to place mechanisms to mechanisms to evaluate all evaluate some parts of evaluate key parts of parts of the management the management the management system.

Guidepost system. system

Met? (Y) (Y) (N)

The National Fishery Management Plan has a term of 5 years (2014 – 2018) and stipulates that a mid-term review will take place in 2016 followed by a second evaluation in 2018. Both reviews will include stakeholder consultation and a new Fisheries Management Plan will be drafted following the 2018 review. Other key parts of the management system have also been evaluated at various times:  In 2000, the CARICOM fisheries unit in Belize undertook a review of the Data collection and management systems for fisheries in Suriname (Mahon 2000).  In 2005, with assistance provided under an EU Project, CRFM undertook a review of the current situation on IUU fishing and MCS in the fisheries sector of the CARICOM/CARIFORUM region (which included Suriname), which resulted in a strategy to enhance the effectiveness of MCS in the region.  FAO occasionally undertake more focused review, for example a “Review of National Fisheries Data Collection Systems in Suriname” (Stamatopoulos 2008).  Posiedon Aquatic Resource Management Consultants have undertaken an evaluation of the implementation of the EU IUU scheme in Suriname, as part of an EU funded project coordinated by Gopa Consultants.  Other specific projects undertake reviews and evaluations relevant to key

parts of the fishery management system such as: o The Inter American Development Bank Review of Sustainable Management of Suriname Fisheries (2013). o United Nations Development Programme Evaluation of the

Justification Suriname Coastal Protected Area Management (2015)

b The fishery-specific The fishery-specific The fishery-specific management system management system is management system is subject is subject to subject to regular to regular internal and external occasional internal internal and occasional review.

Guidepost review. external review.

Met? (Y) (N) (N)

Page 127 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives PI 3.2.5 There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system

The Fishery Specific Management System is set out in the Seabob Fishery Management Plan. This document was implemented in 2010, for a period of 2010 - 2015. It stipulates that internal evaluation / review will occur. However, although there has been some form of on-going and annual internal review – as evidenced by the minutes of the Seabob Working Group, and the SWG annual report – no overall evaluation of the performance of the Fishery Specific management system has been undertaken nor has any such review included an external element. Furthermore, no provision is made for external review. Given that the Fishery

Specific Managament System has now been in operation for in excess of 5 years and given that the on-going work to revise the stock assessment, may well lead to an adjustment of the HCR, it would now seem timely to undertake a more complete review (including external review) of the overall performance of the fishery management system. As a result, the assessment team conclude that SG60 is met,

Justification but SG80 is not met, therefore a condition is raised.

» Onderdirectoraat Visserij (2013). VISSERIJ MANAGEMENT PLAN VOOR SURINAME 2014 – 2018: http://www.gov.sr/media/968160/visserij_management_plan_voor_suriname.pdf » Mahon (2000). Review of the Data Collection and management systems of the marine fisheries in Suriname. CARICOM FISHERIES UNIT » Stamatopoulos. C. (2008). Review of National Fisheries Data Collection Systems in Suriname. FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF References THE UNITED NATIONS. FAO TCP Facility: TCP/SUR/3101 » Seijo J. C. (2013). Sustainable Management of Suriname Fisheries Inter- American Development Bank » Onestini M. (2015). Evaluation Report For the Terminal Evaluation (TE) of the Suriname Coastal Protected Area Management (PIMS 4370) Project. United Nations Development Programme. Available at: http://erc.undp.org/evaluation/evaluations/detail/6124

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 70

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 2

Page 128 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Appendix 1.2 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs Table A1.2.1: PSA rationale table for PI 2.1.1 (retained species). NB: for any criterion, score 3 = high risk, score 2 = medium risk, score 1 = low risk.

Bangamary (minor) Green weakfish (minor) Smalleye croaker (minor) Carpas shrimp (minor) Productivity Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score 1.7 2.6 years 3.8 years Average age www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.org/ 1 www.fishbase.org/ 1 1 <1 year 1 ummary/Nebris- at maturity. summary/417 summary/1178 microps.html 6.8 Average 10.6 years 18 years www.fishbase.de/s Shrimps typically www.fishbase.org/ 2 www.fishbase.org/ 2 1 1 maximum ummary/Nebris- <6years summary/417 summary/1178 age microps.html No species data, but other related species > 20,000 Related 12,400 – 225,700 (e.g. Jamaica No species data, P.monodon ≈ 1 weakfish: 1 but assumed 100- 2 1 Fecundity www.fishbase.org/ 500K eggs per http://www.fishbas 20,000 summary/417 spawning e.se/summary/Cyn oscion- jamaicensis.html) 15 cm male, 20 cm 40 cm Average 45 cm 65 cm female www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.org/ 1 www.fishbase.org/ 1 1 http://www.fao.org/ 1 maximum ummary/Nebris- summary/417 summary/1178 fishery/species/25 size microps.html 91/en 23.8 25 cm 60.6 cm Average size www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.org/ 1 www.fishbase.org/ 2 1 <20cm 1 ummary/Nebris- at maturity summary/417 summary/1178 microps.html No species data, but other related species are Broadcast broadcast spawner No species data, Penaeids are spawner (e.g. orangemouth but very likely to Reproductive 1 1 1 broadcast 1 www.fishbase.org/ weakfish: be a broadcast strategy spawners summary/417 http://www.fishbas spawner e.se/summary/Cyn oscion- xanthulus.html) 3.6 3.9 4.0 Penaeids are www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.org/ 3 www.fishbase.org/ 3 3 omnivores, trophic 1 Trophic level ummary/Nebris- summary/417 summary/1178 level around 2.5. microps.html Susceptibility Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Occurs along the Occurs along the Occurs along the Occurs along the Atlantic and Atlantic and Atlantic and Atlantic and Caribbean coast Caribbean coast Caribbean coast Caribbean coast from Nicaragua to from Nicaragua to Areal from Costa Rica to 1 from Nicaragua to 1 1 1 Brazil Brazil Overlap Brazil Brazil www.fishbase.de/s http://www.fao.org/ www.fishbase.org/ www.fishbase.org/ ummary/Nebris- fishery/species/25 summary/417 summary/1178 microps.html 91/en Species is Species is demersal, Species is Species is Vertical 3 3 3 3 Overlap demersal swimming near demersal demersal surface at night Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & TED but codend is TED but codend is TED but codend is TED but codend is 3 3 3 3 Selectivity relatively small relatively small relatively small relatively small mesh mesh mesh mesh

Post capture Retained 3 Retained 3 Retained 3 Retained 3 mortality

Page 129 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Table A1.2.2: PSA rationale table for PI 2.2.1 (bycatch species). NB: for any criterion, score 3 = high risk, score 2 = medium risk, score 1 = low risk.

Scyphozoa jellyfish Longnose stingray Smalleye stardrum (Main) Jamaica weakfish (Main) (minor) (minor) Productivity Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score 1 year 1.8 years No species data, Assumed young, Average age www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 1 but assumed 3-15 2 <5 years at maturity. ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Cynoscio years microps.html n-jamaicensis.html 3.5 years 7.1 years Average No species data, Assumed short, www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 1 but assumed 10- 2 maximum <10 years ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Cynoscio 25 years age microps.html n-jamaicensis.html 160,308 Multiple spawning Multiple spawning No species data, per year so 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 per year, assumed 1 3 Fecundity but assumed <100 assume >20,000 ummary/Cynoscio >20,000 n-jamaicensis.html 20 cm 50 cm 40 cm 200 cm Average www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 https://en.wikipedia 1 www.fishbase.de/s 2 maximum ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Cynoscio .org/wiki/Scyphozo ummary/Dasyatis- size microps.html n-jamaicensis.html a guttata.html 12.9 cm 22.4 cm 98.9 cm Average size www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 <40cm 1 www.fishbase.de/s 2 at maturity ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Cynoscio ummary/Dasyatis- microps.html n-jamaicensis.html guttata.html Most are Live bearer broadcast spawner Reproductive Broadcast Broadcast www.fishbase.de/s 1 1 https://en.wikipedia 1 3 spawner spawner ummary/Dasyatis- strategy .org/wiki/Scyphozo guttata.html a 3.5 3.8 Predate upon Fishbase value of zooplankton, www.fishbase.de/s 3 www.fishbase.de/s 3 2 2.6 too low. 3 Trophic level assumed 2.75- ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Cynoscio Assumed 3.5 microps.html n-jamaicensis.html 3.25 Susceptibility Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Occurs along the Occurs along the Occurs along the Atlantic, Caribbean Atlantic and Atlantic, Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico Caribbean coast and Gulf of Mexico coast from Florida from Nicaragua to Very wide ranging coast from North Areal 1 1 1 1 Overlap to Brazil Argentina and abundant Carolina to Brazil www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Cynoscio ummary/Dasyatis- microps.html n-jamaicensis.html guttata.html Species is Species is Typically pelagic Species is Vertical 3 3 2 3 Overlap demersal demersal living demersal Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & TED but codend is TED but codend is TED but codend is TED but codend is 3 3 3 3 Selectivity relatively small relatively small relatively small relatively small mesh mesh mesh mesh Most released Unlikely to survive Unlikely to survive Unlikely to survive alive, but no data Post capture 3 3 3 2 mortality discarding discarding discarding on subsequent survival

Page 130 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Largehead hairtail (minor) Rake stardrum (minor) Shorthead drum (minor) Coco sea catfish Productivity Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score 2.3 years 1 year 1.4 years 4.1 years Average age www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 at maturity. ummary/Trichiurus ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Larimus- ummary/Bagre- -lepturus.html rastrifer.html breviceps.html bagre.html 11.6 years 3.5 years 5.1 years 17.9 years Average www.fishbase.de/s 2 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 2 maximum ummary/Trichiurus ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Larimus- ummary/Bagre- age -lepturus.html rastrifer.html breviceps.html bagre.html No species data, No species data, No species data, No species data, Fecundity but assumed 1 but assumed 100- 2 but assumed 100- 2 but assumed 100- 2 >20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 234 cm 20 cm 31 cm 55 cm Average www.fishbase.de/s 2 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 maximum ummary/Trichiurus ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Larimus- ummary/Bagre- size -lepturus.html rastrifer.html breviceps.html bagre.html 75.6 12.9 cm 15.3 cm 31.6 cm Average size www.fishbase.de/s 2 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 at maturity ummary/Trichiurus ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Larimus- ummary/Bagre- -lepturus.html rastrifer.html breviceps.html bagre.html No species data, Broadcast Broadcast Broadcast but a related spawner spawner spawner species is a mouth Reproductive www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 www.fishbase.de/s 1 brooder 3 strategy ummary/Trichiurus ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Larimus- https://en.wikipedia -lepturus.html rastrifer.html breviceps.html .org/wiki/Gafftopsai l_catfish 4.4 3.4 3.5 4.0 www.fishbase.de/s 3 www.fishbase.de/s 3 www.fishbase.de/s 3 www.fishbase.de/s 3 Trophic level ummary/Trichiurus ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Larimus- ummary/Bagre- -lepturus.html rastrifer.html breviceps.html bagre.html Susceptibility Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Occurs along the Occurs along the Occurs along the Circumtropical and Atlantic, Caribbean Atlantic, Caribbean Atlantic and temperate waters and Gulf of Mexico and Gulf of Mexico Caribbean coast globally coast from North coast from Florida from Colombia to Areal 1 1 1 1 Overlap www.fishbase.de/s Carolina to Brazil to Brazil Brazil ummary/Trichiurus www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s -lepturus.html ummary/Stellifer- ummary/Larimus- ummary/Bagre- rastrifer.html breviceps.html bagre.html Species is semi- pelagic Species is Species is Species is Vertical 2 3 3 3 www.fishbase.de/s demersal demersal demersal Overlap ummary/Trichiurus -lepturus.html Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & TED but codend is TED but codend is TED but codend is TED but codend is 3 3 3 3 Selectivity relatively small relatively small relatively small relatively small mesh mesh mesh mesh Unlikely to survive Unlikely to survive Unlikely to survive Post capture 3 3 3 Retained 3 mortality discarding discarding discarding

Page 131 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Sharpsnout stingray Smooth butterfly ray Blackfin croaker (minor) Banded croaker (minor) (minor) (minor) Productivity Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score 1.3 1.4 years www.fishbase.de/s No species data, No species data, Average age www.fishbase.de/s 1 ummary/Paralonch 1 but assumed 3-15 2 but assumed 3-15 2 ummary/Lonchuru at maturity. urus- years years s-elegans.html brasiliensis.html 5.2 5.5 years Average www.fishbase.de/s No species data, No species data, www.fishbase.de/s 1 ummary/Paralonch 1 but assumed 10- 2 but assumed 10- 2 maximum ummary/Lonchuru urus- 25 years 25 years age s-elegans.html brasiliensis.html No species data, No species data, No species data, No species data, but assumed 100- 2 but assumed 100- 2 3 3 Fecundity but assumed <100 but assumed <100 20,000 20,000 30 cm 32 cm 150 cm 137 cm Average www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s 1 ummary/Paralonch 1 2 2 maximum ummary/Lonchuru ummary/Dasyatis- ummary/Gymnura- urus- size s-elegans.html geijskesi.html micrura.html brasiliensis.html 18.5 cm 19.6 cm 76.7 cm 70.7 cm www.fishbase.de/s Average size www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s 1 ummary/Paralonch 1 2 2 ummary/Lonchuru ummary/Dasyatis- ummary/Gymnura- at maturity urus- s-elegans.html geijskesi.html micrura.html brasiliensis.html Livebearer Broadcast Broadcast Reproductive 1 1 www.fishbase.de/s 3 Livebearer 3 strategy spawner spawner ummary/Dasyatis- geijskesi.html 3.4 3.3 3.6 www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s No species data, www.fishbase.de/s 3 ummary/Paralonch 3 3 3 Trophic level ummary/Lonchuru assumed 3.5 ummary/Gymnura- urus- s-elegans.html micrura.html brasiliensis.html Susceptibility Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Rationale Score Occurs along Occurs along the Occurs along the eastern and Atlantic, Caribbean Occurs along the Atlantic, Caribbean western coasts of and Gulf of Mexico Atlantic, Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico the Atlantic, coast from Maine and Gulf of Mexico coast from Florida coast from Florida including Areal 1 to Argentina 1 1 1 to Brazil to Brazil Caribbean and Overlap www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s www.fishbase.de/s Gulf of Mexico ummary/Paralonch ummary/Lonchuru ummary/Dasyatis- www.fishbase.de/s urus- s-elegans.html geijskesi.html ummary/Gymnura- brasiliensis.html micrura.html Species is Species is Species is Species is Vertical 3 3 3 3 Overlap demersal demersal demersal demersal Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & Gear uses BRD & TED but codend is TED but codend is TED but codend is TED but codend is 3 3 3 3 Selectivity relatively small relatively small relatively small relatively small mesh mesh mesh mesh Most released Most released Unlikely to survive Unlikely to survive alive, but no data alive, but no data Post capture 3 3 2 2 mortality discarding discarding on subsequent on subsequent survival survival

Page 132 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)

Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Table A1.2.3: PSA scoring table for PI 2.1.1 (retained species) and PI 2.2.1 (bycatch species). NB: for any criterion, score 3 = high risk, score 2 = medium risk, score 1 = low risk.

Productivity Scores [1 3] Susceptibility Scores [1 3] PSA scores (automatic)

Risk MSC Catch% PSA Scientific name Common name MSC status ctivity Category scoring (2014) Score

Name guidepost

Fecundity

Sele

Availability

capture mortality capture

-

Encounterability

Average max age max Average

Average max size max Average

Precise MSC Score MSC Precise

Total Total (multiplicative)

Reproductive strategy Reproductive Post

Trophic level (fishbase) level Trophic

Average age at maturity at age Average

Average size at Maturity at size Average Total Productivity (average) Productivity Total Retained Species Macrodon ancylodon Bangamary / weakfish 2.51 Retained minor 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1.43 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.18 Low >80 92 Cynoscion virescens Green Weakfish 1.20 Retained minor 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 1.57 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.28 Low >80 90 Nebris microps Smalleye croaker 0.99 Retained minor 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1.43 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.18 Low >80 92 Farfantepenaeus subtilis Carpas shrimp 0.34 Retained minor 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.00 1 3 3 3 1.65 1.93 Low >80 96 Bycatch Species Stellifer microps Smalleye stardrum 11.88 Bycatch MAIN 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1.29 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.09 Low >80 93 Cynoscion jamaicensis Jamaica weakfish 5.64 Bycatch MAIN 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1.29 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.09 Low >80 93 Scyphozoa spp. Scyphozoa jellyfish 8.17 Bycatch minor 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1.14 1 2 3 3 1.43 1.83 Low >80 97 Dasyatis guttata Longnose stingray 1.71 Bycatch minor 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2.43 1 3 3 2 1.43 2.82 Med 60-80 74 Trichiurus lepturus Largehead hairtail 1.47 Bycatch minor 1 2 1 2 2 1 3 1.71 1 2 3 3 1.43 2.23 Low >80 91 Stellifer rastrifer Rake stardrum 1.29 Bycatch minor 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1.43 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.18 Low >80 92 Larimus brevicep Shorthead Drum 1.07 Bycatch minor 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1.43 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.18 Low >80 92 Bagre bagre Coco sea catfish 0.76 Bycatch minor 1 2 2 1 1 3 3 1.86 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.48 Low >80 85 Paralonchurus elegans Blackfin croaker 0.69 Bycatch minor 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1.43 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.18 Low >80 92 Paralonchurus brasiliensis Banded croaker 0.59 Bycatch minor 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1.43 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.18 Low >80 92 Dasyatis geijskesi Sharpsnout stingray 0.58 Bycatch minor 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2.43 1 3 3 2 1.43 2.82 Med 60-80 74 Gymnura micrura Smooth butterfly ray 0.57 Bycatch minor 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2.43 1 3 3 2 1.43 2.82 Med 60-80 74 Anchoa spinifer Spicule anchovy 0.55 Bycatch minor 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1.29 1 2 3 3 1.43 1.92 Low >80 96 Symphurus plagusia Duskycheek tonguefish 0.45 Bycatch minor 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1.43 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.18 Low >80 92 Caranx hippos Crevalle jack 0.44 Bycatch minor 1 2 1 2 2 1 3 1.71 1 3 3 3 1.65 2.38 Low >80 87 56 Other species 3.77 Negligible Not Assessed

Page 133 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15) Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Appendix 1.3 Conditions There are 2 conditions for this fishery. Neither condition relates to conditions applied in the intial assessment. All conditions raised at the time of the initial MSC assessment (FCI 2011) have been closed prior to this re-assessment. The following conditions relate to new issues which have become apparent during the period of initial certification.

Condition 1

Performance PI 1.2.2 (Scoring Issue c) There are well defined and effective harvest control rules Indicator in place PI Score 75

While available evidence indicates the HCR (Harvest Control Rule) CPUE is well tracked Rationale and that management can respond to reductions in HCR CPUE, it is unclear if the HCR is being applied as prescribed in the fishery harvest plan. As such it is uncertain whether in the future fishing effort will be reduced according to the HCR.

Condition The 80 level scoring guidepost of the third scoring issue of performance indicator 1.2.2 must be met. This states “Available evidence indicates that the tools in use are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules”. Year Action Resulting PI Score 1 Commit to a timeframe for a review of the application of 75 the Seabob Fishery HCR with the goal of ensuring the tools in use are effective in achieving the exploitation levels required by the HCR 2 Undertake review process and if needed, modify the HCR 75 Milestones to ensure its effectiveness in achieving the required exploitation levels (note that results of completed stock assessment may be relevant to any HCR changes) 3 Conclude review and implement any changes in the HCR 75 that are needed 4 Provide evidence that the tools in use are appropriate and 80 effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the HCR Year 1: Complete the stock assessment (this is already well underway). The stock assessment would form the basis for conducting the management strategy evaluations (MSE). The assessment is structured to estimate process parameters (e.g. mean and variance of various population and other parameters). It is still hoped to complete this as already agreed hopefully by September 2016. Define precisely the actions currently undertaken in implementing the HCR. These need to be well-defined and the management system needs to commit to them. The HCR needs Client action plan to be defined well enough to apply in the MSE. Year 2: The current HCR as implemented is tested using MSE to provide evidence to meet the MSC standard. If any adjustments are required, these will be made as recommendations. Year 3: Implement any recommendations. Any further changes to the HCR would be tested with MSE before full implementation or as changes occur. This would provide evidence that the HCR is robust to a wide range of uncertainties. Year 4: Provide evidence that the tools in use are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the HCR This condition relies upon the involvement, funding and resources of other bodies – in particular the Fisheries Department and the Seabob Working Group and others that they Consultation on may in turn contract. It has therefore been necessary to consult with these entities to condition confirm that the condition is realistic and achievable. In the following pages the letters from both the Fisheries Department and the Seabob Working Group are presented.

Page 134 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Condition 2

Performance PI 3.2.5 (Scoring Issue b) There is effective and timely review of the fishery- Indicator specific management system PI Score 70

The Fishery Specific Management System is set out in the Seabob Fishery Management Plan. This document was implemented in 2010. It stipulates that internal evaluation / review will occur. However, this review has not been a formal holistic review of the overall Rationale performance of the management system. And no provision is made for external review of the performance of the overall Seabob Fishery Management Plan. This formal review now appears to be overdue and should be undertaken as part of the on-going improvements in the fishery. This is should form part of the process of revision of the Seabob Fishery Management Plan.

Condition The 80 level scoring guidepost of the second scoring issue of performance indicator 3.2.5 must be met. This states that “The fishery-specific management system is subject to regular internal and occasional external review”. Year Action Resulting PI Score 1 Commit to a timeframe for a full formal review of the 70 Seabob Fishery Management Plan, including external. Milestones 2 Begin Review Process. 70 3 Conclude any internal element of Review Process 70 4 Conclude any external element of Review Process 80 Year 1 / 2: SWG conducts an internal review of procedures. It should commit a small sub- group of members to review its procedures against its terms of reference and produce a short report of findings, conclusions and recommendations, to report back to the SWG. Year 2/3: Subsequently, Fisheries Department should approach CRFM (or FAO) to Client action plan commission a consultant to do an external independent review. CRFM will do this on request from a CARICOM member state. The review ToR need to be written carefully and agreed by the SWG/CRFM. They need to be broader than the internal review above. Typical review ToRs of this type can be found for regional fisheries management bodies. Year 4: Demonstrate that the fishery-specific management system is subject to regular internal and occasional external review. This condition relies upon the involvement, funding and resources of other bodies – in particular the Fisheries Department and the Seabob Working Group and others that they Consultation on may in turn contract. It has therefore been necessary to consult with these entities to condition confirm that the condition is realistic and achievable. In the following pages the letters from both the Fisheries Department and the Seabob Working Group are presented.

Page 135 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Figure A1.3.1 Letters of agreement to the conditions

Page 136 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Page 137 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Appendix 2. Peer Review Reports

Peer Reviewer 1 Overall Opinion

Has the assessment team arrived at an appropriate Yes Certification Body Response conclusion based on the evidence presented in the assessment report?

Justification: Acoura response: We welcome the peer review overall agreement with I believe that the assessment of the seabob fishery at a score of 80 the assessment conclusions. The or more against the three MSC Principles is appropriate. I agree reviewer makes a number of with the assessment team’s conclusion that the Suriname Seabob recommendations or suggestions. Atlantic Shrimp fishery meets the MSC standard. Considerable Prior to responding, we would note new and reliable information on the fishery, e.g., the stock structure that none of these imply a material and productivity, fleet composition, and the ecosystem is now change in scores or outcomes. available and thereby close the conditions raised in the 2011 Furthermore, as assessors we are certification report. Bycatch reduction and other measures are in constrained by the MSC requirements place to ensure the fishery does not pose irreversible threats to the and guidance. Above all the focus of ecosystem (habitat, bycatch, retained, and ETP species). A formal the assessment is: a) how does the management system is in place within a legal and/or customary fishery score against the MSC framework. Sufficient current information is therefore available to standard? And b) what steps must be support the precautionary harvest strategy in place. taken to ensure the fishery addresses The following elements should to considered, either as conditions? Whilst the reviewer improvements to this draft report or as activities to be monitored in makes some reasonable suggestions the coming years. of possible future approaches and opportunities for improvement, as 1. While there is now considerable reliable information on the these are not a cause for scores of spatial extent, timing and location of use of the fishing gear, less than 80 the assessors would not knowledge of the ecosystem is still limited. For instance, the most place a requirement on the client to comprehensive seabed habitat map available is still the survey by address them. Below we respond to Lowe-McConnell (1962). Thinking ahead to future recertification, each suggestion in turn: and providing more support for setting precautionary target reference points (i.e., 10% above the level expected to achieve 1. The reviewer asks if the BMSY), can the Fisheries Department or the seabob management Fisheries Department or the advisory group commit to relevant activities that explicitly focus on seabob management advancing such knowledge and consequently ecosystem advisory group can commit to approaches to management? relevant activities that explicitly focus on advancing 2. The assessors recommend that analyses can be conducted to such knowledge and evaluate whether CPUE has been affected by changes in gear or consequently ecosystem changes in environmental conditions? Are there specific related approaches to management - activities that the Suriname Fisheries Department will complete thinking ahead to future under the REBYC-II project? Can such activities also address recertification. The Acoura uncertainties related to the effect of Sargassum seaweed on assessment team concluded CPUE? that the level of ecosystem 3. The risk-based framework was not adequately described by the information was sufficient to assessors. While the MSC (2013) guidance document is meet the unconditional pass referenced, some additional details on PSA scoring for retained level (i.e. SG80 or above) – and bycatch species can be useful. For example, what does a indeed the reviewer agrees score of 1 through 3 in Appendix 1.2 mean? Please note that the with those scores. However, MSC (2013a) citation on p. 23 was not listed in the references; or the Fishery Department and it should be MSC (2013). Seabob working group will have the opportunity to see 4. It was difficult to read further details in the seabob fishery the reviewer’s suggestion and management plan, e.g., details on move-on rules, as the include this in their future management plan that is posted on the website (www.seabob.sr) consideration.

Page 138 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

is only available in Dutch. Can a version in English also be posted? 2. We agree that there may be Or, at the least, include an executive summary in English? opportunities for focus of the recommendation to be 5. As this is a recertification, the website (www.seabob.sr) should addressed in conjunction with also include links to the assessments from 2009-2012 in order to other planned research. This track the increase in knowledge of the fishery, the stock status, and may be considered by the management measures, over time. client fishery as it seeks to address recommendations. 3. Further description has been added in relation to the RBF. A note has been added to the tables to reflect that for any scoring criterion, score 3 = high risk, score 2 = medium risk, score 1 = low risk. A distinction has now been made between MSC 2013a and MSC 2013b, and both references provided. 4. The assessors were provided with an English version of the Management Plan. We will pass on the suggestion that this official English translation be made available on the website. This does not affect scores and does not impact on the operation of the fishery. 5. As above. We will pass on the suggestion that previous MSC assessment reports (or a link to the MSC website) are available on the seabob website. This does not affect scores and does not impact on the operation of the fishery.

Page 139 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Justification: Acoura response: Agreed, no further comment required. Two conditions were raised which relate to having well-defined and effective management structures. The assessors acknowledge that uncertainties and limitations associated with the logistic model used in 2009 and the last stock assessment in 2012, will be addressed in the new assessment of Suriname seabob that is expected to be completed in late 2016. The assessor’s stated that this new size- and sex structured model accounts for within population differences in growth, mortality, and reproduction and is similar to that used for the Guyana seabob in 2013. According to the assessor’s personal communication with the scientist, the new model will increase confidence in the assessment of stock status and estimation of reference points. Based on the update (Medley, dated 11 March 2016) provided on the seabob fishery website (www.seabob.sr) and the explanatory text in the assessor’s report, I am not providing a critique of the model. This work has also been peer reviewed by the CRFM. I believe that the completion of this assessment will provide the main basis for achieving the SG80 outcome (or greater) for well-defined and effective harvest control rules. The outcome of the assessment is expected to guide explicit actions – milestones over a four-year period – to review the harvest control rules and implement any changes projected with a view to achieving a PI score of 80. Similarly, the review of the management system is projected over four years. However, addressing the two conditions relies on the commitment of the Suriname Fisheries Department and the Seabob Working Group. While this cannot be guaranteed, the fact that these entities have signed letters (stating that commitment is promising and can achieve the SG80 outcome.

If included:

Do you think the client action plan is sufficient Yes Certification Body Response to close the conditions raised?

Addressing the two conditions relies on the commitment of the Acoura response: As required by the Suriname Fisheries Department and the Seabob Working Group. MSC standard, the focus of the At this time, it is unlikely that the Suriname Fisheries Department annual surveillance will be material can provide more details on its plans to ensure effective and timely changes in fishery / management review of the management system as well as responsibilities for since the time of the last surveillance future stock assessments in collaboration with the CRFM. and progress against conditions and recommendations. Both Condition 1 The assessors also raised a concern that while the seabob stock and 2 of the assessment, are likely to assessment reviews within the CRFM scientific working group give consideration to how future stock included outside experts, these experts were not tasked assessments are reviewed. Whilst we specifically with reviewing the stock assessments (see PI 1.2.4). agree that there may be “other The following are questions/suggestions for indicators to be regional fisheries management measured in the MSC surveillance plan. bodies or relevant fora, that can be approached to ensure external review 1. Are there any other regional fisheries management bodies or of seabob assessments” it is not the relevant fora, that can be approached to ensure external review of role of the MSC assessors to advise seabob assessments? on how conditions should be met –

Page 140 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

2. Can the Seabob Working Group make appropriate indeed the MSC guidance advises recommendations for future ecological research, e.g., habitat against being too prescriptive in mapping and biology of seabob, to build on work of Willems (2016) setting conditions. and others. Can the Suriname Fisheries Department allocate In relation to the reviewer’s second personnel and funds for this activity? Can the government fund comment, the assessors note that on- graduate research (Masters of PhD students) on habitat mapping? going monitoring of changes within the ecosystem is part of effective on- going management oversight, so would be considered as part of future assessments. Great progress has been achieved in the last 5 years with considerable research and would be positive if this continues and stimulates further research.

For reports using the Risk-Based Framework please follow the link. For reports assessing enhanced fisheries please follow the link.

General Comments on the Assessment Report (optional) The assessment report was well written; in general, facts were clearly presented in a concise manner. The increase in published scientific information relevant to the Suriname seabob fishery is extremely commendable. The available information on the biology and distribution of seabob shrimp has increased with the recent studies by Pérez (2014), Torrez (2015), Willems (2016), and Willems et al (2015). The fact that the Suriname Fisheries Department and the Seabob Working Group have remained committed to filling gaps in the knowledge of the fishery and the ecosystem is praiseworthy. The challenges of dedicating resources, e.g., qualified personnel and funds, as well as having the support and political will of government to conduct research in the Caribbean has always posed barrier to ecosystem approaches to fisheries management. The national actors in Suriname (both government and the fishing industry) have shown considerable determination and forward-thinking in pursuing MSC certification for the seabob fishery. This has effectively lead them along a pathway that can ultimately benefit other national fisheries as recognition of ecosystem approaches to management has undoubtedly increased. All efforts should be made to continue this momentum in the future. In my review of the performance indicators, I have included the most salient issues that I consider to be critical in determining my decision, suggestions for future MSC surveillance, and points needing further clarification.

Page 141 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

1.1.1 Yes Yes NA No issues here. Existing assessments of the Thanks, no response required seabob stock assessment (2009, 2011, and 2012) have consistently indicated that biomass is above BMSY and well above the point where recruitment might be impaired.

1.1.2 Yes Yes NA The scoring of 90% is an improvement from Thanks, no response required previous years as the total catch has been verified back to 1999. Confidence in the assessment of stock status and the appropriateness of reference points has increased.

1.1.3 NA NA NA The stock is not depeleted. Thanks, no response required

1.2.1 Yes Yes NA A score of 85 was given. There are a suite of Thanks, no response required measures to meet the fisheries management and research objectives. Transparency in decision- making for management is faciliated by a Seabob Working Group.

1.2.2 Yes Yes Yes This scoring issue is not met at SG80. I agree with Thanks, no response required the assessors’ recommendation for analyses to evaluate whether CPUE has been affected by

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 142 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

changes in gear to reduce bycatch or changes in environmental conditions (e.g., the influx of sargassum which clogged the nets and thus reduced catches).

1.2.3 Yes Yes NA As above. I agree with the assessors to conduct Thanks, no response required analyses to address uncertainties related to changes in CPUE associated with sargassum incursions.

1.2.4 Yes yes NA A score of 85 is warranted as the 2009 assessment Agreed, thanks. Clients are encouraged to was updated and improved in 2011 and 2012. investigate whether CRFM guidelines for peer review can be provided. This score will likely be increased during the MSC surveillance and when the 2016 seabob assessment becomes available. The assessors raise a concern that outside experts in the CRFM scientific working group were not tasked specifically with reviewing the seabob stock assessments. Can specific guidelines be provided by the CRFM with regard to peer review?

2.1.1 Yes Yes NA The PSA undertaken for the four minor retained A note has been added to the tables to species used all available information in the reflect that for any scoring criterion, score 3 mainstream databases (Fishbase, FAO). = high risk, score 2 = medium risk, score 1 =

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 143 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

low risk. Further information on what However, some additional detail on the exactly that means for each criterion, and methodology used in PSA scoring can be useful in the thresholds that are applied within the this report. A key can be included for Tables PSA, requires consideration of the PSA A1.2.1 and A1.2.2 to describe what a score 1 methodology in the MSC 2013a reference through 3 means. Similarly, a key can be used to listed. describe the Productivity and Susceptibility Scores in Table A1.2.3.

2.1.2 Yes Yes NA This exemplary use of BRDs and TEDs in reducing Agreed, thank you. the amount of non-shrimp catch in trawls is to be commended.

2.1.3 Yes Yes NA Monitoring of retained species is conducted in Agreed, thank you. sufficient detail to assess ongoing mortalities to all retained species.

2.2.1 Yes Yes NA Sufficeint measures are in place to manage Agreed, thank you. bycatch species. Note the error messages for the reference in 2.2.1 Noted – this hyperlink has been corrected. (p. 74).

2.2.2 Yes Yes NA A score of 95 was granted- well done. The Agreed, thank you. combination of monitoring methods related to bycatch management warrant this score.

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 144 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

2.2.3 Yes Yes NA Overall, sufficient data continue to be collected to Agreed, thank you. detect any increase in risk to main bycatch species

2.3.1 Yes Yes NA Recent catch data provide a high degree of Agreed, thank you. confidence that there are no significant detrimental direct effects of the fishery on ETP species.

2.3.2 Yes Yes NA There is clear evidence that the strategy for ETP Agreed, thank you. species is being implemented successfully. It is not clear that the on-board observer However, the data is provided primarily by vessel data would corroborate the encounter data captains. Can this information be corroborated by in a particualrly rigorous or robust way as the seabob Observer data? observer coverage is limited. However, the Assessment Team was reassured through speaking with T. Willems, the PhD student who provided the catch data used in scoring the retained and bycatch comonents, that direct captures of ETP species during the time he spent on the seabob vessels were zero in the main nets. He did report one encounter with a turtle in a try net, which are not equipped with TEDs, but are small and may be employed briefly to check on the likely catche of shrimps when starting fishing or moving grounds. No other encounters were observed (T. Willems, pers. comm.)

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 145 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

2.3.3 Yes Yes NA Available data for the fishery meets the SG80 level Agreed, thank you. of performance. More information on ETP species interactions is likely to be obtained through the FAO project REBYC-II LAC and this can justify a higher score the near future.

2.4.1 Yes Yes NA A partial score of 90 was awarded. The recent Agreed, thank you. Willems (2015) research is commended as the only habitat mapping of the coastal area since the Lowe-McConnell (1962).

The following are some questions/ We agree that these are admirable aims, and recommendations: would furher enhance knowledge of this - Can the Seabob Working Group facilitate fishery. However, they are not required in ecological research to build on Willems (2016) order for the fishery to meet the MSC and others? standard at this time. - Can the Suriname Fisheries Department allocate personnel and funds for this activity? - Can the government fund graduate research (Masters of PhD students) on habitat mapping?

2.4.2 Yes Yes NA A move-on rule to limit impacts on sensitive The Assessment Team was not presented habitats adds to the overall partial strategy. What with evidence to show that the move on rule mechanisms can be utilised to ensure that was being implemented systematically, and implementation of move-on rules are so it was noted in the scoring text that a guaranteed? higher score (than 80) “…would require there

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 146 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

to be evidence of the move-on rule being implemented, and consideration of establishing more permanent closures in the event that any sensitive habitats were identified within the fished area.” Essentially, the Assessmet Team is not aware of a mechanism to ensure implementation is guaranteed.

2.4.3 Yes Yes NA Note the error message related to the reference Noted, thank you. on p. 94.

2.5.1 Yes Yes NA The availability of the ecosystem information Agreed, thank you. presented in Quilez (2014), Willems (2016) and Willems et al. (2015b) has proven invaluable in being able to assign an SG 80 score.

2.5.2 Yes Yes NA No further comments made, thank you.

2.5.3 Yes Yes NA Recently published theses by Quilez (2014), The data collected and reported by recent Willems (2016) and Willems et al. (2015b) provide studies of the Suriname seabob fishery and very useful insights to the trophic relationships the inshore waters of Suriname do provide within the Suriname nearshore ecosystem. the information that is necessary for Modelling of the Suriname nearshore ecosystem modeling to be undertaken. However, would provide the information needed in order to modeling is not required for MSC achieve the SG100 score. Can this be a goal of the certification. Nevertheless, we absolutely

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 147 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

Seabob Working Group? agree that such a model could be useful in testing the management approach being taken by the fishery, and should support even higher scores for various P2 (and possibly P1) PIs.

3.1.1 Yes Yes NA A score of 95 was granted which is highly Agreed. No further comment required. commendable. Evidence of the ‘formal commitment’ to management also signifies the seriousness that the stakeholders view the issue.

3.1.2 Yes Yes NA While there is explicit definition of roles and Agreed. Even though the opportunity for responsibilities for management, these are less consultation is there there is a particular clearly defined for scientific research. challenge in facilitating consultation with all stakeholders - in particular in relation to the While the fisheries and ecosytem science has artisinal fishery. This is why the SG100 level clearly expanded since the first assessment, it is is not met. unfortunate that limited headway was made from the time of the previous MSC assessment related to sector representation in consultation processes.

3.1.3 Yes Yes NA The assessors stated that high level The word “required” is the sole difference “requirement” for the management objectives between an SG80 score and an SG100 score. was not identified. This should be explained However the MSC guidance does not further. Do you mean in the management plans, provide guidance on what it means by

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 148 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

political commitment, legal frameworks, among “required” in this case. The approach taken others? by this assessor, after reviewing many many fisheries, is to interpet a “requirement” as being high level legislation, which “requires” the fishery department to set high level long term objectives reflecting MSC P&Cs and the precautionary approach. In other words does the high level goverance structures require that objectives are set. In this case, though we concluded that the objectives were explicit within managament policy, we were unable to identify the higher level requirement for such objectives to be set.

3.1.4 Yes Yes NA Attempts to quantifiy the contribution of minor This PI has been dropped from MSC CR2, in forms of subsidies, e.g., the preferential tax rate part due to difficulty in consistent applied to diesel across all fishing sectors, should application. For example, though the be made in future assessments to increase the PI description of the PI refers to subsides, the score. scoring guidepost makes no mention of subsides. In the interest of transparent scoring the assesment team have sought to give a full explanation of the system.

3.2.1 Yes Yes NA Short and long term objectives are explicit within Agreed. the management system.

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 149 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

3.2.2 Yes Yes NA A score of 95 was granted. This is justifiable given Agreed. the clear and consistent commitments to establish effective decision-making proceses to formalize management actions.

3.2.3 Yes Yes NA The monitoring, control and surveillance system is Agreed. appropriate to the scale and intensity of the fishery – although not comprehensive. The developments in recent years in the coverage and efficacy of the monitoring, control and surveillance system is commended.

3.2.4 Yes Yes NA Including links to the 2009, 2011 and 2012 Agreed. assessments completed under the CFRM can be very useful to follow the imrovements in the science since the last certification process.

3.2.5 Yes Yes Yes Are commitment letters from the stakeholders These letters are not a guarantee, merely a are the only guarantee that an effective and commitment to work toward addressing the timely review of the fishery-specific management condition. The surveillance audit will assess system will be santioned. whether the required change has occurred. If the required change does not occur, this may ultimately lead to the loss of the MSC certificate.

» Any Other Comments

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 150 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Comments Certification Body Response

Much of the research which has been conducted since the time of the first MSC assessment is available on-line in Comment addressed above. the form of peer reviewed publications. Including links on the www.seabob.sr website to the 2009, 2011 and 2012 assessments completed under the CFRM can be very useful to follow the improvements in science and management. Language of some reports can be a challenge to transferring knowledge. The management plan on www.seabob.sr is available in Dutch only. A full or summary version in English should also be available.

For reports using the Risk-Based Framework: Performance Does the report Are the RBF risk Justification: Certification Body Response: Indicator clearly explain scores well- Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring how the process referenced? issues and any relevant documentation where possible. used to Yes/No Please attach additional pages if necessary. determine risk using the RBF led to the stated outcome? Yes/No 1.1.1 No Yes The risk-based framework was not adequately No RBF was used in Principle 1. In Principle 2, as described. Details on the PSA scoring could be explained stated above, a note has been added to the 2.1.1 No Yes further. A key can be included for Tables A1.2.1 and tables to reflect that for any scoring criterion, A1.2.2 to describe what a score 1 through 3 means. score 3 = high risk, score 2 = medium risk, score 2.2.1 No Yes Similarly, a key can be used to describe the Productivity 1 = low risk. Further information on what exactly and Susceptibility Scores in Table A1.2.3. that means for each criterion, and the thresholds 2.4.1 No Yes that are applied within the PSA, requires consideration of the PSA methodology in the 2.5.1 No Yes MSC 2013a reference listed.

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 151 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Peer Reviewer 2 Overall Opinion

Has the assessment team arrived at an Yes/No Certification Body Response appropriate conclusion based on the evidence Yes presented in the assessment report?

Justification: Agreed – specifics addressed below. The overall conclusion that the fishery meets the MSC standard is concurred for all Principles. The individual scores awarded to all PIs within Principles 1 & 3 are concurred. Adjustments to scoring for three PIs within Principle 2 are recommended (for 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.4.1), overall this is not expected to change the average score significantly with no PIs <80.

Do you think the condition(s) raised are Yes/No Certification Body Response appropriately written to achieve the SG80 Yes outcome within the specified timeframe?

Justification: Agreed – although we would hope that our milestones have not been The milestones for both conditions 1 and 2 are detailed and “prescribed” and deliberately leave prescribed and considered appropriate to achieve SG80 within considerable scope for the client fishery the specified time frame. Both conditions have actions across to address the requirements of the a four-year period and provide milestones that can be measured condition in the approach that they see fit. during that period, thereby allowing clear and early indication of successful implementation.

If included:

Do you think the client action plan is sufficient Yes/No Certification Body Response to close the conditions raised? Yes

Justification: Agreed The client sets out a clear plan with annual actions that are expected to close both of the conditions raised.

For reports using the Risk-Based Framework please follow the link. For reports assessing enhanced fisheries please follow the link.

General Comments on the Assessment Report (optional) The report is well written and succinct while providing well-structured, detailed justifications for the assessments made. Some recommendations are made for further cross-reference between the justification tables and the main report. Adjustments to some Principle 2 PIs are advised, but will not impact the overall conclusion of the assessment.

Page 152 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15) Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

1.1.1 Yes Yes N/A 1.1.1a The certifier indicates that biomass is above BMSY and provides

the B/BMSY ratio to demonstrate that the stock is highly likely to be above the point of recruitment impairment.

It would be helpful if the actual current

values of B and BMSY are provided to allow comparison for future surveillance audits. i.e. Thanks. Current values are provided at the bottom of  B = current (2015) CPUE = 1.51 the scoring table for PI 1.1.1 (Appendix 1.1) tons/day at sea; and

 BMSY = CPUE at BMSY = 1.48

tons/day at sea.

1.1.1b please add reference to Figure 3.3 in the main report (which depicts Done fluctuation around target ref point)

References – add P. Medley pers. Done Comm. To the reference list.

1.1.2 Yes Yes N/A 1.1.2a Please indicate the results of the Agreed, a sentence briefly summarizing results has Medley (2009) evaluation of the been added. Note that there is an elaboration of the reference points against the HCR (i.e. robustness of the HCR in 1.2.2b

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 153 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

were they found to be appropriate) 1.1.2d Agree that seabob is not a key LTL as per MSC definition. It would be Done, thank you. helpful to add a more detailed reference to the main report i.e. “Section 3.3: Trophic status of seabob

in Suriname waters” (or add numbered subheadings, so Section 3.3.2) References: add CRFM (2009, 2011 & Done, thank you. 2012) to the list

1.1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

1.2.1 Yes Yes N/A Clear justification is provided; agree Thanks, no response required with score of 85.

References: add CFRM 2012 and LVV Done, thank you. 2010.

1.2.2 Yes Yes Yes 1.2.2b Agree with the assessment, but Thanks for the opportunity to clarify. The relevant it would be helpful if justification could section now reads: “The SG100 level is not met be provided as to why the effect of because there is uncertainty regarding the effect of sargassum is not considered a ‘main’ sargassum incursions on CPUE. Given that such uncertainty and therefore only scored incursions are likely to reduce rather than inflate

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 154 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

under SG100. CPUE, this is not regarded as a main uncertainty.” 1.2.2c Clear justification has been Thanks, no response required provided as to why this PI does not

meet SG80 and the condition raised is concurred.

1.2.3 Yes Yes N/A 1.2.3a add reference to sargassum Added, thanks for the suggestion uncertainty for SG100 justification

1.2.3b agree with recommendation Thanks, no response required proposed.

Reference: add C Landsburg pers comm. Done

1.2.4 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI Thanks, no response required assessment scores; no further comments.

2.1.1 Yes No N/A The PSA provides an overall PI score of The peer reviewer’s interpretation of the scoring 90 for the minor species (based on methodology is only partially correct. At the SG100

individual scores of 90, 92, 92 & 96). level, SIa is scored for all species (4 minor elements, only, PSA scores as noted, with a final score being There are no main species, so only derived according to Table CC18 (MSC 2013a) = 90).

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 155 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

minor species form the ‘elements’ to However, for SIb at the SG100 level, it is required that be scored. The overall score for this PI there are reference points in place for all retained should be 90. species (which there are not) so this SI scores only 80. SIc and SId are not scored at the SG100 level. Therefore, relevant SI scores of 90 and 80, the overall score for the PI is revised to 85.

2.1.2 Yes No N/A 2.1.2a Based on the average size at The Assessment Team disagrees with this comment, maturity for the retained species and notes that the text states: “A score of 100 is not investigated (25cm, 60cm, 23.8cm and warranted as this would require measures that are <20cm), the TED and BRD will clearly be focused specifically on managing retained species, applicable to manage interaction with and the TED and BRD are focused on reducing the adult individuals of these minor bycatch”. This approach reflects the MSC’s definition species and could therefore be of a ‘Strategy’ (“A “strategy” represents a cohesive considered a strategy. This issue should and strategic arrangement which may comprise one score 100. or more measures, an understanding of how it/they work to achieve an outcome and which should be

designed to manage impact on that component specifically.”) As such, we have not changed the text or scoring.

2.1.2b testing may not be specific to Noted, thank you. the 4 retained species investigated, so

agree with this assessment and that this issue scores 80.

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 156 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

2.1.2c. There is clear evidence that TED As there is not considered to be a strategy in place, and BRD are implemented successfully, and SIc refers to the strategy being implemented at so this issue should score 100. SG100, a score of 80 only is justified. 2.1.2d There may be no evidence linking the TED and BRD specifically to Noted, thank you the 4 minor species, so agree that this issue scores 80. 2.1.2e. Agree this issue is not relevant. Based on the above the overall score Noted, thank you for this PI should be 90. As noted above, the Assessment Team disagrees with this coment and the score has not been revised.

2.1.3 Yes Yes N/A Agree with the overall assessment for Noted, thank you. And, yes, the LVV data include this PI. Does the LVV landings and effort landings of non-target/retained species, but these data include landings of non- data were not reviewed by the Assessment Team. target/retained species?

2.2.1 Yes Yes N/A 2.2.1a add the PSA results for smooth G. micrura does occur in the catch, and was one of butterfly ray (Gymnura micrura) into the most commonly encountered ray species in a justification, as this is indicated to be comparative study between Suriname seabob nets one of the most frequent rays rigged with TEDs and nets fished without (Willems et encountered by seabob shrimp trawl al. 2016). In this study, the mean catch rate of G. (Willems et al 2013) (despite it not micrura fell by 32.1% when TEDs were fitted.

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 157 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

being reflected in the catch data, However, even without this level of reduction, this presumably due to TEDs). species would still comprise <1% of the catch in the data presented here, which is the cut-off point below

which further discussion on any species has not been presented. Overall: agree with assessment scoring Thank you, noted. for this PI.References: Add DoF, 2012. It is not clear why the DoF 2012 reference should be added, so this suggestion has not been adopted.

2.2.2 Yes Yes N/A The justification provided for 3.2.2a The requirement to log bycatch levels has been noted mentions “the requirement to record in the scoring rationale, but data collected through bycatch” details of this should be this process were not reviewed or used to score the provided within 2.2.2 i.e. what is fishery. As such, no further discussion is included. required to be recorded (estimation or

actual weight), frequency of recordings (per haul, trip or week), how information is logged, maintained and

monitored. Noted, thank you. Overall: agree with assessment scoring for this PI.

2.2.3 Yes Yes N/A 2.2.3b&c the justification refers to Noted, thank you – the SI texts have been updated. retained species, please update to

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 158 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

reflect bycatch species. 2.2.3d it would be helpful to This may be helpful but is not necessary in order to understand the approximate frequency score 80, on the basis that the “Overall, sufficient of periodic data collection through data continue to be collected to detect any increase research projects and if/when future in risk to main bycatch species (e.g., due to changes research/data collection is anticipated. in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery”. Given the fishery continues to be Add reference to data that is available monitored with VMS and is restricted to a narrow, due to the “requirement to record depth-defined strip of water off the Suriname coast, bycatch” as mentioned in 3.2.2a. the fishery clearly meets the SG80 level of Overall: agree with assessment scoring performance. for this PI.

Noted, thank you.

2.3.1 Yes Yes N/A Agree with PI assessment scores; no Thank you – noted. further comments.

2.3.2 Yes Yes N/A Agree with PI assessment scores. Thank you, noted.

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 159 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

2.3.2c It would be helpful to list the A comment on the at-sea and onshore inspections of evidence for successful the gear for the use of TEDs has been added. The use implementation including inspections of TEDs in relation to the US export requirement is of of vessels on landing and at sea, and contextual relevance, only. also the fact that (as detailed in the 2011 MSC assessment report) “in order to be permitted to export seabob to the USA, the Surinamese government must seek an annual certificate from a US Inspector approving the implementation of the TED regulation within Suriname”.

2.3.3 Yes Yes N/A Agree with PI assessment scores; no Thank you, noted. further comments.

2.4.1 Yes No N/A The justification does not provide The text of the PI is intended to refect that the fishery evidence that the fishery is highly occurs inshore of the ‘offshore’ habitat types, in the unlikely to reduce habitat structure and inshore to tranistion zone. This area is decribed by the function to a point where serious or data available (i.e., Willems et al. 2015a). A small irreversible harm would occur. The adjustment to the text has been made, but the habitats described are for shallow Assessment Team continues to think that the score is inshore areas and offshore deep area justified. i.e. not the habitats targeted by the

seabob fleet. A description of the

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 160 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

habitats targeted and evidence of post- trawl recovery rates for this habitat

type would allow SG100 to be partially or fully met. As the justification stands SG100 As noted above, we disagree with this comment and should not be met and the PI score believe a partial score of 90 is appropriate. should be 80.

2.4.2 Yes Yes N/A Agree with PI assessment scores; no Thank you, noted. further comments.

2.4.3 Yes Yes N/A Agree with PI assessment scores. Thank you, noted. 2.4.3b add reference to the 3 years’ of A note to this effect has been added. VMS data presented to the assessment

team to demonstrate reliable information on the spatial extent of interaction..

2.5.1 Yes Yes N/A Agree with PI assessment scores; no Thank you, noted. further comments.

2.5.2 Yes Yes N/A Agree with PI assessment scores Thank you, noted. 2.5.2c it would be helpful to indicate A note to this effect has been added to the scoring

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 161 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

that the information directly from the text, thank you. fishery relates to CPUE which acts as a proxy to BMSY.

2.5.3 Yes Yes N/A Agree with PI assessment scores; no Thank you, noted. further comments.

3.1.1 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI No comment or action required. assessment scores; no further comments.

3.1.2 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI No comment or action required. assessment scores. The recommendation raised is commended.

3.1.3 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI No comment or action required. assessment scores; no further comments.

3.1.4 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI Sentence added, as suggested. assessment scores. 3.1.4a It would be helpful to mention

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 162 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

more details on the incentive to use TEDs to ensure USA export e.g. add text along the lines of “(noting that export requires an annual certificate from a US Inspector to certify that TEDs are implemented in the fishery) “

3.2.1 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI Correction made as suggested. assessment scores. 3.2.1a The target reference point is 111% of Bmsy (as stated in 1.1.1), so text should read “which seeks to maintain the stock at 11% above the level of maximum sustainable yield”

3.2.2 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI Comment addressed above in PI 2.2.2 assessment scores. Correction made re: MSY %. 3.2.2a “the requirement to record bycatch” details of this should be provided within P2 2.2.2 and/or 2.2.3. 3.2.2c target biomass is 11% above BMSY.

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 163 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

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

3.2.3 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI Pers comms added. assessment scores. References: add pers comm. References to the list

3.2.4 Yes Yes N/A Clear justifications and agree with PI No comment or action required. assessment scores; no further comments.

3.2.5 Yes Yes Yes Clear justifications and agree with PI No comment or action required. assessment scores and the condition raised.

Any Other Comments Comments Certification Body Response Main report Table 3.4: please indicate within the report the method of determining whether the species is retained or bycatch. The determination of each species being retained or For example, has the catch data been cross-referenced with landing statistics, or has it been informed by bycatch was determined by consultation with the client. consultation with the industry? A note to this effect has been added to the text of Section 3.4.

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 164 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Section 3.4.4 ETP - It would be helpful to mention more details on the TED regulation i.e. that it mirrors regulation The relationship between the use of TEDs in the fishery developed by US National Marine Fisheries Service, and that export requires an annual certificate from a US and the requirements for importing to the US is of Inspector. contextual relevance, only. No changes have been made. Section 3.4.5 Ecosystem – 1st paragraph: put in italics and/or indent to indicate that the text has been taken directly The text has been correctly attributed to Helieman from the source and correctly reference to S. Heileman who originally wrote the text. (undated). However, as it is not quite a direct quote (some editing has been made for style and content) it would not be appropriate to put it in quotes or

otherwise distinguish it. Appendix 1.2: Justification tables

1.1: suggest editing “As a result, the new stock assessment will not likely be completed before July 2016. “ to read Change made re: expected date of the stock the following “ The new stock assessment is expected in late summer/autumn 2016”. By editing in this way the assessment. reader would not expect the new stock assessment to be considered within this re-assessment (dated September 2016). It would be helpful if subheadings in Section 3.3 of the main report were numbered, as they are in Section 3.4. Change made re: numbering in section 3.3 and table of contents updated. 2.1.1a insert “Table” in front of reference to 3.4. Done – ‘Table’ has been inserted. For all of Principle 2 Justification Tables add full references (as per approached used for Principle 1 & 3). Done – full references have been added. 3.2.1 justification table formatting needs to be corrected as it currently sits over the footer and is therefore difficult to read. In relation to 3.2.1 – if understood properly, this appears to have been resolved by MS Word!

2.2.1 Reference: Willems, T. Depestele, J., De Backer, A. and Hostens, K. 2013 By-catch of rays in the trawl fishery for atlantic seabob shrimp xiphopenaeus kroyeri in Suriname: how effective are TEDs & BRDs? ILVO Mededeling nr Noted, thank you. 139 .Available at: http://www.ilvo.vlaanderen.be/Portals/68/documents/Mediatheek/Mededelingen/139_Seabob_ray_by_catch.pdf

For reports using the Risk-Based Framework:

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 165 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Performance Does the report Are the RBF risk Justification: Certification Body Response: Indicator clearly explain scores well- Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring how the process referenced? issues and any relevant documentation where possible. used to Yes/No Please attach additional pages if necessary. determine risk using the RBF led to the stated outcome? Yes/No

1.1.1

No Yes The report undertakes a thorough PSA, however does not Noted – please see comments against the scoring of 2.1.1 use the outcome scores for the 4 minor species elements PI 2.1.1. when determining the overall PI score. Yes Yes Appropriate justification for scoring 2.2.1 is provided. Noted, thank you. 2.2.1

2.4.1

2.5.1

version 3.0(24/03/15) Page 166 of 168 Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Appendix 3. Stakeholder submissions a. Written submissions from stakeholders received during consultation opportunities on the announcement of full assessment, proposed assessment team membership, proposed peer reviewers, proposal on the use or modification of the default assessment tree and use of the RBF. … b. All written and a detailed summary of verbal submissions received during site visits pertaining to issues of concern material to the outcome of the assessment3 regarding the specific assessment. … c. Explicit responses from the assessment team to submissions described in a. and b. above. … Details to be added at PCDR (Public Comment Draft Report) stage

Appendix 3.1 Amendments made to the PCDR following stakeholder consultation Details to be added at FR (Final Report) stage

Page 167 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15) Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Appendix 4. Surveillance Frequency In MSC CRv1.3 the surveillance score (using table C3) would have been 3, on account of having between 1 and 5 conditions and having Principle level scores below 85. This would therefore trigger a normal level of surveillance. However, using the process element of MSC CRv2 the team conclude that a surveillance score of Level 4 is appropriate, meaning 2 on site surveillance and 2 off site. This reduced level of on-site surveillance is appropriate given that this is the 2nd assessment period and the conditions are not on outcome performance indicators. Table A4: Fishery Surveillance Plan Surveillance Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Level

On-site Off-site On-site off-site Level 4 (MSC surveillance audit surveillance surveillance surveillance CRv2) & recertification audit audit audit site visit

Source: Acoura Marine Ltd assessment team

Page 168 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15) Acoura Marine Public Comment Draft Report

Suriname Atlantic Seabob Shrimp

Appendix 5. Client Agreement Acoura Marine Ltd. confirm that the client has reviewed the Public Certification Report and is in full agreement with the terms of certification detailed therein.

Appendix 5.1 Objections Process Box below for guidance - please delete, along with this note. The report shall include all written decisions arising from an objection. (Reference: CR 27.19.1)

Page 169 of 168 version 3.0(24/03/15)