DOCSLIB.ORG

Revision Draft

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revision Draft MRAG-MSC-F13-v1.1 March 2020 Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery Public Certification Report Prepared for the Western Australian Fishing Industry Council Certificate Number: MSC-F-31208 10 December 2020 Conformity Assessment Body MRAG Americas, Inc. (CAB) Richard Banks (TL/P3), Kevin McLoughlin (P1) and Mihaela Zaharia Assessment team (P2) Fishery client Western Australian Fishing Industry Council Assessment Type First Reassessment 1 MRAG Americas – US2733 Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery PCR MRAG-MSC-F13-v1.1 March 2020 Document Control Record Document Draft Submitted By Date Reviewed By Date ACDR RB, MZ, KM 8 March 2020 ASP 9 March 2020 CDR/PRDR RB, MZ, KM 8 June 2020 RB 9 June 2020 PCDR RB, MZ,KM 10 July 2020 RB 13 July 2020 ASP 12 August 2020 FRD RB, MZ,KM 29 Sept 2020 RB and ASP 13 Nov 2020 PCR RB, MZ, KM 8 December 2020 EW 9 Dec 2020 2 MRAG Americas – US2733 Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery PCR MRAG-MSC-F13-v1.1 March 2020 1 Contents 1 Contents ..................................................................................................................... 3 2 Glossary ..................................................................................................................... 6 3 Executive summary .................................................................................................... 8 4 Report details ........................................................................................................... 10 4.1 Authorship and peer review details ............................................................... 10 Peer Reviewers .................................................................................................................... 11 4.2 Version details .............................................................................................. 12 5 Unit(s) of Assessment and Certification and results overview................................... 12 5.1 Unit(s) of Assessment and Unit(s) of Certification ........................................ 12 5.1.1 Unit(s) of Assessment ..................................................................................... 12 5.1.2 Unit(s) of Certification ................................................................................... 13 5.2 Assessment results overview ........................................................................ 14 5.2.1 Determination, formal conclusion and agreement ........................................... 14 5.2.2 Principle level scores ...................................................................................... 14 5.2.3 Summary of conditions ................................................................................... 14 5.2.4 Recommendations .......................................................................................... 15 6 Traceability and eligibility ....................................................................................... 15 6.1 Eligibility date .............................................................................................. 15 6.2 Traceability within the fishery ...................................................................... 15 6.3 Eligibility to enter further chains of custody ................................................. 16 6.4 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practicably Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to enter further chains of custody ............................................................................... 18 7 Scoring .................................................................................................................... 18 7.1 Summary of Performance Indicator level scores ........................................... 18 7.2 Principle 1 .................................................................................................... 21 7.2.1 Principle 1 background ................................................................................... 21 7.2.2 Catch profiles ................................................................................................. 21 Summary of performance against Harvest Strategy indicators for 2018 .................... 35 7.2.3 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data .................................................. 36 7.2.4 Principle 1 Performance Indicator scores and rationales .................................. 37 .................................................................. 37 .............................................................................................. 37 ....................................................................................... 39 ....................................................................................... 40 ................................................................. 43 ..................................................................... 45 3 MRAG Americas – US2733 Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery PCR MRAG-MSC-F13-v1.1 March 2020 ....................................................................... 47 .............................................................................................. 50 ....................................................................................... 52 ....................................................................................... 53 ................................................................. 56 ....................................................................... 60 7.3 Principle 2 .................................................................................................... 63 7.3.1 Ecosystem background ................................................................................... 63 7.3.2 Principle 2 Performance Indicator scores and rationales ................................ 116 PI 2.1.1 – Primary species outcome ........................................................................ 116 PI 2.1.2 – Primary species management strategy .................................................... 119 PI 2.1.3 – Primary species information ................................................................... 122 PI 2.2.1 – Secondary species outcome .................................................................... 126 PI 2.2.2 – Secondary species management strategy ................................................ 129 PI 2.3.1 – ETP species outcome ............................................................................. 135 PI 2.3.2 – ETP species management strategy .......................................................... 140 PI 2.3.3 – ETP species information ........................................................................ 144 PI 2.4.1 – Habitats outcome ................................................................................... 146 PI 2.4.2 – Habitats management strategy ................................................................ 150 PI 2.4.3 – Habitats information .............................................................................. 152 PI 2.5.1 – Ecosystem outcome ............................................................................... 155 PI 2.5.2 – Ecosystem management strategy ............................................................ 158 PI 2.5.3 – Ecosystem information .......................................................................... 160 7.4 Principle 3 .................................................................................................. 164 7.4.1 Principle 3 Background ................................................................................ 164 7.4.2 Decision making processes (PI 3.2.2) ........................................................... 183 7.4.3 Compliance and enforcement (PI 3.2.3) ........................................................ 189 ........................................................ 203 .................................................. 207 .............................................................................. 210 ..................................................................... 212 ................................................................. 216 ............................ 219 8 References ............................................................................................................. 221 9 Appendices ............................................................................................................ 226 9.1 Assessment information .............................................................................. 226 9.1.1 Previous assessments .................................................................................... 226 9.2 Evaluation processes and techniques ........................................................... 230 4 MRAG Americas – US2733 Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery PCR MRAG-MSC-F13-v1.1 March 2020 9.2.1 Site visits ...................................................................................................... 230 9.2.1 Stakeholder participation .............................................................................. 230 9.2.2 Evaluation techniques ................................................................................... 231 9.3 Peer Review reports .................................................................................... 233 9.4 Stakeholder input ........................................................................................ 245 9.4.1 MSC Technical Oversight ............................................................................ 245 9.5 Conditions .................................................................................................. 246
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Deep-Water Bottom Dropping Page 6 FISHING
    Doves usher in a new season * September 12, 2008 Texas’ Premier Outdoor Newspaper Volume 5, Issue 2 * Report on Page 6 www.lonestaroutdoornews.com INSIDE Flyway rivalry prompts HUNTING Texas’ dove research Timing of hunt causes stir among hunters BY CRAIG NYHUS on doves. A team was out two days prior to the hunting season to collect Dove hunters in Texas have long bird specimens for a study compar- feared a federal requirement for the ing the effectiveness of lead and non- use of nonlead shot to pursue their lead shot. But some outfitters and hunters were taken aback by the early Grayson County has become quarry. The state holds the same con- cerns, especially after other states in shooting. famous for its big bucks in the the Central Flyway tried to force Texas Parks and Wildlife biologists state’s lone archery-only Texas to require nonlead shot based are in the first year of a multi-year county. A petition to modify on their waterfowl studies, according study to determine the effectiveness the archery-only rule has many GUNNING FOR RESEARCH: Using volunteer hunters, TPW biologists are to officials. of different load types on wild hunters up in arms. conducting a three-year study of shot effectiveness on dove, but the early That was the genesis of Texas’ own mourning doves using trained Page 7 hunt caused a PR nightmare for officials. Photo by TPW. study on the effect of nonlead shot See DOVE, Page 16 Teal are arriving on schedule along the Texas coast in time for the early season.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Pacific Octopus (Enteroctopus Dofleini) Care Manual
    Giant Pacific Octopus Insert Photo within this space (Enteroctopus dofleini) Care Manual CREATED BY AZA Aquatic Invertebrate Taxonomic Advisory Group IN ASSOCIATION WITH AZA Animal Welfare Committee Giant Pacific Octopus (Enteroctopus dofleini) Care Manual Giant Pacific Octopus (Enteroctopus dofleini) Care Manual Published by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in association with the AZA Animal Welfare Committee Formal Citation: AZA Aquatic Invertebrate Taxon Advisory Group (AITAG) (2014). Giant Pacific Octopus (Enteroctopus dofleini) Care Manual. Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Silver Spring, MD. Original Completion Date: September 2014 Dedication: This work is dedicated to the memory of Roland C. Anderson, who passed away suddenly before its completion. No one person is more responsible for advancing and elevating the state of husbandry of this species, and we hope his lifelong body of work will inspire the next generation of aquarists towards the same ideals. Authors and Significant Contributors: Barrett L. Christie, The Dallas Zoo and Children’s Aquarium at Fair Park, AITAG Steering Committee Alan Peters, Smithsonian Institution, National Zoological Park, AITAG Steering Committee Gregory J. Barord, City University of New York, AITAG Advisor Mark J. Rehling, Cleveland Metroparks Zoo Roland C. Anderson, PhD Reviewers: Mike Brittsan, Columbus Zoo and Aquarium Paula Carlson, Dallas World Aquarium Marie Collins, Sea Life Aquarium Carlsbad David DeNardo, New York Aquarium Joshua Frey Sr., Downtown Aquarium Houston Jay Hemdal, Toledo
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Diversification of Vibrio Fischeri Serially Passaged for 500 Generations in Novel Squid Host Euprymna Tasmanica
    Microb Ecol DOI 10.1007/s00248-013-0356-3 HOST MICROBE INTERACTIONS Ecological Diversification of Vibrio fischeri Serially Passaged for 500 Generations in Novel Squid Host Euprymna tasmanica William Soto & Ferdinand M. Rivera & Michele K. Nishiguchi Received: 4 June 2013 /Accepted: 16 December 2013 # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014 Abstract Vibrio fischeri isolated from Euprymna scolopes V. fischeri ecotypes, and complex changes in biolumines- (Cephalopoda: Sepiolidae) was used to create 24 lines that cence. Our data demonstrate that numerous alternate fitness were serially passaged through the non-native host Euprymna optima or peaks are available to V. fi sc he ri in host adaptive tasmanica for 500 generations. These derived lines were char- landscapes, where novel host squids serve as habitat islands. acterized for biofilm formation, swarming motility, carbon Thus, V. fischeri founder flushes occur during the initiation of source utilization, and in vitro bioluminescence. Phenotypic light organ colonization that ultimately trigger founder effect assays were compared between “ES” (E. scolopes)and“ET” diversification. (E. tasmanica) V. fischeri wild isolates to determine if conver- gent evolution was apparent between E. tasmanica evolved lines and ET V. fischeri. Ecological diversification was ob- Introduction served in utilization of most carbon sources examined. Con- vergent evolution was evident in motility, biofilm formation, The Sepiolid Squid–Vibrio Mutualism and select carbon sources displaying hyperpolymorphic usage in V. fischeri. Convergence in bioluminescence (a 2.5-fold Sepiolid squids in the genera Sepiola and Euprymna form light increase in brightness) was collectively evident in the derived organ mutualisms with marine bioluminescent bacteria from lines relative to the ancestor.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Effects on Cephalopod Population Dynamics: Implications for Management of Fisheries
    Advances in Cephalopod Science:Biology, Ecology, Cultivation and Fisheries,Vol 67 (2014) Provided for non-commercial research and educational use only. Not for reproduction, distribution or commercial use. This chapter was originally published in the book Advances in Marine Biology, Vol. 67 published by Elsevier, and the attached copy is provided by Elsevier for the author's benefit and for the benefit of the author's institution, for non-commercial research and educational use including without limitation use in instruction at your institution, sending it to specific colleagues who know you, and providing a copy to your institution’s administrator. All other uses, reproduction and distribution, including without limitation commercial reprints, selling or licensing copies or access, or posting on open internet sites, your personal or institution’s website or repository, are prohibited. For exceptions, permission may be sought for such use through Elsevier's permissions site at: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissionusematerial From: Paul G.K. Rodhouse, Graham J. Pierce, Owen C. Nichols, Warwick H.H. Sauer, Alexander I. Arkhipkin, Vladimir V. Laptikhovsky, Marek R. Lipiński, Jorge E. Ramos, Michaël Gras, Hideaki Kidokoro, Kazuhiro Sadayasu, João Pereira, Evgenia Lefkaditou, Cristina Pita, Maria Gasalla, Manuel Haimovici, Mitsuo Sakai and Nicola Downey. Environmental Effects on Cephalopod Population Dynamics: Implications for Management of Fisheries. In Erica A.G. Vidal, editor: Advances in Marine Biology, Vol. 67, Oxford: United Kingdom, 2014, pp. 99-233. ISBN: 978-0-12-800287-2 © Copyright 2014 Elsevier Ltd. Academic Press Advances in CephalopodAuthor's Science:Biology, personal Ecology, copy Cultivation and Fisheries,Vol 67 (2014) CHAPTER TWO Environmental Effects on Cephalopod Population Dynamics: Implications for Management of Fisheries Paul G.K.
    [Show full text]
  • Cephalopoda: Sepiolidae)
    Invertebrate Biology 137(3): 240–249. © 2018, The American Microscopical Society, Inc. DOI: 10.1111/ivb.12223 Vascular architecture in the bacteriogenic light organ of Euprymna tasmanica (Cephalopoda: Sepiolidae) Anthony J. Patelunas and Michele K. Nishiguchia Department of Biology, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003-8001, USA Abstract. Symbiosis between southern dumpling squid, Euprymna tasmanica (Cephalopoda: Sepiolidae), and its luminescent symbiont, the bacterium Vibrio fischeri, provides an experi- mentally tractable system to examine interactions between the eukaryotic host and its bacte- rial partner. Luminescence emitted by the symbiotic bacteria provides light for the squid in a behavior termed “counter-illumination,” which allows the squid to mask its shadow amidst downwelling moonlight. Although this association is beneficial, light generated from the bacteria requires large quantities of oxygen to maintain this energy-consuming reaction. Therefore, we examined the vascular network within the light organ of juveniles of E. tas- manica with and without V. fischeri. Vessel type, diameter, and location of vessels were measured. Although differences between symbiotic and aposymbiotic squid demonstrated that the presence of V. fischeri does not significantly influence the extent of vascular branch- ing at early stages of symbiotic development, these finding do provide an atlas of blood ves- sel distribution in the organ. Thus, these results provide a framework to understand how beneficial bacteria influence the development of a eukaryotic closed vascular network and provide insight to the evolutionary developmental dynamics that form during mutualistic interactions. Additional key words: symbiosis, squid, vasculature, aerobic Symbiotic relationships between bacteria and mul- physiological changes during infection and colonization ticellular organisms are very common in nature by bacteria of the genus Vibrio from the environment (Hirsch & McFall-Ngai 2000; Baker 2003; Wang (Montgomery & McFall-Ngai 1998; Foster et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Science
    ICES Journal of Marine Science ICES Journal of Marine Science (2015), 72(3), 992–996. doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsu232 Contribution to the Themed Section: ‘Risk Assessment’ Introduction Risk assessment and risk management: a primer for marine scientists Mark T. Gibbs1,2 and Howard I. Browman3* 1Department of Mathematics and Physics, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia 2AECOM 540, Wickham Street, Fortitude Valley, QLD 4007, Australia 3Institute of Marine Research, Marine Ecosystem Acoustics Disciplinary Group, Austevoll Research Station, N-5392 Storebø, Norway *Corresponding author: e-mail: [email protected] Gibbs, M. T., and Browman, H. I. Risk assessment and risk management: a primer for marine scientists. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 72: 992–996. Received 29 November 2014; accepted 30 November 2014. Risk assessment is the management approach or framework of choice in many disciplines, including health care and research, engineering design, and particularly the insurance sector which relies on the best available forward projections of natural hazards and accidents. The marine manage- ment community, which includes researchers, practitioners, and resource managers responsible for individual targeted stocks, aquaculture activ- ities, and the marine environment in general, has been slower to take up quantitative risk assessment approaches. Whilst there are prominent examples where risk assessment and management approaches have been applied, they are relatively few. This article theme set presents examples of such and identifies tools and approaches that can be applied to coastal and oceanic marine systems worldwide. The methods developed and the lessons learned from these studies can be used to guide researchers, practitioners, and resource managers.
    [Show full text]
  • Diet of the Australian Sea Lion (Neophoca Cinerea): an Assessment of Novel DNA-Based and Contemporary Methods to Determine Prey Consumption
    Diet of the Australian sea lion (Neophoca cinerea): an assessment of novel DNA-based and contemporary methods to determine prey consumption Kristian John Peters BSc (hons), LaTrobe University, Victoria Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Adelaide (October, 2016) 2 DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY I certify that this work contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in my name, in any university or other tertiary institution and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference has been made in the text. In addition, I certify that no part of this work will, in the future, be used in a submission in my name, for any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution without the prior approval of the University of Adelaide and where applicable, any partner institution responsible for the joint-award of this degree. I give consent to this copy of my thesis when deposited in the University Library, being made available for loan and photocopying, subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. I acknowledge that copyright of published works contained within this thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of those works. I also give permission for the digital version of my thesis to be made available on the web, via the University’s digital research repository, the Library Search and also through web search engines, unless permission has been granted by the University to restrict access for a period of time.
    [Show full text]
  • ASFIS ISSCAAP Fish List February 2007 Sorted on Scientific Name
    ASFIS ISSCAAP Fish List Sorted on Scientific Name February 2007 Scientific name English Name French name Spanish Name Code Abalistes stellaris (Bloch & Schneider 1801) Starry triggerfish AJS Abbottina rivularis (Basilewsky 1855) Chinese false gudgeon ABB Ablabys binotatus (Peters 1855) Redskinfish ABW Ablennes hians (Valenciennes 1846) Flat needlefish Orphie plate Agujón sable BAF Aborichthys elongatus Hora 1921 ABE Abralia andamanika Goodrich 1898 BLK Abralia veranyi (Rüppell 1844) Verany's enope squid Encornet de Verany Enoploluria de Verany BLJ Abraliopsis pfefferi (Verany 1837) Pfeffer's enope squid Encornet de Pfeffer Enoploluria de Pfeffer BJF Abramis brama (Linnaeus 1758) Freshwater bream Brème d'eau douce Brema común FBM Abramis spp Freshwater breams nei Brèmes d'eau douce nca Bremas nep FBR Abramites eques (Steindachner 1878) ABQ Abudefduf luridus (Cuvier 1830) Canary damsel AUU Abudefduf saxatilis (Linnaeus 1758) Sergeant-major ABU Abyssobrotula galatheae Nielsen 1977 OAG Abyssocottus elochini Taliev 1955 AEZ Abythites lepidogenys (Smith & Radcliffe 1913) AHD Acanella spp Branched bamboo coral KQL Acanthacaris caeca (A. Milne Edwards 1881) Atlantic deep-sea lobster Langoustine arganelle Cigala de fondo NTK Acanthacaris tenuimana Bate 1888 Prickly deep-sea lobster Langoustine spinuleuse Cigala raspa NHI Acanthalburnus microlepis (De Filippi 1861) Blackbrow bleak AHL Acanthaphritis barbata (Okamura & Kishida 1963) NHT Acantharchus pomotis (Baird 1855) Mud sunfish AKP Acanthaxius caespitosa (Squires 1979) Deepwater mud lobster Langouste
    [Show full text]
  • MARINE FISHERIES REGULATION SUMMARY As of June 1, 2020
    MARINE FISHERIES REGULATION SUMMARY as of June 1, 2020 Updated by Jared Silva, Policy Analyst This is not an official copy of the Commonwealth’s marine fishery laws and regulations. The information in this document outlines the general laws and regulations governing recreational and commercial fishing in the waters under the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It is not comprehensive. Although every attempt has been made to keep this document accurate and up to date, this is not an official copy of the Commonwealth’s marine fishery laws and regulations, and should not be consulted as such. The closure maps depicted in this document demonstrate certain specific closures but are not inclusive of all closures that may affect a certain fishing activity. Please review official copies of M.G.L. c. 130 and 322 CMR for full and accurate descriptions of marine fisheries laws and regulations. For comprehensive regulations contact the Secretary of State Division of Publications and Regulations and for the statutory text to M.G.L Ch. 130 visit the Massachusetts Legislature’s website (http://www.malegislature.gov). MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION OF MARINE FISHERIES RULES & REGULATIONS SUMMARY (as of June 1, 2020) Refer to Chapter 130 and 322 CMR for details. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE FISHERY 3 RECENT REGULATORY CHANGES 7 RECREATIONAL FISHING 8 HOOK AND LINE (includes Rod & Reel) 10 LOBSTERING commercially with Traps in state waters 14 LOBSTERING commercially with Traps - using Student Lobster Permit 18 LOBSTERING commercially with SCUBA in state waters 20 LOBSTERING recreationally with Traps or SCUBA using the Non-Commercial Lobster Permit 23 POTTING for Sea Bass 25 POTTING for Scup 27 POTTING for Whelks 30 FISH WEIRS 31 SINK GILLNETTING (Fishing on or near bottom) 33 SURFACE GILLNETTING (Fishing on or near surface) 35 MOBILE GEAR: Trawls, Scottish/Danish Seines, and Pair Seines – no regulatory fishery endorsements or inshore net 38 MOBILE GEAR: Trawls, Scottish/Danish Seines, and Pair Seines - with small-mesh regulated fishery endorsements.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arran Marine Regeneration Trial
    Community of Arran Seabed Trust The Arran Marine Regeneration Trial Development of a Community-Based Marine Protected Area The Proposals February 2005 c/o The Secretary of COAST Claveron Lamlash Isle of Arran KA27 8NB Tele: 01770 600552 email: [email protected] web: www.arrancoast.co.uk “I‟m truly sorry man‟s dominion has broken Nature‟s social union.” Robert Burns 1 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 1. BACKGROUND 5 1.1 Community of Arran Seabed Trust 5 1.2 Arran 6 1.3 Lamlash Bay 7 1.4 Maerl 7 1.5 Context 8 2. OBJECTIVES 9 3. PROGRESS TO DATE 10 3.1 A community lead approach to marine conservation 10 3.1.1. Clauchlands maerl No Take Zone 11 3.1.2 Lamlash Bay Marine Protected area 12 3.1.3 Fisheries regeneration 13 3.2 Baseline Biological Surveys 13 3.2.1 Seasearch 13 3.2.2 University Marine Biological Station Millport 14 3.3. Conservation significance of Lamlash Bay 15 3.3.1 Maerl 16 3.3.2 Sea Grass and wider area 19 3.3.3 Commercial and other species in NTZ and MPA 20 4 BENEFITS TO OTHER USERS 20 4.1 Fisheries 20 4.2 Tourism and associated socio-economic benefits 22 5 ACTION PLAN 22 5.1 Arran Marine Regeneration Trial 22 5.2 Monitoring 22 5.3 Funding 24 6 CONCLUSIONS 24 7 REFERENCES 25 8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 27 APPENDIX 1 28 APPENDIX 2 ` 29 APPENDIX 3 30 APPENDIX 4 31 APPENDIX 5 1 APPENDIX 6 and APPENDIX 7 3 .
    [Show full text]
  • Description of Key Species Groups in the East Marine Region
    Australian Museum Description of Key Species Groups in the East Marine Region Final Report – September 2007 1 Table of Contents Acronyms........................................................................................................................................ 3 List of Images ................................................................................................................................. 4 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 5 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................ 6 2 Corals (Scleractinia)............................................................................................................ 12 3 Crustacea ............................................................................................................................. 24 4 Demersal Teleost Fish ........................................................................................................ 54 5 Echinodermata..................................................................................................................... 66 6 Marine Snakes ..................................................................................................................... 80 7 Marine Turtles...................................................................................................................... 95 8 Molluscs ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Revision Draft
    MRAG-MSC-F13-v1.1 March 2020 8950 Martin Luther King Jr. Street N. #202 St. Petersburg, Florida 33702-2211 Tel: (727) 563-9070 Fax: (727) 563-0207 Email: [email protected] President: Andrew A. Rosenberg, Ph.D. Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery Announcement Comment Draft Report Prepared for the Western Australia Fisheries Industry Council 17 March 2020 Conformity Assessment Body (CAB) MRAG Americas, Inc. Assessment team Richard Banks (TL/P3), Kevin McLoughlin (P1) and Mihaela Zaharia (P2) Fishery client WAFIC Assessment Type First Reassessment 1 MRAG Americas – US2733 Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery MRAG-MSC-F13-v1.1 March 2020 Document Control Record Document Draft Submitted By Date Reviewed By Date ACDR RB, MZ, KM 8 March 2020 ASP 9 March 2020 2 MRAG Americas – US2733 Shark Bay Prawn Managed Fishery MRAG-MSC-F13-v1.1 March 2020 1 Contents 1 Contents .......................................................................................................... 3 2 Glossary .......................................................................................................... 6 3 Executive summary ......................................................................................... 8 4 Report details .................................................................................................. 9 4.1 Authorship and peer review details ......................................................................... 9 5 Assessors .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]